Other · Local authority data pack
Setting
Summary
What we read, and from where
Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.
Deep dive
What this report says
In plain English
Join free to get a short, plain-English summary of any report.
Tone of the report
How positive or critical the inspectors' language is, from the words they chose. No AI involved.
Reads more critically than most reports of this type.
How the report reads, start to finish
Every paragraph in order, sized by length. Tap one to see it on the page.
Strengths
Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.
- A sustained high, or improving, figure in this indicator, in the three years prior to the end of the relevant period, should feed through to an improved 3072SC PAF CF/A2 figure over time and, to a lesser extent, to an improved 3073SC. p.118
- This indicator shows the performance of local authorities in improving outcomes for young people leaving their care, so that they are enabled to achieve, to make a positive contribution and to be offered the opportunity to secure their future economic well being. p.168
- Successful meeting of the time-scales also indicates effective joint working where multi-agency assessment is required. p.48
- So, for example, the extent to which children thrive may not be influenced by distance at all. p.117
Concerns
Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.
- Poor outcome on long term stability (a low rate) suggest: insufficient support to young people and/or foster carers; insufficient range and number of placements; too many placements ‘over numbers’; lack of placement planning around permanence; lack of available long-term foster carers; difficulties in retaining foster carers. p.71
- Low percentages of IAs completed within timescale suggests problems in the duty and referral system which could include either poor systems, inadequate management, insufficient staff, or poor data management. p.47
- Comparatively low rate of adoptions may suggest: delays in permanency planning and care planning; failure to consider adoption as an option for every child not returning to parents; insufficient adopters to meet need, lack of interagency budget to purchase placements outside the council; court delays. p.78
- Where they do occur, high percentages of children with 3 or more placements may suggest: that children are being placed inappropriately in placements which do not match their needs; insufficient range and number of foster carers to meet demand; lack of appropriate support to children and /or to foster carers, poor care planning and poor assessments. p.69
- Delays in placing children for adoption will also occur due to: insufficient in-house adopters; lack of funding to purchase external adoptive placements; poor care planning; or court delays. p.76
Next steps
Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.
- Consideration needs to be given to the reasons for re-registration and to the timescales concerned in order to establish the extent to which re-registration is a result of inadequate child protection planning. p.55
- A low number, coupled with poor recruitment and retention figures, should prompt further investigation (see above). p.52
- High figures indicate good performance and low figures indicate, generally, poor performance, though both need to be seen in relation to comparator data and great caution needs to be exercised in the assessment of a council's performance here. p.123
- A high figure, coupled with poor recruitment and retention figures (6012SC), should prompt further questions about how this is managed. p.60
- A high number, coupled with poor recruitment and retention figures or with an increasing volume of looked after work, should also prompt further investigation (see above and 2024SC). p.79
- The LA should be able to provide details of these exclusions if there are concerns. p.131
What the report dwells on
Topics by how often they come up, coloured by how they are described. Open one for an example.
Anatomy of the report
How the report is built, against others of the same type and grade.
- Pages
- 193
- Words of findings
- 47,989
- longer than usual (typical 3558)
- Reading level
- Fairly hard
- Flesch 50, typical 50
- Average sentence
- 25 words
- Next steps
- 6
- typical 5
- Hedged sentences
- 4%
- “some”, “not always”, “most”…
Where the words go
Full report text
Traffic Lights and bandings
Please contact the team at jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk if you have any queries.
p.2
Introduction
This is the final version of the 2008 APA tookit, covering the reporting period of April 2007 to March 2008. The report includes updated information on all indicators where data had been available at the time of publication and matches the reporting period where possible. For convenience both the indicators updated from last year's APA toolkit and since the first version in April 2008 are highlighted on the contents page. This includes the unplanned revisions listed in the changes section below. The social care data covers the period 2007-08 and the attainment results relate to the 2006/07 academic year. .
p.2
Changes from the April 2008 APA dataset
. 3013OF /3104OF /5003OF /5004OF - For these indicators the data shown was correct, however, in some cases the traffic light bandings may have been incorrectly applied. 1032OF - The final two columns titled 'current progress' have been removed in line with the Department of Health's guidelines. 5041DE, 5042DE and 5044DE - The figures for 19 year olds not in education, employment or training (NEET) have been removed following DCSF guidance. 5007OF - Data was transposed in some columns and this has now been amended. 2067SC - Issues have arisen with this indicator but the source data remains the same. A detailed explanation of this can be seen in the guidance notes on the indicator page. 6010SC and 6024SC - Data activity on unaccompanied asylum seekers continues to be excluded. 6016SC - Values of 0 (nil) were changed to "." (not applicable) for some LAs in the years prior to 2007-08. England averages for all years have increased as a result. The SN values for some LAs may also have
p.2
Changes from the April 2008 APA dataset
increased as a result. For the 07-08 indicators that include ONS population data, the 2007 figures have been used so there will be no further updates to these indicators.
p.2
Statistical Neighbours
. Statistical neighbour groups help to benchmark local authorities’ performance, and provide an initial guide as to whether it is above or below the level that might be expected. The NFER's Children's Services statistical neighbour groups were published in February 2007 and first used in the APA last year. They are designed to be used across all children's services data and are used on the majority of indicators in this dataset; key exceptions being indicators from the Healthcare Commission, Youth Justice Board and HMI Probation, where data may not be at local authority level. Please refer to appendices 1, 2 and 3.
p.2
Statistical Neighbours
On a number of indicators, traffic lights are used to highlight strong or poor performance. For data on educational attainment and absences the traffic lights show differences between the authority and its statistical neighbours, as well as between the authority and the national figure. For this reason the shading is applied to the neighbours’ and national figures rather than the figures for the authority itself. On social care Performance Assessment Framework indicators, shading is applied to the local authority, neighbours and national figures, as the bandings are based on cut-off points, not relative position. Please refer to individual indicators and contact the relevant inspectorate for further information if required. Universal Code
p.2
Index Page
No. Updated from 2007 APA? Updated from APA 2008 Version 1? Notes
p.3
SECTION 1 – BEING HEALTHY
BH01 Healthy lifestyle and preventative care data 9 1003HC Proportion of mothers initiating breast feeding 10 y 1047SC Percentage change from base year (1998) in number of conceptions among 15-17-year olds (BVPI 197) 13 y
p.3
SECTION 1 – BEING HEALTHY
1032OF Percentage of schools participating and achieving the National Healthy Schools Status 15 y y
p.3
SECTION 1 – BEING HEALTHY
BH02 Physical health data 16 1015HC Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births) 17 y
p.3
SECTION 1 – BEING HEALTHY
BH03 Mental health data 20 1029HC Substance misuse related admissions to hospital, ages under 20 21 y 1030HC Percentage of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service new cases with length of wait under four weeks and under 26 weeks 25 y
p.3
SECTION 1 – BEING HEALTHY
1043SC PAF CF/A70: councils’ self assessment of progress on four elements of the implementation of the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service framework 30 y
p.3
SECTION 1 – BEING HEALTHY
1040NT Proportion of those in substance misuse treatment who are aged under 18 33 y
p.3
SECTION 1 – BEING HEALTHY
BH04 Looked after children and care leavers data 35 1037SC PAF CF/C19: the average of the percentages of children looked after who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months, and who had their teeth checked by a dentist during the previous 12 months, and had an annual health assessment during the previous 12 months 36 y Universal Code
p.3
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
No. Updated from 2007 APA? Updated from APA 2008 Version 1? Notes
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
SS01 Environmental and other safety data 38 2001DT Number of children aged 0-15 killed or seriously injured in road traffic accidents 39 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
SS03 Child protection data – child protection procedures 41 2015SC KIGS CH141: number of referrals of children per 10,000 population 42 y 2016SC KIGS CH142: percentage of referrals that are repeat referrals within 12 months 44 y 2017SC KIGS CH143: percentage of referrals of children in need that led to initial assessments 45 y 2019SC KIGS CH02: initial child protection conferences per 10,000 population aged under 18 46 y 2020SC Percentage of initial assessments within seven working days of referral 47 y 2021SC KIGS CH145: number of core assessments of children in need per 10,000 population aged under 18 48 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2022SC PAF CF/C64: percentage of core assessments that were completed within 35 working days of their commencement 49 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2023SC KIGS CH01: children and young people who are the subject of a child protection plan, or on the child protection register, per 10,000 population aged under 18 51 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2024SC Percentage of children and young people who are the subject of a child protection plan, or on the child protection register, who are not allocated to a social worker 52 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2027SC KIGS CH03: children who became the subject of a child protection plan, or were registered, per 10,000 population aged under 18 54 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2028SC PAF CF/A3: percentage of children who became the subject of a child protection plan, or were registered during the year, who had previously been the subject of a child protection plan or had been registered 55 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2066SC Ethnicity of children who are the subject of a child protection plan (white, mixed ethnic origin, Asian or Asian British, and Black or Black British) 57 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2034SC PAF CF/C20: percentage of child protection cases which should have been reviewed during the year that were reviewed (BVPI 162) 59 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2035SC KIGS CH10: children whose child protection plans were discontinued, or were de-registered, per 10,000 population aged under 18 61 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2036SC PAF CF/C21: percentage of children who ceased to be the subject of a child protection plan, or were de- registered, during the year ending 31 March, who had been registered, or the subject of a child protection plan, continuously for two years or more 62 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
SS06 Looked after children and care leavers data 64 2042SC KIGS CH39: children looked after per 10,000 population aged under 18 65 y 2064SC PAF CF/C68: percentage of looked after children cases which should have been reviewed during the year that were reviewed on time during the year 67 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2043SC PAF CF/A1: percentage of looked after children at 31 March with three or more placements during the year (BVPI 49) 69 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2067SC PAF CF/D78: percentage of children aged under 16 at March 31 who had been looked after continuously for at least 2 1/2 years, who had lived in the same placement for at least two years, or were placed for adoption 71 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2052SC KIGS CH44: percentage of looked after children in residential accommodation 72 y 2054SC Percentage of looked after children fostered by relatives or friends 73 y 2068SC PAF CF/B79: percentage of children aged at least 10 and under 16 looked after at 31 March (excluding those placed with parents) who were in foster placements or placed for adoption 74 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2058SC Percentage of looked after children adopted during the year who were placed for adoption within 12 months of the agency deciding that the child should be placed for adoption 76 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2059SC PAF CF/C23: number of looked after children adopted during the year as a percentage of the number of looked after children at 31 March (excluding unaccompanied asylum seekers) who had been looked after for six months or more on that day (BVPI 163) 77 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
2060SC Percentage of looked after children with a named social worker who is qualified as a social worker 79 y
p.4
SECTION 2 – STAYING SAFE Page
SS07 Children with learning difficulties and/or disabilities data 81 5026SC What percentage of children with disabilities aged 14+ had a transition plan to support their move from Children's Services to Adult Services? 82 y Universal Code
p.4
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
No. Updated from 2007 APA? Updated from APA 2008 Version 1? Notes
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
EA13 Early Years and Foundation Stage 83 3102DE Improvement in young children's development measured by the foundation stage profile 84 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
EA01 Key Stage 1 data 85 3002OF Teacher assessment results on reading: achievement at KS1, level 2+ (all pupils) 86 y 3003OF Teacher assessment results on writing: achievement at KS1, level 2+ (all pupils) 87 y 3004OF Teacher assessment results on mathematics: achievement at KS1, level 2+ (all pupils) 88 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
EA02 Key Stage 2 data 89 3005OF Test results on English: achievement at KS2, level 4+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) 90 y 3006OF Test results on mathematics: achievement at KS2, level 4+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) 91 y 3007OF Test results on science: achievement at KS2, level 4+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) 92 y 3008OF Contextual Value Added measure KS1 to KS2 93 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
EA03 Key Stage 3 data 94 3009OF Test results on English: achievement at KS3, level 5+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) 95 y 3010OF Test results on mathematics: achievement at KS3, level 5+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) 96 y 3011OF Test results on science: achievement at KS3, level 5+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) 97 y 3012OF Contextual Value Added measure KS2 to KS3 98 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
EA04 GCSE/Equivalents data 99 3013OF Percentage achieving 5+ A*-C (all pupils) 100 y y 3104OF Percentage achieving 5+ A*- C (all pupils) - including English and Mathematics 100 y y 3105OF Contextual Value Added measure KS2 to GCSE/equivalents 101 y 3018OF Contextual Value Added measure KS3 to GCSE/equivalents 102 y 3061DE Percentage of schools not attaining KS4 floor targets 103 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
EA05 School Inspection findings 104 3087OF Percentage of schools requiring special measures since September 2005 105 y y 3088OF Percentage of schools requiring a 'Notice To Improve' since September 2005 106 y y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
EA06 Attendance data 107 3034OF Attendance at primary schools 108 y 3035OF Attendance at secondary schools 109 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
EA07 Exclusions data 110 3091DE Percentage of fixed term and permanent exclusions in relation to the number of pupils in primary phase 111 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
3092DE Percentage of fixed term and permanent exclusions in relation to the number of pupils in secondary phase 112 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
EA08 Education otherwise than at school data 113 3067AC BVPI 159a, 159b, 159c and 159d - percentage of permanently excluded pupils provided with alternative tuition
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
EA11 Looked after children and care leavers data 115 3085SC PAF CF/C69: percentage of children newly looked after in the year, and still looked after at 31 March, who were placed at 31 March more than 20 miles from their home address from which first placed 116 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
3071SC Percentage of looked after children who were pupils in year 11 and eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations who sat at least one GCSE or equivalent examination 118 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
3072SC PAF CF/A2: percentage of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with at least one GCSE at grade A*-G or a GNVQ (BVPI 50) 120 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
3073SC Percentage of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with five or more GCSEs at grade A*- C or GNVQs equivalent to grades A*- C 122 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
3074SC PAF CF/C24: percentage of children who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months and were of school age, who missed a total of at least 25 days of schooling for any reason during the previous school year 124 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
EA12 Children with learning difficulties and/or disabilities data 126 3106DE Percentage of fixed term exclusions for pupils with statements in mainstream schools (broken down into Primary and Secondary phase) 127 y y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
3095DE Percentage of pupils with a statement of special educational needs (SEN) 128 y 3063DE DCSF SEN2 – number of new statements of special educational needs (SEN) 129 y 3070AC Audit Commission BVPI – percentage of new statements of special educational needs prepared within 18 weeks 130 y
p.5
SECTION 3 - ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Page
3097DE Percentage of permanent exclusions in relation to the number of pupils in special schools 131 y 3099DE Percentage of fixed period exclusions of one day or more in relation to the number of pupils in special schools 132 y Universal Code
p.5
SECTION 4 – MAKING A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION Page
No. Updated from 2007 APA? Updated from APA 2008 Version 1? Notes
p.6
SECTION 4 – MAKING A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION Page
MPC01 Youth offending information 133 2061YJ Recidivism - the rate of re-offending 134 y 2062YJ Number of first timers in the youth justice system 135 y y 3080YJ The proportion of supervised juveniles in full time education, training and employment 136 y y
p.6
SECTION 4 – MAKING A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION Page
MPC02 Participation and other activity information 137 4021OF Contact - percentage of young people aged 13-19 reached by publicly funded youth services 138 y 4022OF Ratio of full-time equivalent youth workers to young people aged 13-19 139 y
p.6
SECTION 4 – MAKING A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION Page
MPC04 Looked after children and care leavers data 140 4015SC PAF CF/C18: percentage of children aged 10 or over who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months, who were given a final warning/reprimand or convicted during the year for an offence committed while they were looked after, expressed as a ratio of the percentage of all children aged 10 or over given a final warning/reprimand or convicted for an offence in the police force area 141 y
p.6
SECTION 4 – MAKING A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION Page
4016SC PAF CF/C63: number of children and young people who communicated their views specifically for each of their statutory reviews as a percentage of the number of children and young people who had been looked after at 31 March for more than four weeks 143 y Universal Code
p.6
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
No. Updated from 2007 APA? Updated from APA 2008 Version 1? Notes
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
AEWB01 Post 16 education and training data 145 5038LS Percentage of young people by local authority/district achieving level 2 and level 3 by age 19 146 y 5003OF Schools with sixth forms: average point scores of students entered for GCE/VCE A/AS 147 y y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
5007OF Further education institutions/sixth form colleges/specialist colleges/work-based learning providers: success rate by level 148 y y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
5039AL NVQ success rate for all work-based learners living in the area and aged under 19 at the start of their programme (split by learning programme, gender, ethnicity and disability) 150 y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
3079AL Personal characteristics of work-based learners living in the area and aged under 19 (gender ethnicity and disability) 152 y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
5048DE Increase in the number of young people completing an apprenticeship 153
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
AEWB02 Inspection findings 154 5040OF Changes in childcare providers and places (since April 2005 benchmark) 155 y y 5029OF College inspection judgement (2005 framework): how far programmes or the curriculum meet external requirements, and are responsive to local circumstances (KQ 3B) 157 y y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
AEWB03 Employment and NEET data 158 5041DE Connexions Partnership data: number and proportion of 16-18-year-olds not in education, employment or training (NEET) 159 y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
5047DE Connexions Partnership data: increase in participation rates of 17-year-olds in education and training 160 y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
5042DE Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known 161 y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
5044DE Connexions Partnership data: 16-18-year-olds leaving the NEET group to re-engage in employment, education or training 162 y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
5045DE Connexions Partnership data: young people at particular risk of becoming NEET 163 y 5046DE Connexions Partnership data: proportion of young people completing year 11 who continue in learning 165 y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
AEWB07 Looked after children and care leavers data 166 5022SC PAF CF/A4: ratio of the percentage of those young people who were looked after on 1 April in their 17th year (aged 16), who were engaged in education, training or employment at the age of 19 to the percentage of all young people in the population who were engaged in education, training or employment at the age of 19 (BVPI 161) 167 y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
2038SC Percentage of eligible, relevant and former relevant children who have pathway plans, have been allocated a personal adviser and are resident outside the council's boundaries 169 y
p.7
SECTION 5 – ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Page
5037SC Percentage of care leavers at age 19 who are living in suitable accommodation (as judged by the council) 171 y Universal Code
p.7
SECTION 6 – SERVICE MANAGEMENT Page
No. Updated from 2007 APA? Updated from APA 2008 Version 1? Notes
p.8
SECTION 6 – SERVICE MANAGEMENT Page
SM01 Social care 172 6006SC KIGS EX61: gross expenditure on services to children per capita aged under 18 173 y
p.8
SECTION 6 – SERVICE MANAGEMENT Page
6009SC KIGS EX77: expenditure on family support services per capita aged under 18 174 y
p.8
SECTION 6 – SERVICE MANAGEMENT Page
6010SC PAF CF/E44: gross expenditure on children in need but not looked after, as a percentage of gross expenditure on all children’s services 175 y
p.8
SECTION 6 – SERVICE MANAGEMENT Page
6022SC KIGS EX62: gross expenditure on looked after children per capita aged under 18 177 y
p.8
SECTION 6 – SERVICE MANAGEMENT Page
6024SC PAF CF/B8: average gross weekly expenditure per looked after child in foster care or in a children’s home 178 y
p.8
SECTION 6 – SERVICE MANAGEMENT Page
EA09 School places and admissions data 180 3089DE Percentage of primary schools with 25% or more surplus places 181 y 3090DE Percentage of secondary schools with 25% or more surplus places 182 y
p.8
SECTION 6 – SERVICE MANAGEMENT Page
SM03 Staffing and related data - Recruitment & retention 183 6012SC Percentage of social care staff directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September 6016SC Percentage of residential child care workers who have achieved the NVQ at level 3 in 'Caring for Children and Young People' 6049DE Percentage of unfilled full time vacancies in relation to number of full time equivalent teachers employed as at January 186 y
p.8
Appendices Page
No. Updated from 2007 APA? Updated from APA 2008 Version 1? Notes
p.8
Appendices Page
APP01 Statistical Neighbours 187 7001OF List of NFER statistical neighbours for Lancashire 188 Map Showing the position of the local authority and its statistical neighbours 189 7002OF List of Youth Justice Board statistical neighbours for Lancashire 191 7003OF List of ACA statistical neighbours for Lancashire (used for social care indicator 6024SC) 192 7004OF List of Government Office Regions Local Authorities for Lancashire (used for 1032OF) 193
p.8
Healthy lifestyle and preventative care data
(Page 1 of 3) BEING HEALTHY 1003HC Healthy lifestyle and preventative care data
p.10
BURNLEY, PENDLE AND ROSSENDALE PCT
2005/06 1321 2642 50.0% 60.5% - 68.9% - 2004/05 1390 2432 57.2% 58.7% - 66.6% - 2003/04 1213 2219 54.7% 56.4% - 64.6% -
p.10
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
2005/06 1428 2100 68.0% 69.3% - 68.9% - 2004/05 1211 1804 67.1% 67.7% - 66.6% - 2003/04 207 326 63.5% 66.4% - 64.6% -
p.10
FYLDE PCT
2005/06 349 526 66.3% 71.3% - 68.9% - 2004/05 251 416 60.3% 67.7% - 66.6% - 2003/04 243 472 51.5% 67.9% - 64.6% -
p.10
HYNDBURN AND RIBBLE VALLEY PCT
2005/06 830 1251 66.3% 60.5% - 68.9% - 2004/05 786 1222 64.3% 58.7% - 66.6% - 2003/04 739 1223 60.4% 56.4% - 64.6% -
p.10
MORECAMBE BAY PCT
2005/06 1866 2767 67.4% 71.3% - 68.9% - 2004/05 1767 2668 66.2% 67.7% - 66.6% - 2003/04 1454 2212 65.7% 67.9% - 64.6% -
p.10
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
2006/07 1761 2848 61.8% 69.7% - 69.6% - Proportion of mothers initiating breast feeding
p.10
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
numerator denominator Benchmark Group Average significant difference vs benchmark grp? indicator value England average significant difference vs England?
p.10
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding
p.10
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding
p.10
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding
p.10
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding
p.10
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding
p.10
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding
p.10
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding
p.10
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding (Page 2 of 3) BEING HEALTHY 1003HC Healthy lifestyle and preventative care data
p.10
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breast feeding
p.11
NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT
numerator denominator Benchmark Group Average significant difference vs benchmark grp? indicator value England average significant difference vs England?
p.11
PRESTON PCT
2005/06 1137 1752 64.9% 60.5% - 68.9% - 2004/05 1124 1697 66.2% 58.7% - 66.6% - 2003/04 761 1754 43.4% 56.4% - 64.6% -
p.11
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
2005/06 612 1102 55.5% 70.9% - 68.9% - 2004/05 630 1156 54.5% 68.7% - 66.6% - 2003/04 505 1148 44.0% 64.8% - 64.6% -
p.11
WYRE PCT
2005/06 523 984 53.2% 71.3% - 68.9% - 2004/05 402 807 49.8% 67.7% - 66.6% - 2003/04 409 826 49.5% 67.9% - 64.6% -
p.11
WYRE PCT
Indicator Description: The numerator is the number of mothers known to have initiated breastfeeding. The denominator is the number of deliveries for which the breastfeeding status of the mother was known (not the total number of maternities). NB. Please note that PCTs were reconfigured in October 2006. For current PCT names please see the Healthcare Commission APA briefing.
p.11
WYRE PCT
Guidance & Interpretation: High is good. Breastfeeding, especially in the first six months, is generally accepted to have health benefits for the child. A low percentage of mothers breastfeeding could prompt questions surrounding the PCT’s health promotion schemes. This data was collected for the first time in 2003/04 and the breastfeeding status of new mothers was only recorded in 87% of maternities, rising to 93% in 2004/05in 2005/06 the figure was 93% although in some PCTs this % was much lower. Recognising the data quality/coverage issues, the Healthcare Commission PI measured the % for which breastfeeding status was recorded, rather than the % breastfeeding. In future a higher percentage of data is expected to be available which should make this indicator more reliable.
p.11
WYRE PCT
Judgment basis: Judgment basis: green = significantly high rate with 95% confidence amber = within the expected range of variation with 95% confidence red = significantly low rate with 95% confidence. NB Confidence intervals are not shown as the calculation uses an additive over-dispersion model which replaces a single target value with a distribution representing acceptable variability. If the observed indicator is inside the tolerance range, then it cannot be declared significantly different. If it is just outside and there is some overlap with its confidence interval, then it still may be OK. But if there is no overlap, or only minimal overlap, it will be declared significantly different (this assessment is based on a formula and does not correspond exactly to whether the intervals overlap or not) . This means that Cl alone might suggest a significant difference where one is not present.
p.11
WYRE PCT
Time Period: 1 April to 31 March Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding
p.11
WYRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding
p.11
WYRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breastfeeding
p.11
WYRE PCT
2005/06 2004/05 2003/04 England Average BURNLEY, PENDLE AND ROSSENDALE PCT CENTRAL LANCASHIRE PCT CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT EAST LANCASHIRE PCT FYLDE PCT HYNDBURN AND RIBBLE VALLEY PCT MORECAMBE BAY PCT NORTH LANCASHIRE PCT PRESTON PCT WEST LANCASHIRE PCT WYRE PCT (Page 3 of 3) BEING HEALTHY 1003HC Healthy lifestyle and preventative care data
p.11
WYRE PCT
Proportion of mothers initiating breast feeding
p.12
WYRE PCT
numerator denominator Benchmark Group Average significant difference vs benchmark grp? indicator value England average significant difference vs England?
p.12
WYRE PCT
If you have any queries concerning this data please contact JARs@healthcarecommission.org.uk Data Source: Selective data submitted for the "infant health" PCT PI: http://ratings2005.healthcarecommission.org.uk/more_information.asp
p.12
Number of conceptions amongst 15-17-year-olds per 1,000 population
. = Data not applicable 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 .. = Data not available LA 46 41 43 41 42 42 41 - = Data suppressed SN 42 39 39 39 39 39 39 due to small numbers Eng 44 43 43 42 42 41 40
p.13
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
LA -5.0 -14.7 -12.4 -16.3 -13.7 -14.5 -15.9 SN -9.7 -12.5 -14.0 -10.8 -11.9 -11.8 -10.4 Eng -6.4 -8.6 -8.0 -9.5 -10.3 -11.6 -13.3
p.13
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Continued on following page 1047SC - Percentage change from base year (1998) in number of conceptions amongst 15-17-year-olds (BVPI 197)
p.13
Part two: Percentage change in number of conceptions amongst 15-17 year olds
Part one: Number of conceptions among girls aged under 18 resident in an area per 1,000 girls aged 15-17 years resident in the area.
p.13
Part two: Percentage change in number of conceptions amongst 15-17 year olds
Total female population aged 15-17 years in council area [Source - ONS mid year estimates]
p.13
Denominator
Number of conceptions among girls aged under 18
p.13
Numerator
Part 2 - positive or negative percentage to one decimal place
p.13
Data definition
Part 1 - rate per 1,000 as a whole number Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.13
Data definition
Calculation for part 2 = (Numerator - denominator) / denominator x 100 [Source - Teenage Pregnancy Unit] N.B. 2006 Teenage Pregnancy Data is provisional. The actual number of conceptions among girls aged under 18 resident in the authority area per 1,000 girls aged 15-17 years resident in the area for the calendar year.
p.13
Denominator
The actual number of conceptions among girls aged under 18 resident in the authority area per 1,000 girls aged 15-17 years resident in the area in 1998 (baseline year)
p.13
Measuring unit
% change from base year (1998) in number of conceptions amongst 15 - 17 year olds
p.13
Measuring unit
-18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
p.13
Measuring unit
% LA SN Eng Number of conceptions amongst 15-17-year-olds per 1,000 population
p.13
Measuring unit
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 % LA SN Eng
p.13
Measuring unit
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 1047SC]
p.13
Lancashire
1047SC - Percentage change from base year (1998) in number of conceptions amongst 15-17-year-olds (BVPI 197)
p.14
Guidance/interpretation
Data on teenage conceptions is available on a calendar year basis and ONS publish this data in February each year, 14 months after the year to which they relate. Therefore the indicator presented in the 2006/07 BVPI set will be the data published in February 2007 relating to calendar year 2005. The National Teenage Pregnancy Strategy outlines the National target to halve the under-18 conception rate in England by 2010 (with an interim target of 15% by 2004 included in the NHS Plan). Progress in reducing conception rates amongst 15-17 year olds against the 1998 baseline would be represented by a negative figure in the percentage change in number of conceptions amongst 15-17 year olds. A positive figure would suggest that the conception rate has increased. Continued improvement would show a negative figure getting increasingly larger whilst fluctuations in this figure year on year may suggest that strategies to reduce conceptions in 15-17 year olds may be ineffective. This data should be looked at alongside the rate
p.14
Guidance/interpretation
of conceptions per 1,000 population of 15-17 year olds.
p.14
Guidance/interpretation
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 1047SC]
p.14
Lancashire
Number of schools participating Percentage participating Schools achieved NHSS by 25th April Current progress: schools achieving NHSS as percentage of LA target (C) Current progress: schools achieving NHSS as percentage of December 2007 national target of 55% (D)
p.15
Lancashire
LA 613 577 94% 577 #Error 94% Government Office Region: North West 3,221 2,928 91% 2,207 ############### 69%
p.15
Lancashire
SN 2,574 2,439 95% 1,498 n/a n/a NAT 22,040 20,586 93% 13,283 .. 60% School numbers excludes nurseries and independents ..= data not avaliable
p.15
Lancashire
Health Warning: School numbers were provided by the DoH and may not be the same as those published by Ofsted or used in other indicators in this dataset. Schools are not obliged to join the National Healthy Schools Programme. However, involvement in the National Healthy Schools Programme and achievement of National Healthy School Status, is an illustration that the school is attempting to improve the health outcomes for its children. Under the new Local Government Act the current progress of schools achieving Healthy School Status (HSS) is no longer a requirement for Local Authorities. Percentage of schools participating and achieving the National Healthy Schools Status
p.15
Lancashire
Data Definition: The National Healthy Schools Programme is a joint initiative between the Department of Health (DoH) and the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF). It originated in 1997 out of the White Paper Excellence in Schools. In 2004 the programme was revised as a result of the White Paper Choosing Health as there was a need to ensure consistency across the country. There are now four themes-Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE), Physical Activity, Healthy Eating and Emotional Health and Wellbeing (EHWB). Each theme has its own criteria that schools have to meet to achieve National Healthy Schools Status (NHSS). Schools need to meet the criteria through the Whole School Approach (WSA) which is at the core of the NHSP. There are ten elements to the WSA and a process that schools need to employ while participating in the NHSP. Schools now Self-Validate and 10 per cent of all schools who Self-Validate go through
p.15
Lancashire
moderation. The NHSP has four aims which are to support children and young people in developing healthy behaviours, help raise the achievement of children and young people, reduce health inequalities and promote social inclusion. Further information can be found at http://www.healthyschools.gov.uk/ . Data is a 'snap shot' of participation and achievement as of 25th April 2008.
p.15
Lancashire
From April 2008 the DoH National Healthy Schools Standard RAG Ratings no longer apply.
p.15
Lancashire
[Source: DoH National Healthy Schools Standard RAG ratings] Number of Primary and Secondary maintained schools School participation rates School achievement rates
p.15
Lancashire
Data contact: Ade Alao (0207 972 4845) Ade.Alao@dh.gsi.gov.uk Please quote ref: 1032OF
p.15
Physical health data
(Page 1 of 3) BEING HEALTHY 1015HC Physical health data
p.17
Burnley CD
2004-06 17 3489 4.9 7.0 - 5.0 - 2003-05 25 3425 7.3 7.5 - 5.1 - 2002-04 21 3281 6.4 7.8 - 5.2 - 2001-03 22 3188 6.9 7.9 - 5.4 - 2000-02 15 3125 4.8 7.8 - 5.4 - 1999-2001 22 3188 6.9 7.8 - 5.6 -
p.17
Chorley CD
2004-06 15 3623 4.1 4.3 - 5.0 - 2003-05 12 3529 3.4 4.4 - 5.1 - 2002-04 16 3404 4.7 4.3 - 5.2 - 2001-03 14 3182 4.4 4.3 - 5.4 - 2000-02 17 3091 5.5 4.1 - 5.4 - 1999-2001 22 3143 7.0 4.4 - 5.6 -
p.17
Fylde CD
2004-06 8 1833 4.4 4.5 - 5.0 - 2003-05 8 1818 4.4 4.4 - 5.1 - 2002-04 9 1731 5.2 4.4 - 5.2 - 2001-03 7 1795 3.9 4.3 - 5.4 - 2000-02 6 1818 3.3 4.1 - 5.4 - 1999-2001 7 1892 3.7 4.3 - 5.6 -
p.17
Hyndburn CD
2004-06 28 3346 8.4 7.0 - 5.0 signif high 2003-05 26 3377 7.7 7.5 - 5.1 - 2002-04 22 3235 6.8 7.8 - 5.2 - 2001-03 17 3148 5.4 7.9 - 5.4 - 2000-02 22 3099 7.1 7.8 - 5.4 - 1999-2001 24 3117 7.7 7.8 - 5.6 -
p.17
Lancaster CD
2004-06 25 4108 6.1 5.3 - 5.0 - 2003-05 26 4063 6.4 5.3 - 5.1 - 2002-04 22 3860 5.7 5.4 - 5.2 - 2001-03 29 3816 7.6 5.7 - 5.4 - 2000-02 27 3803 7.1 6.1 - 5.4 - 1999-2001 32 4000 8.0 5.9 - 5.6 -
p.17
Pendle CD
2004-06 34 3631 9.4 7.0 - 5.0 signif high 2003-05 35 3535 9.9 7.5 - 5.1 signif high 2002-04 27 3333 8.1 7.8 - 5.2 - 2001-03 34 3269 10.4 7.9 - 5.4 signif high 2000-02 34 3269 10.4 7.8 - 5.4 signif high 1999-2001 38 3304 11.5 7.8 - 5.6 signif high Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births)
p.17
Pendle CD
numerator denominator Benchmark Group Average significant difference vs benchmark grp? indicator value per 1,000 England average significant difference vs England?
p.17
Pendle CD
Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year
p.17
Pendle CD
Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year
p.17
Pendle CD
Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year
p.17
Pendle CD
Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year
p.17
Pendle CD
Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year
p.17
Pendle CD
Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year (Page 2 of 3) BEING HEALTHY 1015HC Physical health data
p.17
Pendle CD
Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births)
p.18
Pendle CD
numerator denominator Benchmark Group Average significant difference vs benchmark grp? indicator value per 1,000 England average significant difference vs England?
p.18
Preston CD
2004-06 35 5454 6.4 7.0 - 5.0 - 2003-05 45 5233 8.6 7.5 - 5.1 - 2002-04 44 5000 8.8 7.8 - 5.2 - 2001-03 42 4884 8.6 7.9 - 5.4 - 2000-02 35 4795 7.3 7.8 - 5.4 - 1999-2001 32 4923 6.5 7.8 - 5.6 -
p.18
Ribble Valley CD
2004-06 7 1485 4.7 4.2 - 5.0 - 2003-05 8 1509 5.3 4.3 - 5.1 - 2002-04 7 1522 4.6 4.2 - 5.2 - 2001-03 5 1515 3.3 4.2 - 5.4 - 2000-02 7 1522 4.6 4.3 - 5.4 - 1999-2001 9 1552 5.8 4.5 - 5.6 -
p.18
Rossendale CD
2004-06 7 2459 2.8 5.4 - 5.0 - 2003-05 8 2353 3.4 5.3 - 5.1 - 2002-04 9 2250 4.0 5.2 - 5.2 - 2001-03 15 2174 6.9 5.2 - 5.4 - 2000-02 16 2222 7.2 5.5 - 5.4 - 1999-2001 17 2329 7.3 5.9 - 5.6 -
p.18
South Ribble CD
2004-06 19 3497 5.4 4.3 - 5.0 - 2003-05 14 3415 4.1 4.4 - 5.1 - 2002-04 9 3333 2.7 4.3 - 5.2 - 2001-03 12 3243 3.7 4.3 - 5.4 - 2000-02 14 3182 4.4 4.1 - 5.4 - 1999-2001 17 3208 5.3 4.4 - 5.6 -
p.18
West Lancashire CD
2004-06 20 3508 5.7 4.6 - 5.0 - 2003-05 18 3529 5.1 4.5 - 5.1 - 2002-04 18 3396 5.3 4.4 - 5.2 - 2001-03 16 3333 4.8 4.5 - 5.4 - 2000-02 17 3269 5.2 5.0 - 5.4 - 1999-2001 21 3387 6.2 5.4 - 5.6 -
p.18
Wyre CD
2004-06 18 2982 6.0 4.5 - 5.0 - 2003-05 12 2927 4.1 4.4 - 5.1 - 2002-04 12 2927 4.1 4.4 - 5.2 - 2001-03 11 2821 3.9 4.3 - 5.4 - 2000-02 15 2778 5.4 4.1 - 5.4 - 1999-2001 12 2791 4.3 4.3 - 5.6 - Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year
p.18
Wyre CD
Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year
p.18
Wyre CD
Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year
p.18
Wyre CD
Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year
p.18
Wyre CD
Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year (Page 3 of 3) BEING HEALTHY 1015HC Physical health data
p.18
Wyre CD
Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births)
p.19
Wyre CD
numerator denominator Benchmark Group Average significant difference vs benchmark grp? indicator value per 1,000 England average significant difference vs England?
p.19
Wyre CD
If you have any queries concerning this data please contact JARs@healthcarecommission.org.uk Data Source: Compendium of Clinical and Health Indicators / Clinical and Health Outcomes Knowledge Base (nww.nchod.nhs.uk) based on National Statistics Code DA04N Indicator Description: This indicator displays deaths of infants aged less than 1 year per 1000 live births occurring in the respective calendar year(s).
p.19
Wyre CD
Guidance & Interpretation: Low is good. High rates may indicate problems such as deprivation, although other factors may also affect rates such as prevalence of low birth weight, age of mother, marital status and ethnicity. These factors are likely to be interlinked. High rates would warrant further investigation. These data are pooled over 3 years because of small numbers issues.
p.19
Wyre CD
Judgment basis: Judgment basis: green = significantly low rate with 95% confidence amber = within the expected range of variation with 95% confidence red = significantly high rate with 95% confidence. NB Confidence intervals are not shown as the calculation uses an additive over-dispersion model which replaces a single target value with a distribution representing acceptable variability. If the observed indicator is inside the tolerance range, then it cannot be declared significantly different. If it is just outside and there is some overlap with its confidence interval, then it still may be OK. But if there is no overlap, or only minimal overlap, it will be declared significantly different (this assessment is based on a formula and does not correspond exactly to whether the intervals overlap or not) . This means that Cl alone might suggest a significant difference where one is not present.
p.19
Wyre CD
Time Period: Deaths registered during the 3 calendar years, eg from 01/01/1999 to 31/12/2001, divided by live births during the same period Infant mortality, deaths per 1000 live births - infant under one year
p.19
Wyre CD
2004-06 2003-05 2002-04 2001-03 2000-02 1999-2001 England Average Burnley CD Chorley CD Fylde CD Hyndburn CD Lancaster CD Pendle CD Preston CD Ribble Valley CD Rossendale CD South Ribble CD West Lancashire CD Wyre CD
p.19
Burnley CD
2004-07 60 34 176.1 107.0 - 100.5 - 2003-06 47 34 139.7 107.1 - 100.7 - 2002-05 44 30 145.2 109.9 - 101.0 - 2001-04 49 29 169.7 114.8 - 101.3 - 2004-07 21 7 303.3 142.2 signif high 126.9 signif high 2003-06 26 7 374.2 151.6 signif high 131.7 signif high 2002-05 26 6 400.8 154.7 signif high 133.6 signif high 2001-04 28 7 430.4 160.1 signif high 137.3 signif high
p.21
Chorley CD
2004-07 31 34 90.7 83.8 - 100.5 - 2003-06 31 33 94.8 88.9 - 100.7 - 2002-05 22 30 74.4 83.2 - 101.0 - 2001-04 28 29 97.5 85.1 - 101.3 - 2004-07 12 7 172.1 119.2 - 126.9 - 2003-06 12 7 175.7 121.6 - 131.7 - 2002-05 13 6 203.3 121.3 - 133.6 - 2001-04 13 7 198.7 151.5 - 137.3 -
p.21
Fylde CD
2004-07 16 23 68.6 125.1 - 100.5 - 2003-06 17 22 75.8 129.3 - 100.7 - 2002-05 13 20 65.5 138.8 - 101.0 - 2001-04 10 19 53.7 135.9 - 101.3 - 2004-07 n/a n/a n/a 2003-06 n/a n/a n/a 2002-05 n/a n/a n/a 2001-04 n/a n/a n/a
p.21
Hyndburn CD
2004-07 36 31 117.1 107.0 - 100.5 - 2003-06 41 30 137.2 107.1 - 100.7 - 2002-05 39 26 148.1 109.9 - 101.0 - 2001-04 57 25 228.0 114.8 - 101.3 - 2004-07 7 6 113.6 142.2 - 126.9 - 2003-06 6 6 98.0 151.6 - 131.7 - 2002-05 n/a n/a n/a 2001-04 n/a n/a n/a Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse
p.21
Hyndburn CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics
p.21
Hyndburn CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse
p.21
Hyndburn CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics
p.21
Hyndburn CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse
p.21
Hyndburn CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics Substance misuse related admissions to hospital, ages under 20s
p.21
Hyndburn CD
number expected Benchmark Group Average significant difference vs benchmark grp? indicator value England average significant difference vs England? BEING HEALTHY 1029HC Mental health data
p.21
Hyndburn CD
Substance misuse related admissions to hospital, ages under 20s
p.22
Hyndburn CD
number expected Benchmark Group Average significant difference vs benchmark grp? indicator value England average significant difference vs England?
p.22
Lancaster CD
2004-07 34 51 66.1 105.2 - 100.5 - 2003-06 32 49 65.4 102.8 - 100.7 - 2002-05 43 43 99.3 99.6 - 101.0 - 2001-04 53 42 126.3 94.8 - 101.3 - 2004-07 10 11 93.6 131.2 - 126.9 - 2003-06 14 10 134.5 125.4 - 131.7 - 2002-05 18 10 187.5 114.9 - 133.6 - 2001-04 17 10 171.9 126.7 - 137.3 -
p.22
Pendle CD
2004-07 44 34 129.2 107.0 - 100.5 - 2003-06 40 33 120.4 107.1 - 100.7 - 2002-05 35 30 115.3 109.9 - 101.0 - 2001-04 47 29 163.4 114.8 - 101.3 - 2004-07 13 7 189.0 142.2 - 126.9 - 2003-06 11 7 160.1 151.6 - 131.7 - 2002-05 12 7 181.9 154.7 - 133.6 - 2001-04 27 7 409.1 160.1 signif high 137.3 signif high
p.22
Preston CD
2004-07 50 48 104.3 107.0 - 100.5 - 2003-06 57 46 122.9 107.1 - 100.7 - 2002-05 71 42 169.4 109.9 - 101.0 - 2001-04 87 41 213.5 114.8 - 101.3 - 2004-07 16 10 159.0 142.2 - 126.9 - 2003-06 18 10 181.9 151.6 - 131.7 - 2002-05 17 9 181.8 154.7 - 133.6 - 2001-04 34 10 353.3 160.1 signif high 137.3 signif high
p.22
Ribble Valley CD
2004-07 17 20 84.2 87.2 - 100.5 - 2003-06 14 19 74.3 83.5 - 100.7 - 2002-05 19 17 112.9 86.6 - 101.0 - 2001-04 26 16 162.7 92.9 - 101.3 - 2004-07 n/a n/a n/a 2003-06 n/a n/a n/a 2002-05 n/a n/a n/a 2001-04 n/a n/a n/a Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics
p.22
Ribble Valley CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse
p.22
Ribble Valley CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse
p.22
Ribble Valley CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics
p.22
Ribble Valley CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse
p.22
Ribble Valley CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics BEING HEALTHY 1029HC Mental health data
p.22
Ribble Valley CD
Substance misuse related admissions to hospital, ages under 20s
p.23
Ribble Valley CD
number expected Benchmark Group Average significant difference vs benchmark grp? indicator value England average significant difference vs England?
p.23
Rossendale CD
2004-07 53 25 213.6 122.2 - 100.5 - 2003-06 48 24 198.8 119.9 - 100.7 - 2002-05 35 21 163.9 119.3 - 101.0 - 2001-04 49 20 241.3 120.6 - 101.3 - 2004-07 6 5 121.8 152.2 - 126.9 - 2003-06 6 5 121.7 153.6 - 131.7 - 2002-05 n/a n/a n/a 2001-04 n/a n/a n/a
p.23
South Ribble CD
2004-07 35 37 94.5 83.8 - 100.5 - 2003-06 32 36 89.6 88.9 - 100.7 - 2002-05 32 33 98.2 83.2 - 101.0 - 2001-04 36 31 117.3 85.1 - 101.3 - 2004-07 7 8 93.3 119.2 - 126.9 - 2003-06 10 7 134.9 121.6 - 131.7 - 2002-05 12 7 170.0 121.3 - 133.6 - 2001-04 13 7 186.8 151.5 - 137.3 -
p.23
West Lancashire CD
2004-07 90 38 236.1 100.5 signif high 100.5 signif high 2003-06 87 37 235.1 105.4 signif high 100.7 signif high 2002-05 63 34 187.4 100.9 - 101.0 - 2001-04 55 32 172.0 100.2 - 101.3 - 2004-07 15 8 194.0 90.0 - 126.9 - 2003-06 14 8 181.4 101.5 - 131.7 - 2002-05 9 7 122.6 103.3 - 133.6 - 2001-04 8 7 107.6 111.8 - 137.3 -
p.23
Wyre CD
2004-07 35 37 95.3 125.1 - 100.5 - 2003-06 27 35 77.8 129.3 - 100.7 - 2002-05 21 31 67.7 138.8 - 101.0 - 2001-04 21 30 70.2 135.9 - 101.3 - 2004-07 7 7 94.4 123.4 - 126.9 - 2003-06 8 7 111.4 141.7 - 131.7 - 2002-05 7 7 105.6 141.6 - 133.6 - 2001-04 9 7 133.2 144.2 - 137.3 - Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse
p.23
Wyre CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse
p.23
Wyre CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics
p.23
Wyre CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse
p.23
Wyre CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics
p.23
Wyre CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with mental and behavioural disorders due to substance misuse
p.23
Wyre CD
Admissions to hospital of under 20 year olds with poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics BEING HEALTHY 1029HC Mental health data
p.23
Wyre CD
Substance misuse related admissions to hospital, ages under 20s
p.24
Wyre CD
number expected Benchmark Group Average significant difference vs benchmark grp? indicator value England average significant difference vs England?
p.24
Wyre CD
If you have any queries concerning this data please contact JARs@healthcarecommission.org.uk Guidance & Interpretation: Low is good. A low value indicates that drug misuse in the area is not leading to a high level of admissions to hospital - possibly due to there not being a major drug problem amongst children and young people in the area, and/or having good access to treatment/services that address problems short of hospital admission. High numbers could indicate poor access to preventative services or a high preponderance of drug use in the area. 2002- 05 drug overdose/poisoning indicator values for 169 LAs have been suppressed due to being based on less than 5 admissions (also 9 LAs' data has been suppressed for mental disorders).
p.24
Wyre CD
Judgment basis: Judgment basis: green = significantly low rate with 95% confidence amber = within the expected range of variation with 95% confidence red = significantly high rate with 95% confidence. NB Confidence intervals are not shown as the calculation uses an additive over-dispersion model which replaces a single target value with a distribution representing acceptable variability. If the observed indicator is inside the tolerance range, then it cannot be declared significantly different. If it is just outside and there is some overlap with its confidence interval, then it still may be OK. But if there is no overlap, or only minimal overlap, it will be declared significantly different (this assessment is based on a formula and does not correspond exactly to whether the intervals overlap or not) . This means that Cl alone might suggest a significant difference where one is not present.
p.24
Wyre CD
Data Source: Healthcare Commission analysis of Hospital Episode Statistics 2001/02 - 2003/04 and 2002/03 - 2004/05 -2005/06 - 2006/07 and ONS population data mid 2002 and mid 2003 and mid 2004 Time Period: Hospital admissions between 1 April and 31 March. Data are pooled over 3 years because of small numbers issues.
p.24
Wyre CD
Indicator Description: The indicator value is the standardised admission ratio - the number of hospital admission first finished consultant episodes (FFCEs) with the specified diagnosis code of patients aged under 20 resident in the local authority area, divided by the "expected" number of admissions, expressed as a percentage (ie England = 100). The expected number of admissions is calculated by multiplying the national rates of admissions for each age group (0, 1-4, 5- 9, 10-14 and 15-19) and sex by the mid 2002 population of the LA within each of these age/sex groups. The specified diagnosis codes for mental and behavioural disorders are F10 to F19 inclusive, which include use of alcohol, opioids, cannabinoids, cocaine, solvents etc. The diagnosis codes for poisoning are T40 including opioids, cocaine and cannabis but not alcohol. (Page 1 of 5) BEING HEALTHY 1030HC Mental health data
p.24
CENTRAL LANCASHIRE PCT
2006 31 205 15.1% 39.8% low 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a 2003 n/a n/a n/a
p.25
CENTRAL LANCASHIRE PCT
2006 187 205 91.2% 89.7% - 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a 2003 n/a n/a n/a
p.25
CENTRAL LANCASHIRE PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a 2003 n/a n/a n/a
p.25
CENTRAL LANCASHIRE PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a 2003 n/a n/a n/a
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 66 106 62.3% 51.2% - 2004 75 222 33.8% 48.8% - 2003 20 30 66.7% 47.5% -
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 105 106 99.1% 94.4% - 2004 221 222 99.5% 91.8% - 2003 30 30 100.0% 91.4% high
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
2003 0 2 0.0% 55.2% low 2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
2003 2 2 100.0% 94.2% high Percentage of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new cases with length of wait under 4 weeks and under 26 weeks
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
numerator denominator indicator value England average significant difference vs England?
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks.
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks.
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks.
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks. (Page 2 of 5) BEING HEALTHY 1030HC Mental health data Percentage of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new cases with length of wait under 4 weeks and under 26 weeks
p.25
CHORLEY AND SOUTH RIBBLE PCT
numerator denominator indicator value England average significant difference vs England?
p.26
EAST LANCASHIRE HOSPITALS NHS TRUST
2006 38 38 100.0% 39.8% high 2005 84 125 67.2% 51.2% - 2004 145 308 47.1% 48.8% - 2003 59 69 85.5% 47.5% high
p.26
EAST LANCASHIRE HOSPITALS NHS TRUST
2006 38 38 100.0% 89.7% high 2005 125 125 100.0% 94.4% high 2004 300 308 97.4% 91.8% - 2003 69 69 100.0% 91.4% high
p.26
EAST LANCASHIRE HOSPITALS NHS TRUST
2006 2 2 100.0% 56.2% high 2005 39 53 73.6% 62.8% - 2004 74 85 87.1% 66.5% high
p.26
EAST LANCASHIRE HOSPITALS NHS TRUST
2003 36 46 78.3% 55.2% high 2006 2 2 100.0% 94.2% high 2005 53 53 100.0% 97.0% high 2004 85 85 100.0% 97.5% high
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
2006 30 268 11.2% 39.8% low 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
2003 n/a n/a n/a 2006 126 268 47.0% 89.7% low 2005 4 26 15.4% 94.4% low 2004 n/a n/a n/a
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
2003 n/a n/a n/a 2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a 2003 n/a n/a n/a
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a 2003 n/a n/a n/a Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks.
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks.
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks.
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks. (Page 3 of 5) BEING HEALTHY 1030HC Mental health data Percentage of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new cases with length of wait under 4 weeks and under 26 weeks
p.26
LANCASHIRE CARE NHS TRUST
numerator denominator indicator value England average significant difference vs England?
p.27
MORECAMBE BAY PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 106 176 60.2% 51.2% - 2004 55 178 30.9% 48.8% - 2003 80 188 42.6% 47.5% -
p.27
MORECAMBE BAY PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 154 176 87.5% 94.4% - 2004 135 178 75.8% 91.8% - 2003 154 188 81.9% 91.4% -
p.27
MORECAMBE BAY PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 16 16 100.0% 66.5% high 2003 n/a n/a n/a
p.27
MORECAMBE BAY PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 16 16 100.0% 97.5% high 2003 n/a n/a n/a
p.27
PRESTON PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 45 109 41.3% 51.2% - 2004 23 66 34.8% 48.8% - 2003 14 38 36.8% 47.5% -
p.27
PRESTON PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 89 109 81.7% 94.4% - 2004 61 66 92.4% 91.8% - 2003 34 38 89.5% 91.4% -
p.27
PRESTON PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a 2003 n/a n/a n/a
p.27
PRESTON PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a 2003 n/a n/a n/a Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks
p.27
PRESTON PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks
p.27
PRESTON PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks.
p.27
PRESTON PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks.
p.27
PRESTON PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks
p.27
PRESTON PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks
p.27
PRESTON PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks.
p.27
PRESTON PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks. (Page 4 of 5) BEING HEALTHY 1030HC Mental health data Percentage of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new cases with length of wait under 4 weeks and under 26 weeks
p.27
PRESTON PCT
numerator denominator indicator value England average significant difference vs England?
p.28
ROYAL LIVERPOOL CHILDRENS NHS TRUST
2006 146 223 65.5% 39.8% high 2005 362 524 69.1% 51.2% - 2004 412 509 80.9% 48.8% high 2003 79 148 53.4% 47.5% -
p.28
ROYAL LIVERPOOL CHILDRENS NHS TRUST
2006 220 223 98.7% 89.7% - 2005 514 524 98.1% 94.4% - 2004 496 509 97.4% 91.8% - 2003 124 148 83.8% 91.4% -
p.28
ROYAL LIVERPOOL CHILDRENS NHS TRUST
2006 26 26 100.0% 56.2% high 2005 10 13 76.9% 62.8% - 2004 8 21 38.1% 66.5% low
p.28
ROYAL LIVERPOOL CHILDRENS NHS TRUST
2003 3 9 33.3% 55.2% low 2006 26 26 100.0% 94.2% high 2005 13 13 100.0% 97.0% high 2004 20 21 95.2% 97.5% -
p.28
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 31 46 67.4% 51.2% - 2004 136 152 89.5% 48.8% high 2003 7 23 30.4% 47.5% -
p.28
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 42 46 91.3% 94.4% - 2004 150 152 98.7% 91.8% - 2003 20 23 87.0% 91.4% -
p.28
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a 2003 n/a n/a n/a
p.28
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
2006 n/a n/a n/a 2005 n/a n/a n/a 2004 n/a n/a n/a 2003 n/a n/a n/a Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks
p.28
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks
p.28
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks.
p.28
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks. Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks
p.28
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks.
p.28
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new specialist cases with length of wait under 26 weeks.
p.28
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
Proportion of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new non-specialist cases with length of wait under 4 weeks (Page 5 of 5) BEING HEALTHY 1030HC Mental health data Percentage of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) new cases with length of wait under 4 weeks and under 26 weeks
p.28
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
numerator denominator indicator value England average significant difference vs England?
p.29
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
If you have any queries concerning this data please contact JARs@healthcarecommission.org.uk Data Source: All data taken from the CAMHS mapping atlas table 4.2: http://www.dur.ac.uk/camhs.mapping/index.php?page=atlas&a=19#s18 Indicator Description: The numerator is the number of cases waiting for under the specified amount of time. The denominator is the total number of cases waiting. Data is supplied separately for specialist and non-specialist cases at the 4 week and 26 week junctures. From 2005 data were reported for tier 2/3 and tier 4 cases instead of non-specialist cases and specialist cases
p.29
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
Guidance & Interpretation: High is good, indicating cases were seen within acceptable time frames. During the data collection period total caseload was broken down by time waited prior to treatment. The duration of the wait is the interval between the receipt of the referral request and the time the case is first seen. In the case of DNAs or cancellations, the wait is from the most recent DNA or cancellation.Non-specialist cases require clinics where clients come for meetings with staff or for group sessions, or individual home visits. Specialist cases require longer term or more intensive provision, which may take the form of whole- or half-day activities, in-patient care, or outreach support as an alternative to in-patient care. Data relates to the provider trust(s) mainly serving an area rather than all children from the LA area. In some cases the extent to which a provider serves children from the LA is not clear. Criteria triggering referral
p.29
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
vary between LAs therefore cases may exist that have not been referred. From 2005 CAMHS groups were described as tier 2/3 and tier 4 instead of non- specialist and specialist
p.29
WEST LANCASHIRE PCT
Judgment basis: green = more than 20% points above national average at 4 weeks, or 100% at 26 weeks amber = within 20% of average red = more than 20% points below national average at 4 weeks or at 26 weeks Time Period: For non-specialist cases, the data collection period was 1st of November to 30th November 2003 and 2004. For special care teams, the data collection period was 1st of April to 30th September 2003 and 1st June to 30th November 2004.
p.29
Progress made towards a comprehensive Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Data is not banded for 2005-06 LA 12 12 12 .. = Data not available SN 11 13 13 Eng 12 13 14
p.30
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz 2006-08 4,5 6-8 9-11 12-14 15,16
p.30
1 2 3 4 Missing
SN - As at 31 Jan 2006 20.0 50.0 30.0 0.0 0.0 SN - As at 31 Jan 2007 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 0.0 SN - As at 31 Jan 2008 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 0.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2006 8.7 22.7 64.0 2.7 2.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2007 0.0 6.0 68.7 25.3 0.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2008 0.0 3.3 57.3 39.3 0.0 Continued on following page 3: Protocols and plans are in place. Services in place/in development 1043SC - PAF CF/A70: Councils’ self assessment of progress on four elements of the implementation of the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service framework
p.30
1 2 3 4 Missing
4: A fully comprehensive CAMH Service for children with learning disabilities and mental health needs is available, including fully implemented protocols between services and appropriately trained staff, covering the whole council area.
p.30
1 2 3 4 Missing
3: Protocols and plans are in place. Services in place/in development 3: Protocols and plans are in place. Services in place/in development
p.30
commissioned for your council area?
1: None of the above in place OR Strategic plans for the council area have yet to address the needs of children and young people with learning disabilities and mental health needs. 2: Plans and protocols for children and young people with learning disabilities and mental health needs are in place: services have yet to be put in place. 3: Plans and protocols for children and young people with learning disabilities and mental health needs are in place: some services are in place, some are still to be developed so as to provide cover across the whole council area.
p.30
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.30
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 1043SC]
p.30
Lancashire
1043SC - PAF CF/A70: Councils’ self assessment of progress on four elements of the implementation of the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service framework
p.31
1 2 3 4 Missing
SN - As at 31 Jan 2006 0.0 20.0 70.0 10.0 0.0 SN - As at 31 Jan 2007 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 0.0 SN - As at 31 Jan 2008 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 0.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2006 2.0 18.0 61.3 16.7 2.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2007 0.0 4.7 54.7 40.7 0.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2008 0.0 2.7 45.3 52.0 0.0
p.31
1 2 3 4 Missing
SN - As at 31 Jan 2006 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 0.0 SN - As at 31 Jan 2007 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 0.0 SN - As at 31 Jan 2008 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2006 3.3 10.7 47.3 36.7 2.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2007 1.3 0.7 41.3 56.7 0.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2008 0.0 1.3 33.3 65.3 0.0 Continued on following page 3: Protocols and plans are in place. Services in place/in development
p.31
1 2 3 4 Missing
3: Protocols and plans are in place, only partially implemented
p.31
assessment to be undertaken within 24 hours or the next working day where indicated?
1: Strategic plans for the council area have yet to address the needs for 24 hour / 7 days per week access for emergencies and/or for specialist mental health assessment within 24 hours. 2: Protocols and plans are in place: services have yet to be put in place. 3: Protocols and plans are in place but are only partially implemented 4: Protocols and plans are in place and are fully implemented.
p.31
assessment to be undertaken within 24 hours or the next working day where indicated?
3: Protocols and plans are in place, only partially implemented 3: Protocols and plans are in place, only partially implemented
p.31
services appropriate to their age and level of maturity?
1: None of the above are in place OR Strategic plans for the council area have yet to address the needs of 16 and 17 year olds who require mental health services. 2: Plans and protocols for 16 and 17 year olds who require mental health services are in place: services have yet to be put in place. 3: Plans and protocols for 16 and 17 year olds who require mental health services are in place: some services are in place, some are still to be developed so as to provide cover across the whole council area. 4: A fully comprehensive CAMH service for 16 and 17 year olds who require mental health services is available, including fully implemented protocols between services and appropriately trained staff, covering the whole council area.
p.31
services appropriate to their age and level of maturity?
3: Protocols and plans are in place. Services in place/in development 3: Protocols and plans are in place. Services in place/in development
p.31
services appropriate to their age and level of maturity?
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 1043SC]
p.31
Lancashire
1043SC - PAF CF/A70: Councils’ self assessment of progress on four elements of the implementation of the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service framework
p.32
1 2 3 4 Missing
SN - As at 31 Jan 2006 10.0 50.0 20.0 20.0 0.0 SN - As at 31 Jan 2007 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 0.0 SN - As at 31 Jan 2008 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 0.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2006 1.3 30.7 42.7 23.3 2.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2007 0.7 15.3 42.7 41.3 0.0 Eng - As at 31 Jan 2008 1.3 7.3 38.7 52.7 0.0 3: Protocols and plans are in place, only partially implemented 3: Protocols and plans are in place, only partially implemented
p.32
and young people with complex, persistent and severe behavioural and mental health needs?
1: No protocols or partnership services are in place for children and young people with complex, persistent and severe behavioural and mental health needs. 2: Protocols and plans at an early stage of development: agreed access arrangements are not yet operating. 3: Protocols and plans are in place: access arrangements are operating but not across the whole council area.
p.32
and young people with complex, persistent and severe behavioural and mental health needs?
3: Protocols and plans are in place, only partially implemented 4: Protocols and plans are in place: access arrangements for services are fully operational.
p.32
Data definition
4. Were protocols in place for your council area for partnership working between agencies for children and young people with complex, persistent and severe behavioural and mental health needs? 3. Were arrangements in place for your council area to ensure that 24 hour cover is available to meet urgent mental health needs of children and young people and for a specialist mental health assessment to be undertaken within 24 hours or the next working day where indicated? 2. Did 16 and 17 year olds from your council area who require mental health services have access to services appropriate to their age and level of maturity? 1. Was a full range of CAMH services for children and young people with learning disabilities commissioned for your council area?
p.32
Guidance/interpretation
This indicator was new in 2005-06. The data for 2006-07 is submitted in February 2007; councils submit data rating themselves on components 1-4; the PI is calculated from the answers given for each of these components. The indicator reflects development in local authority areas of key services for children and adolescents. It has four components, the first three of which relate to a PSA target on CAMHS services. The scoring used is broadly in line with the CAMHS Self Assessment matrix for 2005-06 - each of the components features in this matrix. The plans and protocols for each component must be part of the overall strategy for the CAMHS service developed for each CAMHS partnership in line with the NSF. Councils will have rated their performance against each of the components on a scale of 1 to 4, and the final figure will be an aggregate of these four component scores, i.e. a whole number between four and sixteen. The ratings for each of the four components are above in
p.32
Measuring Unit
[Source - Durham University annual CAMHS mapping exercises]
p.32
Measuring Unit
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 1043SC]
p.32
Lancashire Drug Action Team
numerator denominator indicator value NORTH WEST average DAT - region difference
p.33
Lancashire Drug Action Team
Proportion of those in treatment who are aged less than 18 2005 140 4,720 3% 9% -6%
p.33
Lancashire Drug Action Team
Proportion of under 18s in treatment with young people's services 2005 12 140 9% 89% -80%
p.33
Lancashire Drug Action Team
Note: difference is calculated using actual numbers, not rounded figures as stated in indicator values
p.33
Traffic Light: AMBER
Indicator description and interpretation : This is a two part indicator: For the first part the numerator is the number of people aged less than 18 who have received drug treatment during the year. The denominator is the number of people of all ages who have received drug treatment during the year. High is good - the number of under 18 substance misusers is generally around 11% of the total for all ages: if the percentage of those in treatment aged <18 is higher than this then the DAT has been relatively successful in getting young people into treatment.
p.33
Traffic Light: AMBER
Health warning: Data collection from young persons' treatment services only started in April 2005/06 we would therefore expect large differences with data from 2005/06 to 2006/07. This may be due to better compliance with NDTMS. A low percentage for the first part of this indicator could be due to excellent performance by adult services in getting substance misusers into treatment rather than poor performance by young people's services. The NTA has introduced a new definition of treatment with new thresholds so a drop in numbers in 2007 could reflect a change in practice. An increase in the % of young people in young people's treatment services would be a more realistic indicator of improved services. The figures for Cornwall & Isles of Scilly are combined for both LAs, as they are not reported separately. 1040NT: Proportion of those in substance misuse treatment who are aged under 18
p.33
Traffic Light: AMBER
For the second part the numerator is the number of under 18 year olds receiving treatment from specialist treatment services providing tier 3/4 interventions to under 18s. The denominator is the numerator for the first part i.e. the number of people aged less than 18 receiving treatment High is good, suggesting that interventions for young people are child focused. A high % will indicate the existence of young people’s interventions to meet all needs. A low figure (less than 90%) is likely to indicate that adult services are still providing the more clinical aspects of drug treatment such as prescribing. All numbers are based on the drug action team area (which is the same as the local authority area) where the person lives, not where the treatment is provided.
p.33
Traffic Light: RED
judgment basis for 2005 data : For the first part of the indicator based on a National Average of 5%: green = more than 7% of those receiving treatment are age less than 18 amber = between 3% and 7% red = less than 3% The second part of the indicator is provided for information only, but a high number and high % would indicate a comprehensive range of children’s treatment services
p.33
Mental health data
1040NT: Proportion of those in substance misuse treatment who are aged under 18
p.34
Mental health data
Data Contact: If you have any queries concerning this data please contact Tom Aldridge on 020 7261 8540 or Kirsty Blenkins 020 7261 8550. Please quote REF: 1040NT judgment basis for 2006 & 2007 data : For the first part of the indicator based on a National Average of 11.3%: green = more than 14% of those receiving treatment are age less than 18 amber = between 11 and 13.9% red = less than 11% The second part of the indicator is provided for information only, but a high number and high % would indicate a comprehensive range of children’s treatment services
p.34
Mental health data
Data Source: National Drug Treatment Monitoring System year end figures will be available on www.nta.nhs.uk
p.34
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08
LA 64 67 68 76 85 85 85 . = Data not applicable SN 73 72 75 76 77 77 80 .. = Data not available Eng 68 72 75 78 81 84 85 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.36
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz 2001-08 0<50 50<60 60<70 70<80 80<=100
p.36
Data definition
Continued on following page [Source - OC2 Question 10]
p.36
Data definition
This indicator is an amalgam of two components dealing with visits to the dentist and health assessments. It may be useful to look at each of these individually; poor performance on one component may be masked by good performance on the other. If the figure is low, then the age breakdown of the LAC cohort may be relevant, since older children are more likely to refuse. As is the case with all performance indicators, indicators 'indicate', they do not 'mean'. The overall figure for this indicator should be interpreted with caution. Although councils should encourage children looked after to have a health assessment, participation in them is not mandatory and refusals may have a substantial impact on a council’s indicator value. Health issues are regularly raised in reviews, so there is a likely relationship between participation in, and the timeliness of, reviews (4016SC PAF CF/C63 & 2064SC - PAF CF/C68). Distance from home (3085SC PAF CF/C69) may have an influence on health
p.36
Data definition
outcomes, as would frequent placement moves (2043SC PAF CF/A1). 1037SC - PAF CF/C19: The average of the percentages of looked after children who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months, and who had their teeth checked by a dentist during the previous 12 months, and had an annual health assessment during the previous 12 months
p.36
Data definition
The number of the children in the denominator who had their teeth checked by a dentist during the year ending 30 September.
p.36
Numerator i
This indicator is the average of two indicators which are calculated separately.
p.36
Numerator ii
The number of the children in the denominator who had had an annual health assessment during the year ending 30 September. [Source - OC2 Question 11]
p.36
Numerator ii
The total number of children looked after at 30 September, who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months.
p.36
Numerator ii
This indicator measures some health requirements, which are basic for all children, which should not be overlooked for children looked after and serve as a proxy for good overall health outcomes. This indicator should have an association with good parenting, notwithstanding the fact that older children looked after might exercise their right to refuse medical examinations and treatments. We would expect to see high proportions of children looked after receiving this basic health care. There is an associated National Priorities Guidance objective to enable looked after children to gain maximum life chance benefit from educational opportunities, health care, social care and other services. Percentage as a whole number which is an average of the percentage of (Numerator i/denominator) and (Numerator ii/denominator)
p.36
1037SC - PAF CF/C19: Health of looked after children
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08
p.36
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.36
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 1037SC]
p.36
Lancashire
1037SC - PAF CF/C19: The average of the percentages of looked after children who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months, and who had their teeth checked by a dentist during the previous 12 months, and had an annual health assessment during the previous 12 months
p.37
Lancashire
2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67
p.37
Lancashire
4016SC PAF CF/C63: Participation of looked after children in reviews - see p.143 2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69
p.37
Related measures
3085SC PAF CF/C69: Distance children newly looked after are placed from home - see p.116
p.37
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 1037SC]
p.37
Lancashire excl Blackburn and Blackpool
1994 - 1998 Average 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 percentage change on baseline
p.39
Lancashire excl Blackburn and Blackpool
Lancashire excl Blackbur 200 128 123 119 119 141 -30% England 5,729 3,884 3,477 3,353 2,977 2,779 -51% Great Britain 6,860 4,596 4,100 3,905 3,472 3,294 -52%
p.39
injured in road traffic accidents
Number of children aged 0 to 15 killed or seriously injured in road traffic accidents
p.39
injured in road traffic accidents
Whilst the 2006 total for killed or seriously injured child casualties in Lancashire excl Blackburn and Blackpool was 30% below the baseline, this figure can be highly variable year on year. This variability may occur because a relatively small number of children are killed or seriously injured each year in road accidents at Local Authority level.
p.39
The overarching PSA target for Road Safety:
To reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured in Great Britain in road accidents by 40%, and the number of children killed or seriously injured by 50%, by 2010 compared with the average for 1994-98, tackling the significantly higher incidence in disadvantaged communities. The Department for Transport has agreed a target to reduce the number of children killed or seriously injured in road traffic accidents by 50% by 2010 compared with the average for 1994-98. Statistics showed the number of children killed or seriously injured in Great Britain in 2006 to be 52% below the 1994-98 average. In Lancashire excl Blackburn and Blackpool the number of children killed or seriously injured in 2006 was 30% below the 1994-98 average for that Local Authority.
p.39
Coverage of the Road Safety target:
The 40% and 50% casualty reduction targets apply to Great Britain as a whole, as they were set in the context of the national strategy that included many measures that would affect the whole country in the same way. However, DfT's focus in local interventions necessary to address the special problems of disadvantaged areas is solely a matter for the devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales, and so that part of the target applies to England only.
p.39
Definitions:
The 40% and 50% targets - these relate to combined totals of deaths and serious injuries Children - those aged under 16 Killed - people whose injuries cause their death less than 30 days after the accident Seriously injured - people whose injuries cause them to be detained in hospital as an "in-patient", or include any of the following injuries whether or not they are detained in hospital: fractures, concussion, internal injuries, crushings, burns (excluding friction burns), severe cuts and lacerations, severe general shock requiring medical treatment and injuries causing death 30 or more days after the accident Road accidents - those involving personal injury on the public highway (including footways) in which at least one road vehicle is involved and which becomes known to the police within 30 days of its occurrence Disadvantaged communities - those within the ODPM's 88 Neighbourhood Renewal Fund areas
p.39
injured in road traffic accidents
The credible monitoring of targeted reductions requires that data be reported consistently and accurately. Local and national government, and local police forces, work closely to achieve a common reporting standard. A complex devolved reporting system such as that operated in Great Britain will never produce perfect results, but the high standards that are achieved reflect the efforts of local authorities and police forces to report to the standard national requirement. However readers should note that while very few, if any, fatal accidents do not become known to the police, there is evidence that an appreciable proportion of non fatal injury accidents are not reported to the police and thus are not included.
p.40
injured in road traffic accidents
Any queries on the statistics or requests for further information should be directed to Linden Francis, tel: 020 7944 3078, e-mail: roadacc.stats@dft.gsi.gov.uk
p.40
Statistics, baselines and targets
Provisional statistics for each calendar year are published about six months after it ends, with final figures following in September in the annual publication "Road Accidents Great Britain - The Casualty Report". The PSA target relates to road casualty figures for 2010 to be published in 2011. The baseline figures are the averages for the calendar years 1994 to 1998 in Great Britain: · Total killed or seriously injured 47,656 (after 40% reduction = 28594) · Children killed or seriously injured 6,860 (after 50% reduction = 3430) For disadvantaged communities, our target is a bigger reduction than for England as a whole in the overall road casualty rate by population for ODPM's 88 Neighbourhood Renewal Fund areas, comparing the figure for 2006 with the average for 2000 to 2002.
p.40
Data collection and quality assurance
On receipt of the data, DfT carries out its own validation checks and refers back any records with errors or suspicious values, such as any where the number of vehicles and/or casualties noted on the attendant circumstances record is inconsistent with the actual number of vehicle/casualty records in the accident set. Before annual statistics are compiled, DfT carries out further quality checks including ensuring that the number of records it holds agrees with the total held by data providers. DfT is confident that its casualty statistics based on STATS19 data are accurate, but recognises that, by their nature, they do not cover casualties arising from any accidents that are not reported to the police. Also, studies have shown that the police can underestimate the severity of injuries because of the difficulty of determining this at the scene.
p.40
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 393 338 313 337 415 516 606 . = Data not applicable SN 400 424 443 467 442 400 431 .. = Data not available Eng 511 513 517 499 515 496 490 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.42
Numerator
The population aged under 18 in the council area divided by 10,000
p.42
Denominator
[Source - CPR3, Part A, Item 1, box 1] The number of referrals in period between 1 April and 31 March Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator 2015SC - KIGS CH141: Number of referrals of children per 10,000 population aged under 18
p.42
Denominator
[Source - ONS mid year estimates] (2007-08 data uses the latest 2007 mid year estimates)
p.42
10,000 population aged under 18
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 LA SN Eng
p.42
10,000 population aged under 18
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2015SC]
p.42
Lancashire
2015SC - KIGS CH141: Number of referrals of children per 10,000 population aged under 18
p.43
Lancashire
This indicator tries to establish whether appropriate thresholds are being used in the cases of children who are in need. Referrals of children to councils are important as a measure of local concerns about children's welfare. They cover a wide range of concerns including potential abuse, disability, family functioning etc. They may be made by other professionals, family members, friends, the general public or children referring themselves.
p.43
Lancashire
The measure will reflect: the practices of the council, for example, use of a corporate call centre as compared with access via local offices; joint working with the NHS on CAMHS and other services; and with the local Youth Offending Team. As the newly formed children's services work more closely together the counts of referrals may change, reflecting changes in 'gate keeping' arrangements. There may also be an issue, particularly where departments have recently merged, of social care referrals being correctly identified. The measure will reflect adherence to guidance on how to count referrals for one or more children in the same family and repeat referrals for the same child. Unborn children may be referred and will be counted in this measure.
p.43
Guidance/interpretation
2022SC PAF CF/C64: Timing of core assessments - see p.49 Referral rates may reflect differences in deprivation between councils; this will also apply within a council's area. Children’s social care services vary in their definition of what constitutes a referral which makes comparisons difficult. Some have a ‘pre-referral stage to establish if the concern meets their threshold for an assessment. Low numbers of referrals could suggest that there are clear thresholds for assessment which are well understood by other agencies. Low numbers, however, could also indicate too high thresholds and poor practice of agencies not referring until situations have deteriorated so much that they have become child protection issues This would indicate a need to explore the range of preventative/support services available for those who did not meet the threshold for social care and /or whether local agencies share an agreed common threshold.
p.43
Guidance/interpretation
Referral rates need to be viewed in conjunction with repeat referrals (2016SC), referrals leading to initial assessment (2017SC), initial assessments within 7 working days of referral (2020SC), and rate & timing of core assessments (2021SC & 2022SC). A rising referral rate, linked with a rising number of initial and core assessments, could indicate better identification of concerns by other agencies. The extent to which the introduction of the Common Assessment Framework has occured in the council may affect this indicator as there may be a change in the patterns of referrals between agencies.
p.43
Related measures
2016SC KIGS CH142: % of referrals that are repeat referrals within 12 months - see p.44
p.43
Related measures
2020SC % of initial assessments within 7 working days of referral - see p.47 2017SC KIGS CH143: % of referrals of children in need that led to initial assessments - see p.45
p.43
Related measures
2021SC KIGS CH145: Number of core assessments of children in need per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.48 New information about a child who is part of an already open case does not constitute a referral for the purpose of this return. Open cases should include cases of children receiving an ongoing service that will continue until it is reviewed at a given date, but until that date the case is not active so far as fieldwork and decision making is concerned. Reception and initial contact activity is not in itself a referral for the purposes of child protection plans. Such activity may, or may not, lead to a referral. Only the number of actual referrals should be counted on the return. * in respect of a case of a child not previously known to the council; * where a case was previously open but is now closed. This is either: A referral is defined as a request for services to be provided by social care services.
p.43
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2015SC]
p.43
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 19.2 19.6 18.5 19.0 20.6 22.6 25.2 . = Data not applicable SN 20.8 17.4 19.8 21.9 25.4 23.0 25.6 .. = Data not available Eng 23.8 22.1 22.2 22.1 23.3 22.7 24.3 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.44
Data definition
2020SC % of initial assessments within 7 working days of referral - see p.47 2022SC PAF CF/C64: Timing of core assessments - see p.49 2016SC - KIGS CH142: Percentage of referrals that are repeat referrals within 12 months
p.44
Data definition
[Source - CPR3, Part A, Item 1, box 2] The number of re-referrals in period between 1 April and 31 March
p.44
Data definition
2017SC KIGS CH143: % of referrals of children in need that led to initial assessments - see p.45
p.44
Related measures
2015SC KIGS CH141: Number of referrals of children per 10,000 population - see p.42 Percentage to one decimal place
p.44
Related measures
High re-referral rates may also indicate a lack of understanding of thresholds for social care services and/or a limited range of preventative/support services in the area. It is important to look at this indicator in conjunction with other referral data (2015SC, 2017SC). There may also be links to how quickly the more substantial referrals are dealt with in terms of assessment timescales (2020SC & 2022SC PAF CF/C64). This indicator tries to establish whether appropriate thresholds are being used in the cases of children who are in need. Re-referral percentages help to indicate the extent to which initial assessments at first referral are assessing needs appropriately. High, or higher than average, scores may indicate that following an assessment, appropriate services have not been put in place, or cases have been closed before the required outcomes have been achieved. Lower scores may reflect delays in closure of cases.
p.44
Measuring unit
[Source - CPR3, Part A, Item 1, box 1] Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.44
Measuring unit
The number of referrals in period between 1 April and 31 March
p.44
Denominator
Re-referral for this purpose is where a case has been closed and a referral occurs within 12 months of a previous referral to the same council. See CPR3 form and CPR3 FAQ (DCSF docs) for further explanation of 're-referrals'.
p.44
within 12 months
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.44
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2016SC]
p.44
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 43.0 60.7 65.5 54.3 54.7 43.1 39.3 . = Data not applicable SN 56.3 61.4 64.0 59.7 62.5 65.5 62.4 .. = Data not available Eng 46.3 46.3 50.8 52.6 52.7 56.0 59.4 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.45
Data definition
2020SC % of initial assessments within 7 working days of referral - see p.47 2022SC PAF CF/C64: Timing of core assessments - see p.49 2017SC - KIGS CH143: Percentage of referrals of children in need that led to initial assessments
p.45
Data definition
[Source - CPR3, Part A, Item 2, box 1 + box 2] The number of initial assessments completed in the period between 1 April and 31 March.
p.45
Data definition
2019SC KIGS CH02: Initial child protection conferences per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.46 2016SC KIGS CH142: % of referrals that are repeat referrals within 12 months - see p.44
p.45
Guidance/interpretation
2015SC KIGS CH141: Number of referrals of children per 10,000 population - see p.42
p.45
Related measures
This indicator tries to establish whether appropriate thresholds are being used in the cases of children who are in need and whether their needs are being properly assessed. A high percentage of referrals leading to initial assessments may indicate good inter-agency understanding of thresholds for social care services. A low percentage of referrals leading to initial assessments may indicate a lack of understanding for social care services, perhaps due to poor inter-agency, or poor intra-agency, understanding or application of thresholds. The introduction of CAF may affect this indicator as there may be a change in the patterns of referrals between agencies. Significant variation in council's figure from the SN average figure should prompt further investigation. Consideration should be given to the relationship between the processing of referrals (2015SC & 2016SC), and initial & core assessment
p.45
Related measures
timescales (2020SC & 2022SC PAF CF/C64). Percentage to one decimal place
p.45
Measuring unit
[Source - CPR3, Part A, Item 1, box 1] Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.45
Numerator
The number of referrals in period between 1 April and 31 March.
p.45
to initial assessments
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.45
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2017SC]
p.45
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 24.9 29.0 25.7 28.3 35.6 34.9 33.3 . = Data not applicable SN 30.6 32.4 35.3 33.8 31.5 32.8 32.5 .. = Data not available Eng 31.3 33.7 34.8 33.8 34.4 35.8 36.7 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.46
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
2023SC KIGS CH01: Children and young people on child protection register per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.51 2027SC KIGS CH03: Child Protection registrations per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.54 2019SC - KIGS CH02: Initial child protection conferences per 10,000 population aged under 18
p.46
Measuring unit
[Source - ONS mid year estimates] (2007-08 data uses the latest 2007 mid year estimates) The population aged under 18 in the council area divided by 10,000
p.46
Denominator
[Source - CPR3 Part A Item 4, line 2] Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.46
Denominator
If the rate of ICPCs is significantly at variance to SN (not national) comparators this raises questions regarding the management and decision making regarding child protection concerns.
p.46
Related measures
2021SC KIGS CH145: Number of core assessments of children in need per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.48 2020SC % of initial assessments within 7 working days of referral - see p.47 2015SC KIGS CH141: Number of referrals of children per 10,000 population - see p.42 The number of initial child protection conferences in the period between 1 April and 31 March.
p.46
Numerator
This indicator tries to establish whether appropriate thresholds are being used in the cases of children who are at the greatest risk of abuse. Rates may reflect differences in deprivation between councils; this will also apply within a council’s area. If there is a high mobility of families in an area this may add to numbers of initial conferences as children already on another council’s child protection plan move permanently into the area. Rates may reflect differences in the age structure of the under 18 population between councils.
p.46
10,000 population aged under 18
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 LA SN Eng
p.46
10,000 population aged under 18
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2019SC]
p.46
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 33.0 41.9 25.6 52.6 69.6 73.5 71.3 . = Data not applicable SN 65.8 65.5 72.5 66.1 61.9 70.5 76.5 .. = Data not available Eng 54.0 56.6 58.1 61.7 64.9 68.4 70.7 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.47
Data definition
2020SC - Percentage of initial assessments within seven working days of referral
p.47
Numerator
The number of initial assessments completed in the period between 1 April and 31 March.
p.47
Denominator
[Source - CPR3, Part A, Item 2, box 1] The number of initial assessments completed, in the period between 1 April and 31 March, within seven working days of referral. Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.47
Measuring unit
[Source - CPR3, Part A, Item 2, box 1 + box 2]
p.47
Measuring unit
q p It should be undertaken within a maximum of seven working days. An initial assessment is deemed to have commenced at the point of referral to Children's Services or when the new information on a case already open indicates that an initial assessment should be repeated. This indicator tries to establish whether children who are in need are being assessed in a timely manner as a proxy for the effectiveness of the assessment, and the meeting, of children's needs. A referral is defined as a request for services to be provided by the social services department. The response may include no action, but that in itself is a decision, and should be made promptly and recorded.
p.47
Measuring unit
2015SC KIGS CH141: Number of referrals of children per 10,000 population - see p.42 High scores indicate good performance. Low scores indicate poor performance. Low percentages of IAs completed within timescale suggests problems in the duty and referral system which could include either poor systems, inadequate management, insufficient staff, or poor data management. This indicator should be viewed in conjunction with data on referrals (2015SC-2017SC), core assessments (2021SC & 2022SC) and staffing (6012SC).
p.47
Related measures
The Assessment Framework sets a timescale for an initial assessment which authorities are expected to meet. Feedback from children and parents has been very positive about the requirement to undertake an initial assessment within 7 working days. Where this timescale has been met, they have described being very appreciative of a prompt service.
p.47
Related measures
2016SC KIGS CH142: % of referrals that are repeat referrals within 12 months - see p.44 2017SC KIGS CH143: % of referrals of children in need that led to initial assessments - see p.45 2021SC KIGS CH145: Number of core assessments of children in need per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.48 2022SC PAF CF/C64: Timing of core assessments - see p.49 6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184
p.47
referral
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.47
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2020SC]
p.47
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 10.8 24.5 36.1 38.3 73.6 70.8 90.9 . = Data not applicable SN 49.7 55.8 67.1 61.1 59.5 74.6 86.1 .. = Data not available Eng 50.5 50.1 57.4 66.9 76.8 84.9 95.6 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.48
Data definition
2021SC - KIGS CH145: Number of core assessments of children in need per 10,000 population aged under 18
p.48
Measuring unit
[Source - ONS mid year estimates] (2007-08 data uses the latest 2007 mid year estimates)
p.48
Numerator
The population aged under 18 in the council area divided by 10,000
p.48
Denominator
[Source - CPR3, Part A, Item 3, box 1 + box 2] The number of core assessments completed in the period between 1 April and 31 March. Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.48
Denominator
2016SC KIGS CH142: % of referrals that are repeat referrals within 12 months - see p.44
p.48
Related measures
2015SC KIGS CH141: Number of referrals of children per 10,000 population - see p.42
p.48
Guidance/interpretation
This indicator should be viewed in conjunction with data on referrals (2015SC-2017SC), assessments (2020SC & 2022SC) and staffing (6012SC). Rates may reflect differences in deprivation between councils - this will also apply within a council's area - and may reflect differences in the age structure of the under 18 population. A high rate may indicate that thresholds are set too low and a low rate may indicate threshold set too high, though either may indicate the application of proportionate thresholds. Any rates, high or low, that are consistently and significantly different to those of SN comparators, however, require further exploration. A core assessment is deemed to have commenced at the point at which the initial assessment ended, or strategy discussion decided to initiate enquiries under s47 of the Children Act 1989, or new information obtained on an open case indicates that a core assessment
p.48
Guidance/interpretation
should be undertaken. A core assessment is defined as an in-depth assessment of the needs of a child and the capacity of their parents or care givers to respond appropriately to these needs within the wider family and community network. At the conclusion of this phase of assessment, there should be an analysis of the findings to arrive at an understanding of the child's situation. This understanding should be used to inform a subsequent plan which sets out the case objectives, and the nature of services to be provided. The time-scale for the completion of a core assessment is a maximum of 35 working days. Successful meeting of the time-scales also indicates effective joint working where multi-agency assessment is required.
p.48
Guidance/interpretation
2017SC KIGS CH143: % of referrals of children in need that led to initial assessments - see p.45 2020SC % of initial assessments within 7 working days of referral - see p.47 2022SC PAF CF/C64: Timing of core assessments - see p.49 6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184
p.48
in need per 10,000 population aged under 18
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 LA SN Eng
p.48
in need per 10,000 population aged under 18
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2021SC]
p.48
2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 55 69 75 76 . = Data not applicable SN 69 75 83 79 .. = Data not available Eng 67 74 78 80 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.49
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz 2004-05 0<45 45<55 55<65 65<75 75<=100 2005-06 0<45 45<60 60<70 70<80 80<=100 2006-08 0<60 60<70 70<75 75<80 80<=100
p.49
Data definition
Continued on following page Of the core assessments in the denominator, the number that had been completed within 35 working days of their commencement. A core assessment is deemed to have commenced at the point at which: * the initial assessment ended; or 2022SC - PAF CF/C64: Percentage of core assessments that were completed within 35 working days of their commencement
p.49
Numerator
* a strategy discussion decided to initiate enquiries under section 47 of the Children Act 1989; or
p.49
Guidance/interpretation
This indicator tries to establish whether children who are in the greatest need are being assessed in a timely manner as a proxy for the effectiveness of the assessment, and the meeting, of children's needs. A core assessment is deemed to have commenced at the point at which the initial assessment ended, or strategy discussion decided to initiate enquiries under s47 of the Children Act 1989, or new information obtained on an open case indicates that a core assessment should be undertaken. The Assessment Framework sets a timescale for a core assessment which authorities are expected to meet. It is not always possible to complete core assessments appropriately within 35 days. This is the case in only a minority of instances, however, and the bandings on this indicator have been tightened further from 2005-06 to 2006-07 to both reflect this and to encourage better performance. [Source - CPR3, Item 3, box 1]
p.49
Guidance/interpretation
* new information obtained on an open case indicates that a core assessment should be undertaken.
p.49
Measuring unit
[Source - CPR3, Item 3, box 1+ box 2] The total number of core assessments in the year. If a child undergoes a core assessment more than once in the year, count each core assessment that finished during the year separately.
p.49
Denominator
Examination of the 2005-06 and 2006-07 data of the number of core assessments per 10,000 and the percentage of core assessments completed in time indicates that councils may not be recording data consistently or that practice varies widely. This indicator should be viewed in conjunction with data on referrals (2015SC-2017SC), assessments (2020SC-2022SC), and staffing (6012SC). High numbers generally indicate good performance. Low numbers generally indicate poor performance and suggest problems in allocation, and/or difficulties in joint working with other agencies. Moderate to very high scores in this indicator should, when coupled with high staff vacancy rates, prompt further questions about practice and/or data.
p.49
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.49
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2022SC]
p.49
Lancashire
2022SC - PAF CF/C64: Percentage of core assessments that were completed within 35 working days of their commencement
p.50
Lancashire
6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184
p.50
Related measures
2015SC KIGS CH141: Number of referrals of children per 10,000 population - see p.42
p.50
Related measures
2020SC % of initial assessments within 7 working days of referral - see p.47 2021SC KIGS CH145: Number of core assessments of children in need per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.48 2016SC KIGS CH142: % of referrals that are repeat referrals within 12 months - see p.44 2017SC KIGS CH143: % of referrals of children in need that led to initial assessments - see p.45
p.50
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2022SC]
p.50
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 11.6 15.6 14.5 15.5 20.3 22.2 20.3 . = Data not applicable SN 21.8 22.4 22.8 23.1 21.3 23.5 25.6 .. = Data not available Eng 23.1 23.9 23.7 23.4 23.9 25.3 26.5 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.51
Data definition
Rate per 10,000 population to one decimal place
p.51
Measuring unit
[Source - ONS mid year estimates] (2007-08 data uses the latest 2007 mid year estimates) The population aged under 18 in the council area divided by 10,000
p.51
Denominator
[Source - CPR3, Part B, Table 1, line 6, column 14] Number of children who were the subject of a child protection plan, or on the Child Protection Register at 31 March 2007.
p.51
Numerator
2042SC KIGS CH39: Children looked after per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.65 2036SC PAF CF/C21: Duration on the Child Protection Register - see p.62 2035SC KIGS CH10: De-registrations from the Child Protection Register per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.61 2034SC PAF CF/C20: Reviews of child protection cases (BVPI 162) - see p.59 2016SC KIGS CH142: % of referrals that are repeat referrals within 12 months - see p.44 2015SC KIGS CH141: Number of referrals of children per 10,000 population - see p.42 This indicator tries to establish whether appropriate thresholds are being used in the cases of children who are at risk of suffering significant harm. This indicator should be viewed in conjunction with data on referrals (2015SC-2017SC), child protection conferences (2019SC), assessments (2020SC & 2021SC) and staffing (6012SC). Differences in rates may reflect differences in deprivation between councils -
p.51
Numerator
this will also apply within a council's area - and may reflect differences in the age structure of the under 18 population. A high rate may indicate that thresholds are set too low and a low rate may indicate threshold set too high, though either may also indicate the application of proportionate thresholds. More effective inter-agency working may lead to an increased indicator value and poor inter-agency working may lead to decreased indicator value. Any rates, high or low, that are consistently and significantly different to those of SN comparators, however, require further exploration.
p.51
Guidance/interpretation
Further exploration is also required if there are significant changes in the trend data because this may indicate important changes in the application of thresholds (2019SC, 2027SC, 2028SC PAF CF/A3). Practice in relation to timing of both child protection reviews and of deregistration may have a bearing on this indicator (2034SC PAF CF/C20, 2035SC & 2036SC PAF CF/C21). Changes in trend data on children looked after may also have an important connection with this indicator (2042SC). Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.51
Child protection data - child protection procedures
2023SC - KIGS CH01: Children and young people who are the subject of a child protection plan, or on the child protection register, per 10,000 population aged under 18
p.51
Child protection data - child protection procedures
2028SC PAF CF/A3: Re-registrations on the Child Protection Register - see p.55 2027SC KIGS CH03: Child Protection registrations per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.54 2021SC KIGS CH145: Number of core assessments of children in need per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.48
p.51
Related measures
2017SC KIGS CH143: % of referrals of children in need that led to initial assessments - see p.45
p.51
Related measures
2020SC % of initial assessments within 7 working days of referral - see p.47 2019SC KIGS CH02: Initial child protection conferences per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.46
p.51
protection register per 10,000 population aged under 18
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 LA SN Eng
p.51
protection register per 10,000 population aged under 18
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2023SC]
p.51
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . = Data not applicable SN 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.1 .. = Data not available Eng 1.1 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.52
Data definition
Continued on following page [Source - 2003-04 to 2005-06 - CSCI data collection; 2006-08 - Ofsted data collection]
p.52
Numerator
Numbers on the Child Protection Register at 31 March
p.52
Denominator
[Source - 2003-04 to 2005-06 - CSCI data collection; 2006-08 - Ofsted data collection] Of those in the denominator, numbers not allocated to a key worker at March 31. 2024SC - Percentage of children and young people who are the subject of a child protection plan, or on the child protection register, who are not allocated to a social worker
p.52
Denominator
It should be noted that since this is snapshot data, this indicator does not necessarily represent a council's performance throughout the year. A high number would suggest that further investigation is needed around the number, recruitment, retention, and allocation of social workers. A high number would also raise questions about the use and supervision of unqualified staff (see 6012SC). A low number, coupled with poor recruitment and retention figures, should prompt further investigation (see above). A low number, coupled with an increasing pressure on children's services or of the volume of child protection work, should also prompt further investigation (see indicators 2015SC-2017SC, 2021SC, 2023SC, 2027SC, 2034SC-2035SC). The role of the Key worker is set out in paragraphs 5.75 and 5.76 of Working Together to Safeguard Children . The Key Worker is the qualified social worker who has been allocated responsibility for the case. It is not a managerial role.
p.52
Denominator
This indicator tries to use allocation data as a proxy for the measurement of the effectiveness of the interventions provided to children with a child protection plan or on the Child Protection Register. Working Together , which was based on research, inspections, and reviews of individual cases, stresses the importance of key workers in ensuring that plans are developed and implemented to protect children from abuse. The death of Victoria Climbié and its aftermath have reinforced this importance. Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.52
protection register who are not allocated to a social worker
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 % LA SN Eng
p.52
protection register who are not allocated to a social worker
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2024SC]
p.52
Lancashire
2024SC - Percentage of children and young people who are the subject of a child protection plan, or on the child protection register, who are not allocated to a social worker
p.53
Lancashire
6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184 2021SC KIGS CH145: Number of core assessments of children in need per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.48 2023SC KIGS CH01: Children and young people on child protection register per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.51 2027SC KIGS CH03: Child Protection registrations per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.54 2017SC KIGS CH143: % of referrals of children in need that led to initial assessments - see p.45 2019SC KIGS CH02: Initial child protection conferences per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.46
p.53
Lancashire
2034SC PAF CF/C20: Reviews of child protection cases (BVPI 162) - see p.59 2035SC KIGS CH10: De-registrations from the Child Protection Register per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.61 2060SC % of looked after children with a named social worker who is qualified as a social worker - see p.79 2016SC KIGS CH142: % of referrals that are repeat referrals within 12 months - see p.44
p.53
Related measures
2015SC KIGS CH141: Number of referrals of children per 10,000 population - see p.42
p.53
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2024SC]
p.53
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 19.2 24.6 22.4 22.1 29.5 29.9 27.3 . = Data not applicable SN 24.1 25.7 27.5 28.0 25.8 29.4 28.3 .. = Data not available Eng 25.0 27.2 28.1 27.7 28.5 30.2 30.9 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.54
Child protection data - child protection procedures
2027SC - KIGS CH03: Children who became the subject of a child protection plan, or were registered, per 10,000 population aged under 18
p.54
Child protection data - child protection procedures
Rate per 10,000 population to one decimal place
p.54
Measuring unit
[Source - ONS mid year estimates] (2007-08 data uses the latest 2007 mid year estimates) The population aged under 18 in the council area divided by 10,000
p.54
Denominator
[Source - CPR3, Part B, Table 5, line 6 (also Table 6, line 6, column 4)]
p.54
Numerator
2036SC PAF CF/C21: Duration on the Child Protection Register - see p.62 2034SC PAF CF/C20: Reviews of child protection cases (BVPI 162) - see p.59 2028SC PAF CF/A3: Re-registrations on the Child Protection Register - see p.55 2035SC KIGS CH10: De-registrations from the Child Protection Register per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.61 Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.54
Numerator
2024SC % of children and young people on the child protection register who are not allocated to a social worker - see p.52 2019SC KIGS CH02: Initial child protection conferences per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.46
p.54
Data definition
If the rate of registrations is significantly at variance to national and local comparators this raises questions regarding the management and decision making regarding child protection concerns. If there are significant numbers of LAC on the CPR this should be investigated because it may suggest an inefficient use of resources or drift. Changes in this over time is a good indicator of changing practice within an authority (more or less risk averse, better prevention etc). This data should be viewed in conjunction with indicators on rates with child protection plans (2019SC), registration (2028SC PAF CF/A3), deregistration (2035SC & 2036SC PAF CF/C21) and reviews (2034SC PAF CF/C20). This indicator tries to establish whether appropriate thresholds are being used in the cases of children who are at risk of suffering significant harm. Differences in rates between councils may reflect differences in deprivation between councils; this may also apply within a council's area.
p.54
Data definition
Rates may also reflect differences in the age structure of the under 18 population between councils.
p.54
Guidance/interpretation
Number of children registered, or having a child protection plan, during the year, ending 31 March.
p.54
population aged under 18
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 LA SN Eng
p.54
population aged under 18
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2027SC]
p.54
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 15.9 15.6 13.1 11.6 12.2 14.5 14.0 . = Data not applicable SN 14.9 13.4 12.4 14.1 15.9 15.4 14.5 .. = Data not available Eng 14.0 13.4 13.1 13.4 14.2 13.4 13.6 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.55
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz zzzz zzz zz z 2001-08 0<3 3<6 6<8 8<10 10<15 15<17.21 17.21<20 20<24 24<=100
p.55
Data definition
Continued on following page 2028SC - PAF CF/A3: Percentage of children who became the subject of a child protection plan, or were registered during the year, who had previously been the subject of a child protection plan or had been registered
p.55
Data definition
The purpose of the child protection plan, or registration, is to devise and implement a plan which leads to lasting improvements in the child’s safety and overall well being. Some re-registrations are essential in responding to adverse changes in circumstance, but high levels of re-registration may suggest that the professionals responsible for the child’s welfare are not intervening effectively either to bring about the required changes in the child’s family situation, or to make alternative plans for the child’s long term care.
p.55
Guidance/interpretation
It is important to link this indicator with the other key child protections indicators (2023SC, 2027SC, 2034SC, 2035SC). The most obvious relationship is with 2036SC PAF CF/C21, duration with a child protection plan or on the register, where a good (i.e. low) figure for this indicator may have been achieved at the expense of a poor (i.e. high) figure for PAF C21. The levels of re-registrations, in other words, might be low where a council fails to achieve de-registrations within two years and children are left on the register for extended periods.
p.55
Measuring unit
[Source - CPR3, Part B, Table 5, line 6, column 4 (also Table 9)]
p.55
Measuring unit
Consideration needs to be given to the reasons for re-registration and to the timescales concerned in order to establish the extent to which re-registration is a result of inadequate child protection planning. A proportion of a council’s re-registrations may be because a child had left a council area only to return to the same area at some later date; this is not necessarily evidence of a failure of a child protection plan. Also a child may have been registered and deregistered many years previously to the relevant financial year and so their re-registration will not be a reflection of any failure on the part of the council in their child protection work. Not all councils have comprehensive records for previous registrations going back 18 years. The less comprehensive their data, the lower the rate of re-registration may be.
p.55
Numerator
The number of children who were the subject of a child protection plan, or on the Child Protection Register, at any time between 1 April and 31 March. This is a count of each occasion of registration in the year, and may count the same child more than once.
p.55
Denominator
[Source - CPR3, Part B, Table 7 line 2 (also Table 9)] Of the children in the denominator, the number who had previously been the subject of a child protection plan, or on the Child Protection Register, regardless of how long ago that was.
p.55
2028SC - PAF CF/A3: Re-registrations on the child protection register
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.55
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.55
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2028SC]
p.55
Lancashire
2028SC - PAF CF/A3: Percentage of children who became the subject of a child protection plan, or were registered during the year, who had previously been the subject of a child protection plan or had been registered
p.56
Lancashire
2023SC KIGS CH01: Children and young people on child protection register per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.51 2027SC KIGS CH03: Child Protection registrations per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.54 2034SC PAF CF/C20: Reviews of child protection cases (BVPI 162) - see p.59 2035SC KIGS CH10: De-registrations from the Child Protection Register per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.61 2036SC PAF CF/C21: Duration on the Child Protection Register - see p.62 6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184
p.56
Guidance / interpretation
Low figures may be related to poor management of data. A very low level of re-registrations may, however, mean that a council is not re- registering some children who are in need. Higher numbers in relation to SN may suggest poor decision-making to end a protection plan, or remove from the register, or a lack of appropriate support for families after de-registration. There is also a possible interplay between staffing issues and re-registrations (6012SC).
p.56
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2028SC]
p.56
KIGS CH121: Percentage of children subject to a child protection plan at 31 March who are White
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 . = Data not applicable LA 96.9 96.6 94.9 92.4 89.5 92.7 92.9 .. = Data not available SN 95.8 95.3 94.8 94.7 92.9 93.2 93.4 - = Data suppressed Eng 84.1 84.2 83.3 82.0 81.4 80.7 80.2 due to small numbers
p.57
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 0.0 2.0 3.2 2.8 3.9 3.4 3.4 SN 2.4 2.9 3.0 3.8 4.6 4.8 3.3 Eng 5.8 6.2 6.4 6.9 7.3 7.3 7.6
p.57
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 3.1 - - 3.8 6.3 3.6 2.8 SN 1.0 1.0 1.2 0.8 1.6 1.4 2.4 Eng 3.6 3.5 3.5 4.2 4.7 5.3 4.8
p.57
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 0.0 - 0.0 - 0.0 - - SN 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.4 Eng 4.4 4.8 5.5 5.4 5.5 5.3 5.8
p.57
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
Continued on following page Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator 2066SC - Ethnicity of children who are the subject of a child protection plan (White, mixed ethnic origin, Asian or Asian British, and Black or Black British)
p.57
Child protection data - child protection procedures
% of children subject to a child protection plan at 31 March who are White
p.57
Child protection data - child protection procedures
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0
p.57
Child protection data - child protection procedures
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 % LA SN Eng % of children subject to a child protection plan at 31 March who are of mixed ethnic origin
p.57
Child protection data - child protection procedures
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 % LA SN Eng
p.57
Child protection data - child protection procedures
% of children subject to a child protection plan at 31 March who are Asian or Asian British
p.57
Child protection data - child protection procedures
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 % LA SN Eng % of children subject to a child protection plan at 31 March who are Black or Black British
p.57
Child protection data - child protection procedures
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 % LA SN Eng
p.57
Child protection data - child protection procedures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2066SC]
p.57
Lancashire
2066SC - Ethnicity of children who are the subject of a child protection plan (White, mixed ethnic origin, Asian or Asian British, and Black or Black British)
p.58
Data definition
Those whose ethnicity is in the following categories: white; mixed; Asian or Asian British; black or black British. [Source - CPR3, Part B, Table 2, lines 1 to 3 (white); lines 4 to 7 (mixed); lines 8 to 11 (Asian or Asian British); lines 12 to 14 (black or black British)]
p.58
Data definition
If children of any particular ethnic origin are over represented among those with a child protection plan, or on the register, in relation to the population breakdown for the area this suggests that they may not be accessing preventative support at an early enough stage to prevent concerns escalating in to child protection. If children of any particular ethnic origin are under represented, this suggests that concerns about their welfare are not being identified which may leave them at risk. This indicator needs to be considered alongside other indicators relating to ethnicity (2060SC). In small authorities, or those with low numbers on the register, this set of indicators needs to be treated with care – as a small number of children can skew the figures.
p.58
Denominator
The total number of children subject to a child protection plan, or on the Child Protection Register at 31 March (minus unborn). [Source - CPR3, Part B, Table 2: row 18 (minus row 17)]
p.58
Numerator
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2066SC]
p.58
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 93.9 97.3 98.4 100.0 100.0 . = Data not applicable SN 96.5 99.5 99.6 99.3 99.9 .. = Data not available Eng 95.5 98.8 99.4 99.5 99.4 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.59
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz 2003-08 0<92.5 92.5<95 95<97.5 97.5<100 100
p.59
Numerator
Continued on following page 2034SC - PAF CF/C20: Percentage of child protection cases which should have been reviewed during the year that were reviewed (BVPI 162)
p.59
Numerator
This indicator tries to use reviews as a proxy for the measurement of the effectiveness of the interventions provided to children with a child protection plan or on the register. Guidance, Working Together to Safeguard Children , which came into effect from December 1999, requires that the first child protection review is held within three months of the initial child protection conference and thereafter at intervals of no more than six months. Reviews are a key element in delivering Child Protection Plans and effective reviews should ensure the provision of good quality interventions.
p.59
Denominator
iii. a review was held within 6 months of the end of the year (i.e. on or after 1 October)
p.59
Denominator
[Source - CPR3, Part B, Table 9] A review should be recorded in writing and should consider the child's safety, health and development against the intended outcomes set out in the child protection plan. (Note that the only account taken of reviews in previous years is set out at i)
p.59
Denominator
The number of children on the Child Protection Register, or having a child protection plan, at 31 March, continuously for at least the previous three months.
p.59
Denominator
High figures indicate good performance. A high figure for CF/C20 might be expected to be linked with reasonably low figure for 2036SC PAF CF/C21, otherwise the efficacy of the reviews may be questionable, as well as having a potential impact on re-registrations (2028SC PAF CF/A3). From 2003-04, the definition of this indicator changed to include children who had been on the Register for at least 3 months. Percentage to one decimal place
p.59
Definition
ii. the maximum gap between reviews during the year was 6 months; and i. the first review of the year was held within 6 months of the last review in the previous year (or within 3 months of the child being placed on the Register, if there was no review in the previous year); Of the children in the denominator, the number of children whose cases had been reviewed so that:
p.59
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.59
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2034SC]
p.59
Lancashire
2034SC - PAF CF/C20: Percentage of child protection cases which should have been reviewed during the year that were reviewed (BVPI 162)
p.60
Lancashire
2028SC PAF CF/A3: Re-registrations on the Child Protection Register - see p.55 2036SC PAF CF/C21: Duration on the Child Protection Register - see p.62 6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184
p.60
Related measures
2024SC % of children and young people on the child protection register who are not allocated to a social worker - see p.52
p.60
Guidance/interpretation
Performance has improved in this indicator, to the extent that few councils now record a result of less than 92.5%: nonetheless close attention still needs to be paid to this part of the child protection picture. A high figure, coupled with poor recruitment and retention figures (6012SC), should prompt further questions about how this is managed. A high figure, coupled with an increasing volume of child protection work, should also prompt some further questions. This indicator should also be looked at in conjunction with allocation data (2024SC).
p.60
Guidance/interpretation
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2034SC]
p.60
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 15.9 20.7 23.5 20.5 24.8 28.0 29.5 . = Data not applicable SN 25.0 25.1 27.1 28.0 27.7 27.3 26.2 .. = Data not available Eng 25.8 26.3 28.3 28.1 28.1 28.9 29.7 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.61
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184 2028SC PAF CF/A3: Re-registrations on the Child Protection Register - see p.55
p.61
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
2036SC PAF CF/C21: Duration on the Child Protection Register - see p.62 2034SC PAF CF/C20: Reviews of child protection cases (BVPI 162) - see p.59 2027SC KIGS CH03: Child Protection registrations per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.54 2024SC % of children and young people on the child protection register who are not allocated to a social worker - see p.52 2023SC KIGS CH01: Children and young people on child protection register per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.51 Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.61
Denominator
[Source - CPR3, Part B, Table 8, line 7, column 4]
p.61
Denominator
This indicator tries to establish whether child protection plans have been effective. It is possible for an individual child to be de-registered by the same council more than once in the year. In such circumstances each occasion of de-registration should be counted in the numerator.
p.61
Guidance/interpretation
[Source - ONS mid year estimates] (2007-08 data uses the latest 2007 mid year estimates) The population aged under 18 in the council area divided by 10,000 2035SC - KIGS CH10: Children whose child protection plans were discontinued, or were de-registered, per 10,000 population aged under 18
p.61
Data definition
Rate per 10,000 population to one decimal place
p.61
Measuring unit
The number of plans discontinued, or deregistrations, in the period between 1 April and 31 March.
p.61
Numerator
This indicator needs to be considered alongside re-registration data (2028SC PAF CF A3 & 2036SC). If children in 2028SC and this indicator overlap, a comparatively high rate of de-registrations, allied with a high rate of re-registrations, would suggest a revolving door policy or practice: that is children’s plans have been discontinued too quickly, before risks have been satisfactorily reduced. Low de-registration and high registration (2027SC) and may be indicative of a risk-averse culture this would lead over time to increases in number of children on the CPR. Comparatively low deregistration figures indicate that child protection plans are not being progressed satisfactorily, which raises questions regarding allocation (2024SC), as well as staffing (6012SC to 6024SC), quality of case working, level of case holding and managerial oversight. Low figures for deregistration could also be linked to a poor outcome on frequency of child protection reviews (2034SC PAF
p.61
register per 10,000 population aged under 18
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 LA SN Eng
p.61
register per 10,000 population aged under 18
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2035SC]
p.61
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA - - 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.4 5.3 . = Data not applicable SN 8.5 9.0 6.4 6.1 6.4 5.3 5.5 .. = Data not available Eng 9.9 8.4 6.7 6.0 5.8 5.8 5.3 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.62
Bands Low High
zzzzz zzzz zzz zz z 2001-08 · 0<10 10<15 15<20 20<=100
p.62
Data definition
Continued on following page 2036SC - PAF CF/C21: Percentage of children who ceased to be the subject of a child protection plan, or were de-registered, during the year ending 31 March, who had been registered, or the subject of a child protection plan, continuously for two years or more
p.62
Guidance/interpretation
Comparatively low deregistration figures indicate that child protection plans are not being progressed satisfactorily, which raises questions regarding allocation (2024SC), as well as staffing (6012SC to 6024SC), quality of case working, level of case holding and managerial oversight. Low figures for deregistration could also be linked to a poor outcome on frequency of child protection reviews (2034SC PAF CF/20). There is often a close relationship between performance in this indicator and that for re-registrations (2028SC PAF CF/A3). A good (i.e. low) figure for de-registrations may be explained by a poor (i.e. high) figure for re-registrations. If the PAF CF/C21 figure is poor (high), then this may be explained by a poor (low) figure for the timely review of child protection cases (2034SC PAF CF/C20). It is not always clear what an extremely low figure for this indicator means. If children in 2028SC and this indicator overlap, a comparatively high rate of de-registrations, allied with a high rate of re-registrations,
p.62
Guidance/interpretation
would suggest a revolving door policy or practice: that is children’s plans have been discontinued too quickly, before risks have been satisfactorily reduced. Numbers in the numerator for some councils will be small and the measure may vary significantly from year to year This indicator tries to establish whether child protection plans have been effective and the extent to which risk is being managed appropriately. Registration should ensure that children who are likely to suffer significant harm are protected and that they and their families are receiving the services necessary to bring about the required changes in the family situation. Professionals, the child and the family should be working towards specified outcomes which should lead to the child's name being taken off the Register within two years. Percentage to one decimal place
p.62
Measuring unit
[Source - CPR3, Table 8, line 7, column 4 (also Table 9] The number of children deregistered from the Child Protection Register, or who ceased to be the subject of a child protection plan in the period between 1 April and 31 March. This may count a child more than once if they were deregistered more than once during the year.
p.62
Denominator
[Source - CPR3, Table 8, lines 5 and 6, column 4 (also Table 9)] Of the children in the denominator, the number who had been on the Register continuously for two years or longer (i.e. for more than 729 days including day of de-registration).
p.62
2036SC - PAF CF/C21: Duration on the child protection register
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.62
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.62
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2036SC]
p.62
Lancashire
2036SC - PAF CF/C21: Percentage of children who ceased to be the subject of a child protection plan, or were de-registered, during the year ending 31 March, who had been registered, or the subject of a child protection plan, continuously for two years or more
p.63
Related measures
2023SC KIGS CH01: Children and young people on child protection register per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.51
p.63
Related measures
2034SC PAF CF/C20: Reviews of child protection cases (BVPI 162) - see p.59 2035SC KIGS CH10: De-registrations from the Child Protection Register per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.61 6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184 2024SC % of children and young people on the child protection register who are not allocated to a social worker - see p.52 2027SC KIGS CH03: Child Protection registrations per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.54 2028SC PAF CF/A3: Re-registrations on the Child Protection Register - see p.55
p.63
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2036SC]
p.63
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 49.2 50.0 49.7 49.4 49.9 51.4 50.8 . = Data not applicable SN 43.1 42.9 40.5 41.7 41.6 40.6 43.3 .. = Data not available Eng 53.5 54.7 55.2 55.1 54.6 54.6 54.1 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.65
Data definition
Continued on following page [Source - ONS mid year estimates] (2007-08 data uses the latest 2007 mid year estimates) 2042SC - KIGS CH39: Looked after children per 10,000 population aged under 18
p.65
Data definition
This is an indicator intended to provide context for all indicators relating to looked after children and to provide some relative data on thresholds for LAC. Differences between council's rates will often reflect differences in deprivation between councils. Rates may also reflect differences in the age structure of the under 18 population between councils. Rates may be notably higher for councils that have a significant number of unaccompanied asylum seeker children looked after. Placement data is pertinent here, especially the percentage of children looked after who are placed with parents, or fostered by relatives and friends.
p.65
Measuring unit
It is also important to consider the profile of the LAC population as high numbers can also suggest that young people are not being forced to leave care prematurely at 16. Conversely low numbers may indicate young people are leaving care prematurely. There are no 'good' or 'bad' figures for this indicator, only rates relative to comparator groups and relative to the needs of children living in the council area. If numbers of LAC are significantly lower than comparators, it may indicate that thresholds for becoming looked after are too high, leaving some children inadequately protected. If the overall number of LAC is significantly lower than comparators and the rates of children with child protection plans (2023SC), as well as numbers of children in need, are higher, this suggests that tight gate keeping processes are in place, risk is well managed, and children supported in their communities.
p.65
Measuring unit
If the overall number of LAC is significantly higher than comparators this suggests ineffective gate keeping and /or delays in care plans being progressed. This needs to be considered, though, with data on timescales for LAC reviews (2064SC PAF CF/C68), adoptions (2058SC, 2059SC PAF CF/C23), staffing data (2024SC; 6012SC) as well as the sufficiency of the support/preventative services (6009SC, 6010SC PAF CF/E44). Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.65
Numerator
The population aged under 18 in the council area divided by 10,000
p.65
Denominator
[Source - SSDA903] The total number of children who were looked after at 31 March 2008, excluding any children who were looked after on that date under an agreed series of short term-placements (legal status codes V3 and V4) (under the provisions of Reg. 13 of the Arrangement for Placement of Children (General) Regulations, 1991).
p.65
population aged under 18
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 LA SN Eng
p.65
population aged under 18
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2042SC]
p.65
Lancashire
2042SC - KIGS CH39: Looked after children per 10,000 population aged under 18
p.66
Lancashire
2060SC % of looked after children with a named social worker who is qualified as a social worker - see p.79 2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67 2058SC The % of looked after children adopted during the year who were placed for adoption within 12 months of their best interest decision being made - see p.76 2059SC PAF CF/C23: Adoptions of children looked after (BVPI 163) - see p.77
p.66
Related measures
2023SC KIGS CH01: Children and young people on child protection register per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.51
p.66
Related measures
2068SC PAF CF/B79: % of children aged at least 10 and under 16 who were in foster placements or placed for adoption - see p.74
p.66
Related measures
6022SC KIGS EX62: Gross expenditure on children looked after per capita aged under 18 - see p.177 6009SC KIGS EX77: Expenditure on family support services per capita aged under 18 - see p.174 6010SC PAF CF/E44: Relative spend on family support - see p.175 6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184
p.66
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2042SC]
p.66
Lancashire
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Data is not banded for 2005-06 LA 71 80 86 . = Data not applicable SN 86 88 92 .. = Data not available Eng 79 85 90 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.67
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz 2006-08 0<80 80<85 85<90 90<95 95<=100
p.67
Data definition
Continued on following page 2064SC - PAF CF/C68: Percentage of looked after children cases which should have been reviewed during the year that were reviewed on time during the year
p.67
Data definition
Percentage as a whole number [Source - SSDA903] Of the children in the denominator, the number of children whose cases had been reviewed (in accordance with the Review of Children's Cases Regulations 1991) so that: * the first review of the year was held within 183 days of the last review in the previous year (or within 91 days if the previous review was the child's initial review, or within four weeks of the child becoming looked after if there was no review in the previous year) * the maximum gap between 'six month' reviews during the year was 183 days * a review was held within 183 days of the year end (i.e. after 29 September) Do not count the first day a child starts to be looked after as a day in care, e.g. a child starts to be looked after on 02/04/07 and has a review on 20/04/07 – this is a gap of 18 days. The areas for consideration in children looked after reviews are set out in the schedules attached to the Review regulations; these include
p.67
Data definition
general considerations as well as education and health.
p.67
Measuring unit
[Source - SSDA903] The total number of children who were looked after at 31 March 2008, excluding any children who were looked after on that date under an agreed series of short term-placements (legal status codes V3 and V4) (under the provisions of Reg. 13 of the Arrangement for Placement of Children (General) Regulations, 1991).
p.67
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.67
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2064SC]
p.67
Lancashire
2064SC - PAF CF/C68: Percentage of looked after children cases which should have been reviewed during the year that were reviewed on time during the year
p.68
Lancashire
4015SC PAF CF/C18: Final warnings/reprimands and convictions of children looked after - see p.141 4016SC PAF CF/C63: Participation of looked after children in reviews - see p.143 2068SC PAF CF/B79: % of children aged at least 10 and under 16 who were in foster placements or placed for adoption - see p.74 3072SC PAF CF/A2: Educational qualifications of children looked after [joint working] (BVPI 50) - see p.120 3073SC The % of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with 5 or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or GNVQ equivalent - see p.122 3074SC PAF CF/C24: Children looked after absent from school [joint working] - see p.124 Delays in LAC reviews affect care planning and may allow some children to ‘drift’ in care. Poor timeliness of LAC reviews may affect numbers of adoption orders made, timescales for placement for adoption, placement stability and may impact on keeping numbers of LAC high. Underlying reasons for delays need to be explored. These may include problems with the review system, such as insufficient
p.68
Lancashire
independent review chairs, or a high real number of unallocated LAC cases. The scheduling of first reviews sometimes are not in the domain of the Independent Review Team, but rather with the locality or specialist teams; this can affect adversely timescales in relation to initial reviews. Consideration should also be given to indicators on reviews (4016SC PAF CF/C63), adoption (2059SC PAF CF/C23), health (1037SC PAF CF/C19), placement (2043SC PAF CF/A1, 2067SC PAF CF/D78, 2068SC PAF CF/B79), education (3072SC PAF CF/A2, 3073SC, 3074SC) and offending (4015SSC PAF CF/C18).
p.68
Related measures
1037SC PAF CF/C19: Health of looked after children - see p.36 This indicator seeks to use reviews as a proxy for the measurement of the effectiveness of the monitoring of the care of looked after children and as a proxy outcome measure. Reviews are a key element in delivering a successful care plan. The review looks at the child’s progress to date and plans for the future. Effective and timely reviews should ensure that the care plan remains appropriate for the child and that the needs of the child are well met.
p.68
Guidance/interpretation
High figures indicate good performance and low figures indicate poor performance. With councils that do not score highly, consideration should be given to whether there is any pattern to the reviews that are out of time, which indicates systemic difficulties in the way that reviews are resourced and managed. Managers need to ensure that the recommendations reached at reviews are actioned so that the best possible outcome is achieved for the young person. There is a statutory obligation to review the cases of looked after children, first within 28 days of their becoming looked after, then within a further three months, and subsequently at intervals of no more than six months until they cease to be looked after. The timeliness of the reviews, then, relates not just to the gap between reviews, but also to the start of the period of care itself. In 2004-05 data was collected on the timeliness of the latest review of those children looked after at 31 March. From 2005-06 onwards the indicator was defined to look
p.68
Guidance/interpretation
at all the relevant reviews for a child looked after at 31 March, including ones in the previous year which establish the time frame for when reviews should occur. The denominator consists of the number of looked after children who qualify and who were looked after at March 31. It does not consist of the number of reviews of those children in the preceding year. If a child looked after at 31 March 2008 had more than one review in 2007-08 which meet the criteria for inclusion, the child is counted once in the denominator. The numerator counts only those children, from the denominator, all of whose reviews in the year were carried out within the specified time limit. If a child had two reviews within the timescale and one review outside of the timescale, the child would be excluded from the numerator as a result of the one review out of time.
p.68
Guidance/interpretation
2042SC KIGS CH39: Children looked after per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.65 2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69 2059SC PAF CF/C23: Adoptions of children looked after (BVPI 163) - see p.77 2060SC % of looked after children with a named social worker who is qualified as a social worker - see p.79
p.68
Guidance/interpretation
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2064SC]
p.68
2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 15 15 12 13 . = Data not applicable SN 13 12 12 11 .. = Data not available Eng 13 12 12 11 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.69
Bands High
zzzzz zzzz zzz zz z 2004-08 0<16.01 · . 16.01<20 20<=100
p.69
Data definition
Continued on following page 2043SC - PAF CF/A1: Percentage of looked after children at 31 March with three or more placements during the year (BVPI 49)
p.69
Data definition
Most councils seem to have been successful in their efforts to keep within the limits of the highest banding (less than 16.01%). Questions still need to be asked, however, about adequate and appropriate placement choices, especially where figures are comparatively low. Indicators on which PAF CF/A1 may have an impact, and vice versa, are: placement type, distance from home, reviews, allocation and education.
p.69
Measuring unit
[Source - SSDA903] The total number of children who were looked after at 31 March, excluding any children who were looked after on that date under an agreed series of short term-placements (legal status codes V3 and V4) (under the provisions of Reg. 13 of the Arrangement for Placement of Children (General) Regulations, 1991).
p.69
Denominator
High figures for this indicator were, by 2006-07, relatively rare. Where they do occur, high percentages of children with 3 or more placements may suggest: that children are being placed inappropriately in placements which do not match their needs; insufficient range and number of foster carers to meet demand; lack of appropriate support to children and /or to foster carers, poor care planning and poor assessments. This indicator is an important measure of the stability of care that a child has experienced. On the whole stability is associated with better outcomes - placement instability has been highlighted by the Social Exclusion Unit as a key barrier to improving educational outcomes. Proper assessment of a child’s needs and an adequate choice of placements to meet the varied needs of different children are essential if appropriate stable placements are to be made. Inappropriate placements often break
p.69
Denominator
down and lead to frequent moves. The circumstances of some individual children will require 3 or more separate placements during a year if they are to be kept safe. [Source - SSDA903] Of the children looked after in the denominator, the number who had three or more separate placements (as defined by the SSDA903 collection) during the year. All placements of 24 hours or more are counted, regardless of duration. Please see 2007-08 Annual Performance Assessment (APA) indicators for full details of inclusions and exclusions. http://www.dfes.gov.uk/datastats1/guidelines/children/pdf/APA%20Definitions%20for%202008.pdf
p.69
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.69
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2043SC]
p.69
Lancashire
2043SC - PAF CF/A1: Percentage of looked after children at 31 March with three or more placements during the year (BVPI 49)
p.70
Related measures
1037SC PAF CF/C19: Health of looked after children - see p.36
p.70
Related measures
2068SC PAF CF/B79: % of children aged at least 10 and under 16 who were in foster placements or placed for adoption - see p.74 2052SC KIGS CH44: % of children looked after in residential accommodation - see p.72 2059SC PAF CF/C23: Adoptions of children looked after (BVPI 163) - see p.77 2060SC % of looked after children with a named social worker who is qualified as a social worker - see p.79 2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67 2067SC PAF CF/D78: Long term stability of children looked after - see p.71
p.70
Related measures
3085SC PAF CF/C69: Distance children newly looked after are placed from home - see p.116 4016SC PAF CF/C63: Participation of looked after children in reviews - see p.143 3071SC The % of children looked after who were pupils in year 11 who were eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations who sat at least one GCSE or equivalent exam - see p.118 3072SC PAF CF/A2: Educational qualifications of children looked after [joint working] (BVPI 50) - see p.120 3073SC The % of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with 5 or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or GNVQ equivalent - see p.122 3074SC PAF CF/C24: Children looked after absent from school [joint working] - see p.124
p.70
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2043SC]
p.70
Lancashire
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 This indicator does not have banding LA 63.8 63.3 67.4 69.0 65.9 . = Data not applicable SN 61.9 58.2 63.2 63.1 65.9 .. = Data not available Eng 64.3 63.0 64.8 65.9 66.5 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.71
Data definition
It has become apparent recently that the data Ofsted has been using for this indicator does not exactly match the definition that has published since the indicator’s inception. Ofsted’s specification, in the numerator, was for the inclusion of all children placed for adoption, regardless of how long they were looked after. The data provided includes children placed for adoption only if they have been looked after for at least two and a half years. Consequently the data resulting from the two definitions are different for a large number of local authorities. Ofsted have decided to keep the data that appears in the APA toolkit for 2007-08 unchanged. To republish the data as originally conceived would mean it would become a different indicator for most local authorities. Keeping the situation unchanged allows continuity in assessment from last year to this. 2067SC - PAF CF/D78: Percentage of children aged under 16 at March 31 who
p.71
Data definition
had been looked after continuously for at least 2 1/2 years, who had lived in the same placement for at least two years, or were placed for adoption
p.71
Data definition
2059SC PAF CF/C23: Adoptions of children looked after (BVPI 163) - see p.77 2068SC PAF CF/B79: % of children aged at least 10 and under 16 who were in foster placements or placed for adoption - see p.74 This indicator has replaced PAF CF/D35 as a measure indicating long-term stability. Preliminary research has shown it to be of more practical value to social work staff operationally than its predecessor.
p.71
Guidance/interpretation
2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69 Generally, a high figure is an indicator of good performance and a low one of poor performance, though comparator data is important to consider here, as with most indicators. Poor outcome on long term stability (a low rate) suggest: insufficient support to young people and/or foster carers; insufficient range and number of placements; too many placements ‘over numbers’; lack of placement planning around permanence; lack of available long-term foster carers; difficulties in retaining foster carers. The age profile of the looked after population is important with high numbers of teenagers looked after posing a particular problem for this indicator. A high figure for 2059SC CF/PAF C23 or for 2034SC CF/PAF A1 is likely to adversely affect this indicator. Conversely a low figure for PAF C23 and PAF A1 is likely to see a higher figure for PAF D78.
p.71
Measuring unit
[Source - SSDA903] Of those in the denominator, the number who were in their current placement, for at least 2 years (i.e. for strictly more than 729 days inclusive of 31 March) or are placed for adoption (placement codes A3, A4, A5 and A6) on 31 March. Children who are placed for adoption at 31 March are to be included in the numerator regardless of how long they have been placed for adoption or how long they have been looked after.
p.71
Numerator
[Source - SSDA903] Exclude children who had been looked after at any time during the 2.5 year period under an agreed series of short term-placements (legal status codes V3 and V4) (under the provisions of Reg. 13 of the Arrangement for Placement of Children (General) Regulations, 1991). All children aged under 16 on 31 March of the year of measurement who had been looked after for 2.5 years or more (i.e. for more than 911 days inclusive of 31 March) on 31 March of the year of measurement.
p.71
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.71
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2067SC]
p.71
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 24.2 22.0 17.0 16.4 13.7 14.2 14.4 . = Data not applicable SN 13.8 14.4 14.3 14.8 14.6 13.5 15.6 .. = Data not available Eng 16.1 15.7 15.6 15.5 14.9 14.9 14.7 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.72
Data definition
2052SC - KIGS CH44: Percentage of looked after children in residential accommodation
p.72
Related measures
Low numbers of young people in residential care, however, may mean that some young people leave care too early (i.e. at 16) or that the council has some specialist fostering schemes that cater successfully for teenagers. High numbers, if placed with independent providers, suggest a system under pressure affected by: poor foster placement stability; lack of appropriate gate keeping; and poor care planning. This measure may be affected by the age structure of the council's looked after children - the older the group, the more likely this measure will be higher; the younger the group, the more likely that it will be lower. Included in this indicator are children with very complex needs in residential placements and boarding schools. If the indicator is high, some consideration should be made as to the extent to which looking after of this group of children, which constitutes good practice, affects the total figure. Conversely, a low figure may indicate poor practice in relation to this group of children, because their needs may
p.72
Related measures
not be being adequately met. This indicator should be considered with other placement data (2054SC, 2068SC PAF CF/B79). This indicator is intended to establish the extent to which residential placements, which current good practice consider to be suitable only for a relatively small percentage of children, are used by the council, particularly in relation to their comparators. A low figure is considered good performance and a high figure, especially a very high figure, poor performance. Percentage to one decimal place
p.72
Numerator
The total number of children looked after at 31 March 2008 excluding any children placed with parents (placement code P1) or who were looked after on that date under an agreed series of short term placements (legal status codes V3 and V4).
p.72
Denominator
Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.72
Denominator
[Source - SSDA903] Of the children in the denominator, the number of children who were looked after in residential accommodation (placement codes H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, R1, R2, R3, R5 and S1).
p.72
Denominator
2068SC PAF CF/B79: % of children aged at least 10 and under 16 who were in foster placements or placed for adoption - see p.74 2042SC KIGS CH39: Children looked after per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.65 2054SC % of looked-after children fostered by relatives or friends - see p.73
p.72
accommodation
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.72
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2052SC]
p.72
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 10.9 13.8 17.0 17.8 17.1 17.9 16.4 . = Data not applicable SN 11.7 13.1 12.5 12.4 12.9 11.5 10.5 .. = Data not available Eng 13.3 14.1 13.9 13.8 13.4 12.7 12.4 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.73
Data definition
2054SC - Percentage of looked after children fostered by relatives or friends
p.73
Data definition
Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children should be included, along with both immediate and emergency placements under regulation 11. [Source - SSDA903]
p.73
Numerator
The total number of children looked after at 31 March 2008 excluding any children placed with parents (placement code P1) or who were looked after on that date under an agreed series of short term placements (legal status codes V3 and V4).
p.73
Denominator
[Source - SSDA903] Of the children in the denominator, the number fostered by a relative or friend (placement codes F1 or F4). A relative includes anyone who is related to the child by blood or marriage. A friend is someone who knows the child or members of his/her family and has become a foster carer in order to care for this child. Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.73
Measuring unit
2068SC PAF CF/B79: % of children aged at least 10 and under 16 who were in foster placements or placed for adoption - see p.74 High figures in relation to comparators may indicate an under-usage by the council of residence orders supported by residence allowances and /or special guardianship orders. Some children may be inappropriately placed with family and friends due to a lack of other foster placements. Low figures may indicate ineffectiveness of foster placement services or they may reflect a lack of suitable kinship carers available to foster. This indicator is intended to establish the extent to which kinship placements, which current good practice consider to be the next most suitable placement for children other than with their parents, are used by the council, particularly in relation to their comparators. A comparatively high figure is considered good performance and a comparatively low figure, especially a very low figure, poor
p.73
Measuring unit
performance. This measure may be affected by the age structure of the council's looked after children - the older the group, the more likely this measure will be higher; the younger the group, the more likely that it will be lower.
p.73
Guidance/interpretation
2052SC KIGS CH44: % of children looked after in residential accommodation - see p.72
p.73
Related measures
2042SC KIGS CH39: Children looked after per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.65
p.73
friends
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.73
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2054SC]
p.73
Lancashire
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 This indicator does not have banding LA 77.5 79.0 81.9 82.3 84.1 . = Data not applicable SN 79.2 79.7 80.3 81.5 81.4 .. = Data not available Eng 77.5 78.5 79.7 80.7 81.7 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.74
Data definition
Continued on following page 2068SC - PAF CF/B79: Percentage of children aged at least 10 and under 16 looked after at 31 March (excluding those placed with parents) who were in foster placements or placed for adoption
p.74
Measuring unit
[Source - SSDA903] The total number of children aged at least 10 and under 16 at 31 March 2008 who were looked after at 31 March 2008, excluding any children placed with parents (SSDA placement code P1) or who were looked after on that date under an agreed series of short term- placements (legal status codes V3 and V4) (under the provisions of Reg. 13 of the Arrangement for Placement of Children (General) Regulations, 1991).
p.74
Denominator
[Source - SSDA903] Of the children aged at least 10 and under 16 looked after at 31 March 2008 (excluding those placed with parents) the percentage who were in foster placements or placed for adoption.
p.74
Numerator
This indicator is intended to establish the extent to which foster care and placed for adoption placements, which current good practice consider to be suitable for the majority of children, are used by the council, particularly in relation to their comparators. It measures placement type as a proxy for good placement choice and for the appropriateness of the placements chosen. Most children’s needs are such that they will make better developmental progress in family settings rather than in residential care, although for a minority of children residential care will continue to offer the best solution. In most cases, caring for children in family settings also costs less than residential care.
p.74
Guidance/interpretation
This indicator is a refined version of PAF B7, which looked at children of all ages, rather than this age group. Since most children under 10 have been, for some years, placed with either foster parents or prospective adopters, it was decided to focus on older children: the group more likely to go into residential care. The CSCI document 'Children_PIs_2006-07.doc' has the full rationale for the change to PAF B79 from PAF B7. http://www.csci.org.uk/Docs/children_PIs_2006-07.doc High figures are an indicator of good performance and low figures of poor performance. A higher value indicates both a better outcome and a more efficient one, subject to placing children with parents (under care orders) where appropriate and providing residential care for the minority of children for whom this is best. A very high figure, however, raises questions because it is likely that there will always be some children needing some form of residential care.
p.74
Guidance/interpretation
Consideration should also be given to data on placements (2034SC CF/PAF A1, 2052SC, 2054SC, 2058SC, 2059SC CF/PAF C23, 2067SC PAF CF/D78) , reviews (2064SC PAF CF/C68), distance from home (3085SC PAF CF/C69) and unit costs (6024SC PAF CF/B8).
p.74
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.74
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2068SC]
p.74
Lancashire
2068SC - PAF CF/B79: Percentage of children aged at least 10 and under 16 looked after at 31 March (excluding those placed with parents) who were in foster placements or placed for adoption
p.75
Lancashire
2042SC KIGS CH39: Children looked after per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.65 2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69 2052SC KIGS CH44: % of children looked after in residential accommodation - see p.72 2054SC % of looked-after children fostered by relatives or friends - see p.73
p.75
Related measures
3085SC PAF CF/C69: Distance children newly looked after are placed from home - see p.116 6024SC PAF CF/B8: Cost of services for children looked after - see p.178 2058SC The % of looked after children adopted during the year who were placed for adoption within 12 months of their best interest decision being made - see p.76 2059SC PAF CF/C23: Adoptions of children looked after (BVPI 163) - see p.77 2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67 2067SC PAF CF/D78: Long term stability of children looked after - see p.71
p.75
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2068SC]
p.75
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 88 82 94 81 80 79 74 . = Data not applicable SN 77 82 76 83 80 74 65 .. = Data not available Eng 80 81 79 81 77 77 76 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.76
Data definition
2058SC - Percentage of looked after children adopted during the year who were placed for adoption within 12 months of the agency deciding that the child should be placed for adoption
p.76
Data definition
[Source - SSDA903] The number of children included in the denominator who were placed for adoption (placement codes A3, A4, A5 and A6) within 12 months (i.e. less than 365 days, inclusive of date child was placed for adoption) of the decision that they should be placed for adoption. This figure excludes children who were placed within 12 months of the decision that they should be placed for adoption, but whose placement for adoption broke down before being adopted.
p.76
Data definition
2068SC PAF CF/B79: % of children aged at least 10 and under 16 who were in foster placements or placed for adoption - see p.74
p.76
Related measures
2059SC PAF CF/C23: Adoptions of children looked after (BVPI 163) - see p.77
p.76
Guidance/interpretation
Timescales for placing children for adoption will be affected by how easy or difficult it is to place them. Older children with more complex needs will take longer to place, as will sibling groups, disabled children and children from black and ethnic minority groups. It is important to ensure that councils are not achieving a good outcome on timescales by only making adoption decisions for younger children and/or those with less complex needs. Delays in placing children for adoption will also occur due to: insufficient in-house adopters; lack of funding to purchase external adoptive placements; poor care planning; or court delays. Numbers in the numerator for some councils will be small and the measure may vary significantly from year to year; this could have an impact on the figure which indicates volatility, where really there is none. Local information should be available to assess how often adoption was not the outcome once a decision had been reached to place the
p.76
Guidance/interpretation
child for adoption. This indicator is intended to show the effectiveness of an important part of the adoption process. A high figure is good performance and a low one poor performance. Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.76
Numerator
The number of children who ceased to be looked after during the year ending 31 March as a result of the granting of an adoption order (reason episode ceased codes E11 and E12). Includes only those children who were adopted after having been looked after by the authority immediately prior to adoption. Children placed for adoption or freed for adoption remain looked after until the adoption order is granted.
p.76
months of adoption decision
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.76
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2058SC]
p.76
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 7.8 7.8 8.5 . = Data not applicable SN 9.1 10.0 9.4 .. = Data not available Eng 7.6 8.3 8.8 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.77
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz zzzz zzz zz z 2005-08 0<3 3<6 6<7 7<8 8<25 · · 25<=100 ·
p.77
Bands Low High
Continued on following page Percentage to one decimal place
p.77
Data definition
The number of children who ceased to be looked after during the year as a result of the granting of an adoption order excluding any unaccompanied asylum seeking children (counting only those children who were adopted after having been looked after by the council immediately prior to adoption). From 2005-06 onward, children ceasing to be looked after as a result of the granting of a special guardianship order should also be included. Children placed for adoption or freed for adoption remain looked after until the adoption order is granted.
p.77
Numerator
2059SC - PAF CF/C23: Number of looked after children adopted during the year as a percentage of the number of looked after children at 31 March (excluding unaccompanied asylum seekers) who had been looked after for six months or more on that day (BVPI 163)
p.77
Numerator
The total number of children who were looked after at 31 March and who at that date had been looked after for 6 months or more (i.e. 183 or more days inclusive of 31 March), excluding any unaccompanied asylum seeking children and children who were looked after on that date under an agreed series of short term placements (under the provisions of Reg. 13 of the Arrangement for Placement of Children (General) Regulations, 1991).
p.77
Denominator
Asylum seeker children were excluded from the denominator, from 2002-03 on, along with all children looked after for less than 6 months.
p.77
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.77
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2059SC]
p.77
Looked after children and care leavers data
2059SC - PAF CF/C23: Number of looked after children adopted during the year as a percentage of the number of looked after children at 31 March (excluding unaccompanied asylum seekers) who had been looked after for six months or more on that day (BVPI 163)
p.78
Looked after children and care leavers data
3085SC PAF CF/C69: Distance children newly looked after are placed from home - see p.116 Consideration should be given to the age at adoption, as older children with more complex needs are more difficult to place, as are sibling groups, disabled children and children from black and ethnic minority groups. Other factors worth considering are the proportion of placements for adoption ending in adoption; the trend in numbers of children looked after for more than 6 months; the numbers of children returning to own families; the numbers of children looked after for fairly short periods; the number of adoption breakdowns and the numbers of special guardianship orders in the relevant council. This is a complex indicator. Very important contextual data for this indicator is the actual trend in numbers of adoptions in each council. This is because an improvement in numbers of adoptions is not always evident in the final indicator value. Small numbers in this indicator
p.78
Looked after children and care leavers data
can also lead to some variability in the indicator value year on year. This volatility means, therefore, that the data needs to be treated with some caution. This indicator is designed to give some data on the effectiveness of the end of the adoption procedure and seeks to encourage the use of adoption. For most children the best place to grow up is with their birth parents. Where this is not possible, society has a clear responsibility to provide children with stability and permanence in their lives. The Government believes that more can and should be done to promote the wider use of adoption which offers the only legally secure placement for children unable to return to their birth families. This does not mean that adoption is appropriate for more than a minority of children.
p.78
Guidance/interpretation
2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67 2058SC The % of looked after children adopted during the year who were placed for adoption within 12 months of their best interest decision being made - see p.76
p.78
Guidance/interpretation
2067SC PAF CF/D78: Long term stability of children looked after - see p.71 2068SC PAF CF/B79: % of children aged at least 10 and under 16 who were in foster placements or placed for adoption - see p.74 2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69 2042SC KIGS CH39: Children looked after per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.65
p.78
Related measures
A high figure is, generally, considered good performance and a low figure poor performance. Comparatively low rate of adoptions may suggest: delays in permanency planning and care planning; failure to consider adoption as an option for every child not returning to parents; insufficient adopters to meet need, lack of interagency budget to purchase placements outside the council; court delays. The figures may be low, though, because of the prevalence of factors, already discussed, which can militate against a higher score, but over which the council has little of no influence. A very high figure, particularly sustained over some years, should prompt further enquiry. It may be the result from the prevalence of factors assisting a council to achieve a high figure, but it may also be a result of a council placing children inappropriately. Consideration should also be given to other indicators on adoption (2058SC), placement (2043SC PAF CF/A1, 2067SC PAF CF/D78,
p.78
Related measures
2068SC PAF CF/B79), distance from home (3085SC PAF CF/C69).
p.78
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2059SC]
p.78
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.8 100.0 . = Data not applicable SN 95.7 95.1 95.3 99.4 97.2 96.4 97.8 .. = Data not available Eng 97.3 97.3 92.6 93.4 94.8 95.5 97.0 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.79
Data definition
Continued on following page Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator 2060SC - Percentage of looked after children with a named social worker who is qualified as a social worker
p.79
Data definition
A high figure indicates good performance and a low figure indicates poor performance. A low number would suggest that further investigation is needed around the number, recruitment, retention, and allocation of social workers. A low number would also raise questions about the use and supervision of unqualified staff (see 6012SC). The consequences of a low figure for this indicator can be quite widespread. It can have an impact, for example, of the stability of placement, through drift and on the timeliness of reviews, when lack of social work input can cause delays (see 2043SC, 2059SC, 2064SC, 2085SC, 4016SC). A high number, coupled with poor recruitment and retention figures or with an increasing volume of looked after work, should also prompt further investigation (see above and 2024SC). All looked after children should be allocated to a qualified social worker; where direct work with the child is being done by an unqualified
p.79
Data definition
worker or social work student, the council should ensure that that person is carefully supervised and the qualified worker has oversight of and control of the care plan, ensuring that statutory requirements are met. Data suggests that most looked after children appear to have a named worker, but inspection suggests that these are not always qualified as social workers. This indicator tries to use allocation data as a proxy for the measurement of the effectiveness of the interventions provided to children looked after. Percentage to one decimal place
p.79
Measuring unit
[Source - 2001-02 to 2005-06 - CSCI data collection; 2006-08 - Ofsted data collection]
p.79
Numerator
The number of children looked after at March 31 (excluding those looked after on that date under an agreed series of short term- placements (under the provisions of Reg. 13 of the Arrangement for Placement of Children (General) Regulations, 1991).
p.79
Denominator
[Source - 2001-02 to 2005-06 - CSCI data collection; 2006-08 - Ofsted data collection] The number of those children in the denominator who have a named social worker, who is qualified as a social worker, other than a team leader.
p.79
who is qualified as a social worker
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.79
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2060SC]
p.79
Lancashire
2060SC - Percentage of looked after children with a named social worker who is qualified as a social worker
p.80
Lancashire
2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67 3085SC PAF CF/C69: Distance children newly looked after are placed from home - see p.116 4016SC PAF CF/C63: Participation of looked after children in reviews - see p.143 6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184 2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69 2059SC PAF CF/C23: Adoptions of children looked after (BVPI 163) - see p.77 2042SC KIGS CH39: Children looked after per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.65
p.80
Related measures
2024SC % of children and young people on the child protection register who are not allocated to a social worker - see p.52
p.80
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2060SC]
p.80
Possible responses:
1 - less than 50% 2 - up to 75% 3 - up to 90% 4 - over 90%
p.82
LA response:
2004-05 4 - over 90% . = Data not applicable 2005-06 4 - over 90% .. = Data not available 2006-07 4 - over 90% 2007-08 3 - up to 90%
p.82
1 2 3 4 5
SN - 2004-05 10 10 40 40 . SN - 2005-06 0 20 30 50 . SN - 2006-07 0 10 20 70 . SN - 2007-08 0 0 20 20 60 Eng - 2004-05 13 25 23 39 . Eng - 2005-06 7 16 25 52 . Eng - 2006-07 3 11 24 63 . Eng - 2007-08 1 6 18 47 28
p.82
Data definition
1 - less than 50% 2 - up to 75% 3 - up to 90% 4 - over 90%
p.82
Data definition
It should be noted that, for some local authorities, this indicator concerns small numbers of children. 5 - 100% N.B. This response was only available in 2007-08.
p.82
Data definition
Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator 5026SC - What percentage of children with disabilities aged 14+ had a transition plan to support their move from Children's Services to Adult Services?
p.82
Data definition
5 - 100% N.B. This response was only available in 2007-08.
p.82
Guidance/interpretation
This indicator may prompt consideration of the extent to which the council keeps accurate and useful data on children with disabilities to whom they provide services, as well as other children with disabilities who are in need, and the extent to which threshold criteria are clearly thought out. It should also prompt consideration about how well children's and adult's services work together to see that needs of the eligible children are met appropriately. This indicator only refers to young people in receipt of social care services, not all young people who should have a transition plan. Some children with disabilities receiving services from children’s social care may not meet the threshold criteria to receive services from adult social care raising the question of how their future support needs will be met. [Source - 2004-05 to 2005-06 - CSCI data collection; 2006-08 - Ofsted data collection]
p.82
Guidance/interpretation
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 5026SC]
p.82
% inequality gap
Source of data: DCSF Foundation Stage Profile 2007
p.84
% inequality gap
Statistical Neighbour comparisons have not been given for this indicator, due to areas being at different levels of development with assessing the foundation stage. Assessment and moderation have improved since 2005 and the National Assessment Authority has an action plan to assign support officers to the Local Authorities with less developed moderation processes. Improvement in young children's development measured by the foundation stage profile
p.84
Area NAT
Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.84
Area NAT
Health warning: The Foundation Stage Profile is a statutory stage of the National Curriculum and measures the achievement of children in the summer term preceding a child's transition to a Key Stage 1 programme of study. The child will usually have reached the age of 5 by this time. This is the first year that schools and early years settings have been under a statutory obligation to send their Local Authorities full data for every individual child for the 13 assessment scales. In previous years, the percentage of children achieving a score of 78 points or more and 6 or more in each of the PSE and CLL scales have been based on a 10 per cent child level sample, which are subject to sampling error. Data Definition: These data show the percentage of all eligible children on the Foundation Stage Profile in maintained schools and the private,voluntary and independent sectors who achieve a) 78 points or more across the 13 assessment scales and b) 6 points or
p.84
Area NAT
more in each of the scales relating to the Personal, Social and Emotional (PSE) and Communication Language and Literacy (CLL) areas of learning (the percentage achieving a good level of overall achievement). PSE includes 3 assessment scales: Dispositions and Attitudes, Social Development and Emotional Development; CLL includes 4 scales: Language for Communication and Thinking, Linking Sounds and Letters, Reading and Writing. The remaining 6 assessment scales in the FSP are in Mathematical Development (3 scales), Knowledge and Understanding of the World (1 scale), Physical Development (1 scale) and Creative Development (1 scale). Also shown is the percentage gap in achievement between the mean score for the lowest 20 per cent of achieving children in a local authority, and the score of the median child in the local authority. This is presented as the difference divided by the median to give the inequality gap measuring the extent of under-achievement.
p.84
Area NAT
2007 data is based on full data for every individual child.
p.84
the PSE and CLL scales
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3102DE
p.84
Level 2+ % Trend Analysis
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Reading 2003 86.30 85.88 84.88 V Level 2+ % Trend 2004 86.17 86.64 85.23 V 03/04 -0.13 0.76 0.35 National 2005 87.58 86.71 85.50 V 04/05 1.41 0.07 0.27 Statistical Neighbours 2006 85.46 86.17 84.78 U 05/06 -2.12 -0.54 -0.72 2007 84.99 85.62 84.16 V 06/07 -0.47 -0.55 -0.62 Minimum Pupil Count: Maximum Pupil Count: .. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.86
Level 2+ % APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Subject Year Area SN Nat Reading 2003 86.2976 85.8773 84.8805 Reading 1998 2004 86.1652 86.6403 85.23 1999 2005 87.5786 86.7075 85.5019 2000 2006 85.457 86.1701 84.779 2001 2007 84.9876 85.6237 84.1604 2002
p.86
Level 2+ % APS
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3002OF [Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables] Data Definition : The indicator shows the percentage of KS1 pupils who achieve at least level 2 in Reading. Trend : The trend for each year is generated by taking a three point moving average of the LA percentage figures. The rate of change is calculated by fitting a regression line to these moving averages. The rate of change for all 150 LAs are then ranked. The top 10% are classed as 'Well above', the next 20% 'Above', the next 40% 'In line', the next 20% 'Below', the final 10% 'Well below'. Similarly the rate of change for each LAs group of statistical neighbours is calculated and deducted from each LA rate of change. The differences are then ranked, and the same classification is used to compare the LA against their statistical neighbours, as is used in the national calculation. The trend indicates whether the change over time in the LA is greater
p.86
Level 2+ % APS
or less than the change over time for the national or statistical neighbours.
p.86
SN NAT
Teacher assessment results on reading: achievement at KS1, level 2+ (all pupils) Ref. 3002OF
p.86
Area
Health warning : These figures include mainstream maintained schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included. Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures.
p.86
Level 2+ Reading
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3002OF
p.86
Level 2+ % Trend Analysis
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Writing 2003 83.67 83.79 82.67 V Level 2+ % Trend 2004 83.86 84.51 82.93 V 03/04 0.19 0.72 0.26 National 2005 84.71 83.96 82.75 V 04/05 0.85 -0.55 -0.19 Statistical Neighbours 2006 82.22 82.96 81.71 U 05/06 -2.49 -1.00 -1.03 2007 81.06 82.33 80.68 V 06/07 -1.17 -0.63 -1.03 Minimum Pupil Count: Maximum Pupil Count: .. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.87
Level 2+ %
Subject Year Area SN Nat Writing 2003 83.6742 83.7894 82.6723 20034 83.8607 84.5127 82.9309 2005 84.7139 83.9645 82.745 2006 82.2243 82.9602 81.7119 2007 81.0552 82.3263 80.6823
p.87
Level 2+ %
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3003OF Teacher assessment results on writing: achievement at KS1, level 2+ (all pupils) Ref. 3003OF
p.87
Below Well Below
Data Definition : The indicator shows the percentage of KS1 pupils who achieve at least level 2 in Writing. Trend : The trend for each year is generated by taking a three point moving average of the LA percentage figures. The rate of change is calculated by fitting a regression line to these moving averages. The rate of change for all 150 LAs are then ranked. The top 10% are classed as 'Well above', the next 20% 'Above', the next 40% 'In line', the next 20% 'Below', the final 10% 'Well below'. Similarly the rate of change for each LAs group of statistical neighbours is calculated and deducted from each LA rate of change. The differences are then ranked, and the same classification is used to compare the LA against their statistical neighbours, as is used in the national calculation. The trend indicates whether the change over time in the LA is greater or less than the change over time for the national or statistical neighbours.
p.87
Below Well Below
[Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.87
Below Well Below
Health warning : These figures include mainstream maintained schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures.
p.87
Level 2+ Writing
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3003OF
p.87
Level 2+ % Trend Analysis
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Maths 2003 89.67 89.76 88.99 V Level 2+ % Trend 2004 90.18 90.99 89.66 V 03/04 0.52 1.23 0.67 National 2005 92.57 92.44 91.39 V 04/05 2.39 1.45 1.72 Statistical Neighbours 2006 90.58 91.74 90.67 U 05/06 -1.99 -0.70 -0.72 2007 90.41 91.60 90.32 V 06/07 -0.17 -0.14 -0.35 Minimum Pupil Count: Maximum Pupil Count: .. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.88
Level 2+ % Trend Analysis
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.88
Level 2+ % APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Subject Year Area SN Nat Maths 2003 89.6662 89.7581 88.9895 Maths 1998 2004 90.1815 90.9901 89.6615 1999 2005 92.5705 92.4386 91.3851 2000 2006 90.5773 91.7418 90.669 2001 2007 90.4122 91.5972 90.3225 2002
p.88
Level 2+ % APS
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3004OF Data Definition: The indicator shows the percentage of KS1 pupils who achieve at least level 2 in Mathematics. Trend: The trend for each year is generated by taking a three point moving average of the LA percentage figures. The rate of change is calculated by fitting a regression line to these moving averages. The rate of change for all 150 LAs are then ranked. The top 10% are classed as 'Well above', the next 20% 'Above', the next 40% 'In line', the next 20% 'Below', the final 10% 'Well below'. Similarly the rate of change for each LAs group of statistical neighbours is calculated and deducted from each LA rate of change. The differences are then ranked, and the same classification is used to compare the LA against their statistical neighbours, as is used in the national calculation. The trend indicates whether the change over time in the LA is greater or less than the change over time for the national or statistical neighbours.
p.88
Area SN NAT
[Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.88
Area SN NAT
Health warning : These figures include mainstream maintained schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures. Teacher assessment results on mathematics: achievement at KS1, level 2+ (all pupils) Ref. 3004OF
p.88
Level 2+ Mathematics
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3004OF
p.88
Level 4+ % Trend Analysis
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat English 2003 76.73 76.03 75.47 V Level 4+ % Trend 2004 79.89 78.17 77.81 V 03/04 3.16 2.14 2.34 National 2005 81.56 80.12 79.49 V 04/05 1.67 1.95 1.68 Statistical Neighbours 2006 81.57 80.06 79.96 V 05/06 0.01 -0.06 0.47 2007 81.93 81.10 81.04 V 06/07 0.36 1.04 1.08 Minimum Pupil Count: Maximum Pupil Count:
p.90
APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat English 2003 26.97 26.92 26.82 V APS Trend 2004 27.18 27.02 26.96 V 03/04 0.21 0.10 0.14 NATIONAL 2005 27.26 27.15 27.06 V 04/05 0.08 0.13 0.10 STATISTICAL NEIGHBOURS 2006 27.64 27.49 27.45 V 05/06 0.38 0.34 0.39 2007 27.76 27.68 27.63 V 06/07 0.12 0.19 0.18
p.90
APS
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.90
Level 4+ % APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Subject Year Area SN Nat English 2003 76.73 76.03 75.47 English 2003 26.97 26.92 26.82 2004 79.89 78.17 77.81 2004 27.18 27.02 26.96 2005 81.56 80.12 79.49 2005 27.26 27.15 27.06 2006 81.57 80.06 79.96 2006 27.64 27.49 27.45 2007 81.93 81.1 81.04 2007 27.76 27.68 27.63
p.90
Level 4+ % APS
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3005OF Test results on English: achievement at KS2, level 4+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) Ref. 3005OF
p.90
Year-on-Year Change
Data Definition: The indicator represents two measures for KS2 data on English: Level 4+ attainment and Average Point Scores (APS). Level 4 data shows the percentage of KS2 pupils who achieve at least level 4 in English. APS are calculated from all pupils' test scores. Absent and disapplied pupils are excluded from the calculation of the APS, but included in the calculation of the % attaining level 4+. Trend : The trend for each year is generated by taking a three point moving average of the LA percentage figures. The rate of change is calculated by fitting a regression line to these moving averages. The rate of change for all 150 LAs are then ranked. The top 10% are classed as 'Well above', the next 20% 'Above', the next 40% 'In line', the next 20% 'Below', the final 10% 'Well below'. Similarly the rate of change for each LAs group of statistical neighbours is calculated and deducted from each LA rate of change. The differences are then ranked, and the same classification is used to compare
p.90
Year-on-Year Change
the LA against their statistical neighbours, as is used in the national calculation. The trend indicates whether the change over time in the LA is greater or less than the change over time for the national or statistical neighbours. [Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.90
Below Well Below
Health warning : These figures include mainstream maintained schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures.
p.90
APS English
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3005OF
p.90
Level 4+ % Trend Analysis
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Maths 2003 76.06 73.18 72.66 V Level 4+ % Trend 2004 77.61 74.85 74.20 V 03/04 1.55 1.67 1.54 National 2005 78.28 76.32 75.51 V 04/05 0.67 1.47 1.31 Statistical Neighbours 2006 79.10 76.91 76.43 V 05/06 0.82 0.59 0.92 2007 80.26 78.11 77.84 V 06/07 1.16 1.20 1.41 Minimum Pupil Count: Maximum Pupil Count:
p.91
APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Maths 2003 27.22 26.91 26.82 V APS Trend 2004 27.44 27.16 27.04 V 03/04 0.22 0.25 0.22 NATIONAL 2005 27.43 27.23 27.10 V 04/05 -0.01 0.07 0.06 STATISTICAL NEIGHBOURS 2006 27.61 27.39 27.29 V 05/06 0.18 0.16 0.19 2007 27.63 27.45 27.35 V 06/07 0.02 0.06 0.06
p.91
APS
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.91
Level 4+ % APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Subject Year Area SN Nat Maths 2003 76.06 73.18 72.66 Maths 2003 27.22 26.91 26.82 2004 77.61 74.85 74.2 2004 27.44 27.16 27.04 2005 78.28 76.32 75.51 2005 27.43 27.23 27.1 2006 79.1 76.91 76.43 2006 27.61 27.39 27.29 2007 80.26 78.11 77.84 2007 27.63 27.45 27.35
p.91
Level 4+ % APS
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3006OF Data Definition: The indicator represents two measures for KS2 data on Mathematics: Level 4+ attainment and Average Point Scores (APS). Level 4 data shows the percentage of KS2 pupils who achieve at least level 4 in Mathematics. APS are calculated from all pupils' test scores. Absent and disapplied pupils are excluded from the calculation of the APS, but included in the calculation of the % attaining level 4+. Trend : The trend for each year is generated by taking a three point moving average of the LA percentage figures. The rate of change is calculated by fitting a regression line to these moving averages. The rate of change for all 150 LAs are then ranked. The top 10% are classed as 'Well above', the next 20% 'Above', the next 40% 'In line', the next 20% 'Below', the final 10% 'Well below'. Similarly the rate of change for each LAs group of statistical neighbours is calculated and deducted from each LA rate of change. The differences are then ranked, and the same classification is used to compare
p.91
Level 4+ % APS
the LA against their statistical neighbours, as is used in the national calculation. The trend indicates whether the change over time in the LA is greater or less than the change over time for the national or statistical neighbours.
p.91
Area SN NAT
[Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.91
Area SN NAT
Health warning: These figures include mainstream maintained schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures. Test results on mathematics: achievement at KS2, level 4+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) Ref. 3006OF
p.91
Level 4+ Mathematics
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3006OF
p.91
Level 4+ % Trend Analysis
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Science 2003 88.23 87.71 87.11 V Level 4+ % Trend 2004 87.73 86.78 86.34 V 03/04 -0.50 -0.93 -0.77 National 2005 88.29 87.84 87.17 V 04/05 0.56 1.06 0.83 Statistical Neighbours 2006 88.51 87.82 87.43 V 05/06 0.22 -0.02 0.26 2007 89.39 88.54 88.55 V 06/07 0.88 0.72 1.12 Minimum Pupil Count: Maximum Pupil Count:
p.92
APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Science 2003 28.79 28.73 28.62 V APS Trend 2004 28.91 28.72 28.66 V 03/04 0.12 -0.01 0.04 NATIONAL 2005 29.12 29.05 28.95 V 04/05 0.21 0.33 0.29 STATISTICAL NEIGHBOURS 2006 29.11 28.99 28.90 V 05/06 -0.01 -0.06 -0.05 2007 29.21 29.04 29.03 V 06/07 0.10 0.05 0.13
p.92
APS
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.92
Level 4+ % APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Subject Year Area SN Nat Science 2003 88.23 87.71 87.11 Science 2003 28.79 28.73 28.62 2004 87.73 86.78 86.34 2004 28.91 28.72 28.66 2005 88.29 87.84 87.17 2005 29.12 29.05 28.95 2006 88.51 87.82 87.43 2006 29.11 28.99 28.9 2007 89.39 88.54 88.55 2007 29.21 29.04 29.03
p.92
Level 4+ % APS
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3007OF Test results on science: achievement at KS2, level 4+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) Ref. 3007OF
p.92
Year-on-Year Change
Data Definition: The indicator represents two measures for KS2 data on Science: Level 4+ attainment and Average Point Scores (APS). Level 4 data shows the percentage of KS2 pupils who achieve at least level 4 in Science. APS are calculated from all pupils' test scores. Absent and disapplied pupils are excluded from the calculation of the APS, but included in the calculation of the % attaining Level 4+. Trend : The trend for each year is generated by taking a three point moving average of the LA percentage figures. The rate of change is calculated by fitting a regression line to these moving averages. The rate of change for all 150 LAs are then ranked. The top 10% are classed as 'Well above', the next 20% 'Above', the next 40% 'In line', the next 20% 'Below', the final 10% 'Well below'. Similarly the rate of change for each LAs group of statistical neighbours is calculated and deducted from each LA rate of change. The differences are then ranked, and the same classification is used to compare
p.92
Year-on-Year Change
the LA against their statistical neighbours, as is used in the national calculation. The trend indicates whether the change over time in the LA is greater or less than the change over time for the national or statistical neighbours.
p.92
Well Above Above In Line Below Well Below
[Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.92
Well Above Above In Line Below Well Below
Health warning : These figures include mainstream maintained schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures.
p.92
Level 4+ Science
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3007OF
p.92
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.93
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3018OF Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator Contextual Value Added measure KS1 to KS2 Ref. 3008OF
p.93
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
[Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.93
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
Health warning: The CVA measure is only descriptive of the results of the schools in the local area and should not be taken as a value-judgement of the effectiveness of the "local authority" as a head-office organisation. The CVA figures include pupils from maintained schools including special schools. Data Definition: The local area level contextual value added (CVA) score reflects the average rate of progress of all pupils in the local area, not necessarily the overall effectiveness of the local area. The CVA measure is calculated by aggregating the CVA scores of pupils at schools within the local area. More information on CVA can be found on the DCSF website: www.dcsf.gov.uk/performancetables
p.93
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3008OF
p.93
Level 5+ % Trend Analysis
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat English 2003 72.94 70.71 69.82 V Level 5+ % Trend 2004 72.76 72.41 71.90 V 03/04 -0.18 1.70 2.08 National 2005 76.62 76.10 75.10 V 04/05 3.86 3.69 3.20 Statistical Neighbours 2006 74.59 74.02 73.81 V 05/06 -2.03 -2.08 -1.29 2007 76.90 76.04 75.46 V 06/07 2.31 2.02 1.65 Minimum Pupil Count: Maximum Pupil Count:
p.95
APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat English 2003 34.15 33.84 33.67 V APS Trend 2004 33.67 33.78 33.71 V 03/04 -0.48 -0.06 0.04 NATIONAL 2005 34.19 34.15 33.97 V 04/05 0.52 0.37 0.26 STATISTICAL NEIGHBOURS 2006 34.08 33.81 33.81 V 05/06 -0.11 -0.34 -0.16 2007 33.98 33.81 33.71 V 06/07 -0.10 0.00 -0.10
p.95
APS
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.95
Level 5+ % APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Subject Year Area SN Nat English 2003 72.94 70.71 69.82 English 2003 34.15 33.84 33.67 2004 72.76 72.41 71.9 2004 33.67 33.78 33.71 2005 76.62 76.1 75.1 2005 34.19 34.15 33.97 2006 74.59 74.02 73.81 2006 34.08 33.81 33.81 2007 76.9 76.04 75.46 2007 33.98 33.81 33.71
p.95
Level 5+ % APS
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3009OF [Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.95
Area SN NAT
Data Definition : The indicator represents two measures for KS3 data on English: Level 5+ attainment and Average Point Scores (APS). Level 5 data shows the percentage of KS3 pupils who achieve at least level 5 in English. APS are calculated from all pupils' test scores. Absent and disapplied pupils are excluded from the calculation of the APS, but included in the calculation of the % attaining Level 5+. Trend : The trend for each year is generated by taking a three point moving average of the LA percentage figures. The rate of change is calculated by fitting a regression line to these moving averages. The rate of change for all 150 LAs are then ranked. The top 10% are classed as 'Well above', the next 20% 'Above', the next 40% 'In line', the next 20% 'Below', the final 10% 'Well below'. Similarly the rate of change for each LAs group of statistical neighbours is calculated and deducted from each LA rate of change. The differences are then ranked, and the same classification is used to compare
p.95
Area SN NAT
the LA against their statistical neighbours, as is used in the national calculation. The trend indicates whether the change over time in the LA is greater or less than the change over time for the national or statistical neighbours.
p.95
Area SN NAT
Health warning : These figures include mainstream maintained schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures. Test results on English: achievement at KS3, level 5+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) Ref. 3009OF
p.95
APS English
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3009OF
p.95
Level 5+ % Trend Analysis
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Maths 2003 74.51 73.33 71.64 V Level 5+ % Trend 2004 76.55 74.89 73.98 V 03/04 2.04 1.56 2.34 National 2005 77.10 76.12 74.90 V 04/05 0.55 1.23 0.92 Statistical Neighbours 2006 80.01 78.48 77.94 V 05/06 2.91 2.36 3.04 2007 78.79 77.44 76.92 V 06/07 -1.22 -1.04 -1.02 Minimum Pupil Count: Maximum Pupil Count:
p.96
APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Maths 2003 36.15 36.00 35.64 V APS Trend 2004 36.34 36.12 35.90 V 03/04 0.19 0.12 0.26 NATIONAL 2005 36.69 36.54 36.25 V 04/05 0.35 0.42 0.35 STATISTICAL NEIGHBOURS 2006 37.76 37.40 37.29 V 05/06 1.07 0.86 1.04 2007 37.49 37.18 37.03 V 06/07 -0.27 -0.22 -0.26
p.96
APS
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.96
Level 5+ % APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Subject Year Area SN Nat Maths 2003 74.51 73.33 71.64 Maths 2003 36.15 36 35.64 2004 76.55 74.89 73.98 2004 36.34 36.12 35.9 2005 77.1 76.12 74.9 2005 36.69 36.54 36.25 2006 80.01 78.48 77.94 2006 37.76 37.4 37.29 2007 78.79 77.44 76.92 2007 37.49 37.18 37.03
p.96
Level 5+ % APS
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3010OF Test results on mathematics: achievement at KS3, level 5+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) Ref. 3010OF
p.96
NAT
Data Definition : The indicator represents two measures for KS3 data on Mathematics: Level 5+ attainment and Average Point Scores (APS). Level 5 data shows the percentage of KS3 pupils who achieve at least level 5 in Mathematics. APS are calculated from all pupils' test scores. Absent and disapplied pupils are excluded from the calculation of the APS, but included in the calculation of the % attaining level 5+. Trend : The trend for each year is generated by taking a three point moving average of the LA percentage figures. The rate of change is calculated by fitting a regression line to these moving averages. The rate of change for all 150 LAs are then ranked. The top 10% are classed as 'Well above', the next 20% 'Above', the next 40% 'In line', the next 20% 'Below', the final 10% 'Well below'. Similarly the rate of change for each LAs group of statistical neighbours is calculated and deducted from each LA rate of change. The differences are then ranked, and the same classification is used to compare
p.96
NAT
the LA against their statistical neighbours, as is used in the national calculation. The trend indicates whether the change over time in the LA is greater or less than the change over time for the national or statistical neighbours.
p.96
Well Above Above In Line Below Well Below
[Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.96
Well Above Above In Line Below Well Below
Health warning : These figures include mainstream maintained schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures.
p.96
Level 5+ Mathematics
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3010OF
p.96
Level 5+ % Trend Analysis
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Science 2003 72.19 71.87 69.38 V Level 5+ % Trend 2004 69.36 68.78 67.08 V 03/04 -2.83 -3.09 -2.30 National 2005 73.21 72.65 70.78 V 04/05 3.85 3.87 3.70 Statistical Neighbours 2006 75.59 74.78 73.28 V 05/06 2.38 2.13 2.50 2007 75.93 75.33 73.94 V 06/07 0.34 0.55 0.66 Minimum Pupil Count: Maximum Pupil Count:
p.97
APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Science 2003 34.38 34.25 33.84 V APS Trend 2004 33.80 33.67 33.37 V 03/04 -0.58 -0.58 -0.47 NATIONAL 2005 34.30 34.13 33.81 V 04/05 0.50 0.46 0.44 STATISTICAL NEIGHBOURS 2006 34.98 34.68 34.46 V 05/06 0.68 0.55 0.65 2007 35.05 34.81 34.55 V 06/07 0.07 0.13 0.09
p.97
APS
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.97
Level 5+ % APS
Subject Year Area SN Nat Subject Year Area SN Nat Science 2003 72.19 71.87 69.38 Science 2003 34.38 34.25 33.84 2004 69.36 68.78 67.08 2004 33.8 33.67 33.37 2005 73.21 72.65 70.78 2005 34.3 34.13 33.81 2006 75.59 74.78 73.28 2006 34.98 34.68 34.46 2007 75.93 75.33 73.94 2007 35.05 34.81 34.55
p.97
Level 5+ % APS
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3011OF Data Definition : The indicator represents two measures for KS3 data on Science: Level 5+ attainment and Average Point Scores (APS). Level 5 data shows the percentage of KS3 pupils who achieve at least level 5 in Science. APS are calculated from all pupils' test scores. Absent and disapplied pupils are excluded from the calculation of the APS, but included in the calculation of the % attaining Level 5+. Trend : The trend for each year is generated by taking a three point moving average of the LA percentage figures. The rate of change is calculated by fitting a regression line to these moving averages. The rate of change for all 150 LAs are then ranked. The top 10% are classed as 'Well above', the next 20% 'Above', the next 40% 'In line', the next 20% 'Below', the final 10% 'Well below'. Similarly the rate of change for each LAs group of statistical neighbours is calculated and deducted from each LA rate of change. The differences are then ranked, and the same classification is used to compare
p.97
Level 5+ % APS
the LA against their statistical neighbours, as is used in the national calculation. The trend indicates whether the change over time in the LA is greater or less than the change over time for the national or statistical neighbours.
p.97
Area SN NAT
[Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.97
Area SN NAT
Health warning : These figures include mainstream maintained schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures. Test results on science: achievement at KS3, level 5+ and Average Point Scores (all pupils) Ref. 3011OF
p.97
Level 5+ Science
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3011OF
p.97
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.98
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3018OF Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator Contextual Value Added measure KS2 to KS3 Ref. 3012OF
p.98
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
[Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.98
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
Health warning: The CVA measure is only descriptive of the results of the schools in the local area and should not be taken as a value-judgement of the effectiveness of the "local authority" as a head-office organisation. The CVA figures include pupils from maintained schools including special schools. Data Definition: The local area level contextual value added (CVA) score reflects the average rate of progress of all pupils in the local area, not necessarily the overall effectiveness of the local area. The CVA measure is calculated by aggregating the CVA scores of pupils at schools within the local area. More information on CVA can be found on the DCSF website: www.dcsf.gov.uk/performancetables
p.98
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3012OF
p.98
% 5+ A*-C Summary Statistics
GCSE Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat 2003 54.28 52.67 51.86 V 2004 54.81 52.95 52.89 V 03/04 0.53 0.28 1.03 2005 57.36 55.36 55.52 V 04/05 2.55 2.41 2.63 2006 59.33 57.88 58.23 V 05/06 1.97 2.52 2.71 2007 62.65 60.50 60.86 V 06/07 3.32 2.62 2.63
p.100
% 5+ A*-C (including English and Maths)
GCSE Year Area SN Nat Area SN Nat 2003 .. .. .. 2004 .. .. .. 03/04 .. .. .. 2005 45.16 43.30 43.00 V 04/05 .. .. .. 2006 46.66 44.46 44.72 V 05/06 1.50 1.16 1.72 2007 49.03 46.14 46.52 V 06/07 2.37 1.68 1.80
p.100
% 5+ A*-C (including English and Maths)
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.100
%5+ A*-C %1+ A*-C (including English and Maths)
GCSE Year Area SN Nat GCSE Year Area SN Nat 2003 54.28 52.67 51.86 2003 #N/A #N/A #N/A 2004 54.81 52.95 52.89 2004 #N/A #N/A #N/A 2005 57.36 55.36 55.52 2005 45.16 43.3 43 2006 59.33 57.88 58.23 2006 46.66 44.46 44.72 2007 62.65 60.5 60.86 2007 49.03 46.14 46.52
p.100
%5+ A*-C %1+ A*-C (including English and Maths)
Ref: 3013OF 3014OF RAI, Ofsted Health warning: These figures include mainstream schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures. Discontinuous Yearly Data . From 2004, the figures are calculated from a wider range of GCSE-equivalent pre-16 qualifications as well as GCSEs. Therefore, extra care should be taken when comparing post 2004 performance with previous years that do not include the wider range of qualifications. For 5 A*-C including English and Maths, 2005 figures may include Statistics counted as Maths. 2006 figures count only English and Maths GCSE or equivalent. Percentage achieving 5+ A*-C (all pupils) and Percentage achieving 5+ A*-C (all pupils) - including English and Mathematics Ref. 3013OF, Ref. 3104OF
p.100
Data Definition:
These indicators show the percentage of all GCSE-eligible pupils in mainstream maintained secondary schools who attained at least five grades of C or above. A GCSE-eligible pupil is defined as a pupil who is aged 15 at the beginning of the school year. The new 5+ A*-C GCSEs (and equivalent) including English and Maths GCSEs, was announced in the 14-19 Education and Skills White Paper and subsequently confirmed in the Driving Forward 14-19 Reform: Implementation Plan published in December 2005. Pupils counted must have achieved at least a grade C English GCSE, and at least a grade C Maths GCSE, and at least the equivalent of another three C+ GCSEs.
p.100
Data Definition:
[Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.100
Percentage of pupils acheiving 5+ A*-C
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3013OF, 3104OF
p.100
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
Year Number of Schools Lowest Median Highest
p.101
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.101
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3018OF KS2-KS4 CVA - Distribution of School CVA measures in the area Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator Contextual Value Added measure KS2 to GCSE/equivalents Ref. 3105OF
p.101
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
[Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.101
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
Health warning: The LA CVA score is the average rate of progress of all pupils in the LA and reflects the effectiveness of the groups of schools in the LA, not necessarily the overall effectiveness of the LA. The CVA figures include pupils from maintained schools including special schools. It excludes pupils in pupil referral units, Hospital schools, FE sector institutions and sixth form centres/consortia. Schools opened after January 06 are also excluded from the LA CVA score. Data Definition: The LA level contextual value added (CVA) score reflects the average rate of progress of all pupils in the LA. The LA CVA measure is calculated by aggregating the CVA scores of pupils at schools within the LA and applying an adjustment to take account of the number of pupils in the calculation – for most LAs this adjustment is very small. Pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 by summer for who we have prior attainment data are included in the school and LA level CVA
p.101
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
measures. The CVA measures are centred around 1000. A CVA score of 1006.0 means that, on average pupils within the LA achieved one grade higher in one GCSE subject than similar pupils nationally. Similarly, a value added measure of 994.0 would suggest that, on average, pupils within the LA achieved one grade lower in one GCSE subject than similar pupils nationally. The coverage shows the percentage of pupils within the LA at the end of Key Stage 4 who were included in KS2-KS4 CVA measure. Along with the LA CVA score, the distribution of CVA scores of schools within the LA is shown. This shows the lowest, highest and median – or mid point – of CVA scores for the individual schools within the LA. More information on CVA can be found on the DCSF website: www.dcsf.gov.uk/performancetables
p.101
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3105OF
p.101
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.102
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3018OF Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator Contextual Value Added measure KS3 to GCSE/equivalents Ref. 3018OF
p.102
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
[Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables]
p.102
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
Health warning: The LA CVA score is the average rate of progress of all pupils in the LA and reflects the effectiveness of the groups of schools in the LA, not necessarily the overall effectiveness of the LA. The CVA figures include pupils from maintained schools including special schools. It excludes pupils in pupil referral units, Hospital schools, FE sector institutions and sixth form centres/consortia. Schools opened after January 06 are also excluded from the LA CVA score. Data Definition: The LA level contextual value added (CVA) score reflects the average rate of progress of all pupils in the LA. The LA CVA measure is calculated by aggregating the CVA scores of pupils at schools within the LA and applying an adjustment to take account of the number of pupils in the calculation – for most LAs this adjustment is very small. Pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 by summer for who we have prior attainment data are included in the school and LA level CVA
p.102
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
measures. The CVA measures are centred around 1000. A CVA score of 1006.0 means that, on average pupils within the LA achieved one grade higher in one GCSE subject than similar pupils nationally. Similarly, a value added measure of 994.0 would suggest that, on average, pupils within the LA achieved one grade lower in one GCSE subject than similar pupils nationally. The coverage shows the percentage of pupils within the LA at the end of Key Stage 4 who were included in KS3-KS4 CVA measure. Along with the LA CVA score, the distribution of CVA scores of schools within the LA is shown. This shows the lowest, highest and median – or mid point – of CVA scores for the individual schools within the LA. More information on CVA can be found on the DCSF website: www.dcsf.gov.uk/performancetables
p.102
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3018OF
p.102
GCSE/Equivalents data
Total secondary schools in Lancashire 2003: 88 Lancashire 2004: 88 2005: 88 2006: 77 2007: 84 Traffic lights have not been applied to this data Percentage of KS4 schools below Floor Target
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Area SN Nat Area SN Nat 2003 1.14% 1.60% 1.36% 2003 3.41% 4.79% 3.62% 2003 5.68% 8.24% 7.24% 2003 10.23% 12.50% 13.25% 2004 0.00% 1.34% 0.87% 2004 2.27% 1.88% 2.33% 2004 4.55% 6.43% 6.01% 2004 6.82% 13.67% 11.08% 2005 0.00% 0.00% 0.36% 2005 1.14% 0.81% 1.29% 2005 2.27% 4.85% 3.55% 2005 4.55% 8.63% 7.43% 2006 0.00% 0.80% 0.23% 0.00% 1.33% 0.49% 1.30% 1.86% 1.53% 2.60% 5.32% 4.36% 2007 0.00% 0.00% 0.03% 0.00% 0.27% 0.13% 0.00% 0.54% 0.56% 1.19% 2.17% 2.10%
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3061DE] [ Source: Revised GCSE School and College Achievement and Attainment tables.]
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
Health warning: N.B. This data shows the % of schools who fail to meet each floor target - this is not the same as showing what % of students failed to get 5 A* to Cs. Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator, as to have any school not meeting the 2007 floor target is deemed to be a poor outcome. Please note that the target is assessed at three time points, but only two of these time points have been exceeded so far. All schools with pupils aged 15 on 31st August will have been included under the current target. In a minority of cases it is possible that a school is shown as failing the floor targets, although they had no pupils taking GCSEs. Data definition: This indicator shows the % of schools failing to meet each floor target. By 2008, 60% of those aged 16 should achieve the equivalent of 5 GCSEs at grades A* to C; and in all schools at least 20% of pupils achieve this standard by 2004, rising to 25% by 2006 and 30% by 2008. The target includes all Maintained Mainstream
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
schools, including Academies and City Technology Colleges published with GCSE and equivalent results in the secondary school performance tables. It excludes all non-maintained schools, all special schools, all hospital schools, all pupil referral units, schools that closed ahead of publication of the tables, and schools that opened after the Annual School Census (be that through mergers, amalgamations or new establishments). GCSE and equivalent results are cumulative, i.e. all of the results achieved by those pupils in a particular year (winter and summer sessions) are counted, as well as any results they obtained in earlier years. Floor Target (2004 Spending Review PSA): by 2008, 60% of those aged 16 to achieve the equivalent of 5 GCSEs at grades A* to C; and in all schools at least 20% of pupils achieve this standard by 2004, rising to 25% by 2006 and 30% by 2008
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
The SN figure is calculated as the total number of schools not reaching a certain floor target for all statistical neighbours, divided by the total number of schools for all statistical neighbours. School level figures are adjusted for pupils recently arrived from overseas and additionally for pupils taken on by the school who were permanently excluded from previous schools. 30% 25% 3061DE: Percentage of schools not attaining KS4 floor targets
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
Area SN NAT % of KS4 schools below 25% Floor Target
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
2003 2004 2005 2006 % of KS4 schools below 30% Floor Target
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
2003 2004 2005 2006 % of KS4 schools below 15% Floor Target
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
0.0% 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% 1.0% 1.2% 1.4% 1.6% 1.8%
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
2003 2004 2005 2006 % of KS4 schools below 20% Floor Target
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
Area SN NAT % of KS4 schools below 25% Floor Target
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 % of KS4 schools below 30% Floor Target
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 % of KS4 schools below 15% Floor Target
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
0.0% 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% 1.0% 1.2% 1.4% 1.6% 1.8%
p.103
GCSE/Equivalents data
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 % of KS4 schools below 20% Floor Target
p.103
Lancashire
Data Definition: This indicator shows the percentage of local authority maintained schools which were inspected under the Section 5 framework and placed in special measures between September 2005 and the end of the spring 2008 term (4th April 2008). The number of schools placed in a category is a cumulative total over the full period, and each school is only included once. The total number of schools used in the calculation is the number of schools open as at 30th April 2008, rather than the number of schools inspected during the period.
p.105
Lancashire
[Source: Ofsted Section 5 inspection data] Schools numbers source: DCSF: Schools and Pupils in England: January 2007 (Final)
p.105
Lancashire
Health warning: Although the number of schools placed in a category is taken over the full period, the total number of schools is a snapshot view of schools open as at 4th April 2008. Therefore the percentage figure does not take account of schools who have opened or closed over the period. This data may also include schools that will close on 4th April 2008. Percentage of schools requiring special measures since Sept 2005
p.105
Lancashire
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3087OF
p.105
Lancashire
Data Definition: This indicator shows the percentage of local authority maintained schools which were inspected under the Section 5 framework and given a notice to improve between September 2005 and the end of the spring 2008 term (4th April 2008). The number of schools placed in a category is a cumulative total over the full period, and each school is only included once. The total number of schools used in the calculation is the number of schools open as at 30th April 2008, rather than the number of schools inspected during the period.
p.106
Lancashire
[Source: Ofsted Section 5 inspection data] Schools numbers source: DCSF: Schools and Pupils in England: January 2007 (Final)
p.106
Lancashire
Health warning: Although the number of schools given a notice to improve is taken over the full period, the total number of schools is a snapshot view of schools open as at 4th April 2008. Therefore the percentage figure does not take account of schools who have opened or closed over the period. This data may also include schools that will close on 4th April 2008. Percentage of schools placed in notice to improve category since Sept 2005
p.106
Lancashire
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3088OF
p.106
Attendance data
Lancashire Summary Statistics Attendance Area SN Nat Area SN Nat NATIONAL 2003 94.82 94.38 94.20 STATISTICAL NEIGHBOURS 2004 94.98 94.71 94.51 03/04 0.15 0.33 0.31 2005 95.00 94.70 94.58 04/05 0.02 -0.01 0.07 2006 94.84 94.40 94.25 05/06 -0.15 -0.29 -0.32 Minimum Pupil Count: 2007 95.20 94.94 94.83 06/07 0.36 0.54 0.58 Maximum Pupil Count:
p.108
Attendance data
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3034OF Attendance at primary schools
p.108
Attendance data
Health warning: These figures include mainstream maintained schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures. Data Definition: The data above are based on maintained primary and middle deemed primary schools open as at December 2007.
p.108
Attendance data
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3034OF
p.108
Attendance data
Area SN Nat Area SN Nat 2003 92.02 91.98 91.74 2004 91.87 92.14 91.97 03/04 -0.15 0.17 0.23 2005 92.23 92.29 92.20 04/05 0.36 0.15 0.23 2006 92.29 92.15 92.09 05/06 0.06 -0.14 -0.11 Minimum Pupil Count: 2007 92.43 92.40 92.31 06/07 0.14 0.25 0.22 Maximum Pupil Count:
p.109
Attendance data
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 3035OF Attendance at secondary schools
p.109
Attendance data
Health warning: These figures include mainstream maintained schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures. Year-on-Year Change Attendance %
p.109
Attendance data
Data Definition: The data above are based on maintained secondary and middle deemed secondary schools open as at December 2007. Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.109
Attendance data
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 3035OF
p.109
Lancashire
Type Year Area SN Nat Traffic lights have fixed 2005 0.96% 0.92% 1.04% not been applied 2006 n/a n/a n/a to this indicator 2007 0.81% 0.82% 1.11% permanent 2005 0.03% .. 0.03% 2006 0.03% .. 0.02% 2007 0.02% .. 0.02%
p.111
Lancashire
.. = Data not available # = Exclusion rate based on less than 3 pupils
p.111
Lancashire
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3091DE] 3091DE: Percentage of fixed term and permanent exclusions in relation to the number of pupils in primary phase
p.111
Data Definition:
A fixed period exclusion refers to a pupil who is excluded from a school but remains on the register of that school because they are expected to return when the exclusion period is completed. A permanent exclusion refers to a pupil who is excluded and their name is removed from the school register. Where a student receives more than one fixed period exclusion during the year, each exclusion will be counted separately. Fixed term exclusions of less than a day are counted as one full day. Exclusion rates based on less than 3 pupils are not shown (indicated by #). This missing data means that SN figures could be misleading, so they are not given for permanent exclusions (indicated by ..) This indicator shows the number of fixed period and permanent exclusions expressed as a percentage of the number (headcount) of pupils in the local authority. The national figures are DCSF published figures. They are mean averages of the sum of each type of exclusion in all LAs, divided by the sum of the pupils in all LAs. However the SN figures
p.111
Data Definition:
have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of the %s for all of the LA's statistical neighbours.
p.111
Data Definition:
[ Source: DCSF Pupil Level Annual School Census (permanent exclusions) and the Termly Exclusions Survey (fixed-term exclusions).]
p.111
Data Definition:
Health warning : The two types of exclusions are shown together to present a fuller picture of exclusions policies within the area: fixed term exclusions can be used as a strategy to prevent permanent exclusions, so are not necessarily a negative outcome for children and young people. For this reason, LA's fixed term exclusion rates do not have traffic lights. Please use with caution: high exclusion rates are a measure of how an area deals with behavioural issues - but a high rate may not always be an indication that an area has particularly poor behaviour. All %s are based on low numbers of students. Due to changes in the data collection information on fixed period exclusions the data is not available for maintained primary schools for 2006.
p.111
Exclusions Data
Lancashire N.B. Fixed term exclusions do not have traffic lights
p.112
Exclusions Data
Type Year Area SN Nat fixed 2005 10.59% 9.64% 9.94% 2006 9.37% 10.69% 10.40% 2007 11.03% 11.54% 10.83% permanent 2005 0.31% 0.25% 0.24% 2006 0.32% 0.24% 0.24% 2007 0.33% 0.25% 0.22%
p.112
Exclusions Data
.. = Data not available # = Exclusion rate based on less than 3 pupils
p.112
Exclusions Data
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3092DE] Health warning : The two types of exclusions are shown together to present a fuller picture of exclusions policies within the area: fixed term exclusions can be used as a strategy to prevent permanent exclusions, and so are not necessarily a negative outcome for children and young people. For this reason, LA's fixed term exclusion rates do not have traffic lights. Please use with caution: high exclusion rates are a measure of how an area deals with behavioural issues - but a high rate may not always be an indication that an area has particularly poor behaviour. All %s are based on low numbers of students. 3092DE: Percentage of fixed term and permanent exclusions in relation to the number of pupils in secondary phase
p.112
Exclusions Data
[ Source: DCSF Pupil Level Annual School Census (permanent exclusions) and the Termly Exclusions Survey (fixed-term exclusions).
p.112
Data Definition:
A fixed period exclusion refers to a pupil who is excluded from a school but remains on the register of that school because they are expected to return when the exclusion period is completed. A permanent exclusion refers to a pupil who is excluded and their name is removed from the school register. Where a student receives more than one fixed period exclusion during the year, each exclusion will be counted separately. Fixed term exclusions of less than a day are counted as one full day. Exclusion rates based on less than 3 pupils are not shown (indicated by #). This indicator shows the number of fixed period and permanent exclusions expressed as a percentage of the number (headcount) of pupils in the Local Authority. The National figures are DCSF published figures. They are mean averages of the sum of each type of exclusion in all LAs, divided by the sum of the pupils in all LAs. However the
p.112
Data Definition:
SN figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of the %s for all of the LA's statistical neighbours. Includes middle schools deemed secondary schools.
p.112
2002-03
Under 6 hours a week (159a) 0.0% 12.5% 1.8% 11.0% 20.9% 6-12 (inclusive) hours a week (159b) 0.0% 10.4% 3.3% 12.2% 20.0% 13-19 (inclusive) hours a week (159c) 0.0% 18.4% 7.5% 16.1% 25.9% 20 hours or more a week (159d) 0.0% 50.0% 32.2% 52.0% 75.0% N/A Not Improving
p.114
2003-04
Under 6 hours a week (159a) 1.7%* 6.4% 0.0% 3.9% 13.0% 6-12 (inclusive) hours a week (159b) 0.5%* 7.0% 1.0% 5.8% 12.8% 13-19 (inclusive) hours a week (159c) 0.4%* 12.0% 2.0% 10.3% 20.4% 20 hours or more a week (159d) 97.4%* 72.2% 50.5% 70.6% 93.2% N/A Improving
p.114
2004-05
Under 6 hours a week (159a) 6.7%* 1.6% 0.0% 3.0% 11.7% 6-12 (inclusive) hours a week (159b) 1.7%* 4.0% 0.0% 3.8% 10.2% 13-19 (inclusive) hours a week (159c) 0.3%* 9.5% 0.5% 6.1% 15.4% 20 hours or more a week (159d) 91.2% 79.6% 55.3% 80.3% 93.4% 2nd Q'tile Not Improving
p.114
Data definition
The percentage of permanently excluded pupils provided with alternative tuition of the following average hours per week: a. 5 hours or less; b. 6-12 hours; c. 13-19 hours; or d. 20 hours or more.
p.114
Data definition
[ Source: Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPIs) 159a, 159b, 159c & 159d]
p.114
Data definition
[Data contact: r-james@audit-commission.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3067AC] Health warning: BVPI 159 was not collected by the Audit Commission from data period 2005/2006. SN figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of the %s for all of the LA's statistical neighbours.
p.114
Education otherwise than at school data
3067AC: Percentage of permanently excluded pupils provided with alternative tuition (BVPI 159a, 159b, 159c & 159d)
p.114
England
* = Doubts expressed about the reliability of the council's arrangements for producing the data
p.114
England
Provision is calculated from the 16th school day after the governors uphold the head teacher's decision to exclude, or from the date the exclusion appeal panel uphold the decision to exclude.
p.114
England
Scope: Metropolitan Authorities, London Boroughs, Unitary Authorities, County Councils, Council of the Isles of Scilly, Common Council of the City of London.
p.114
Lancashire
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 This indicator does not have banding LA 13.8 10.5 14.5 . = Data not applicable SN 11.4 12.0 10.1 .. = Data not available Eng 12.1 11.7 11.9 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.116
Data definition
Continued on following page 3085SC - PAF CF/C69: Percentage of children newly looked after in the year, and still looked after at 31 March, who were placed at 31 March more than 20 miles from their home address from which first placed
p.116
Denominator:
The postcode of the address from which the child/young person was first looked after will be related to the postcode of the address of their placement at 31 March. The distance in miles 'as the crow flies' between the address from which a looked after child was taken into care and that of the placement where the child was placed at 31 March has been collected from 2004-05. [Source - SSDA903] Of the children in the denominator, the number who were placed at March 31 more than 20 miles from their home address from which first placed (Counting only those children who are more than 20 miles but less than 999.9 miles from their home address).
p.116
Denominator:
* Children missing from care at 31 March 2008 (placement codes M1, M2 and M3) * Unaccompanied Asylum Seeker children * Looked after children subject to an agreed pattern of short term placements (legal status codes V3 and V4) All children newly accommodated (SSDA903 reason for new episode code of S) in the year prior to 31 March and still accommodated at 31 March, excluding:
p.116
Denominator:
* Children placed for adoption (placement codes A3, A4, A5 and A6)
p.116
Measuring unit
All such cases are excluded on the grounds that the distance from home may exceed the stated limit but may be unavoidable and / or in the child's best interests. [Source - SSDA903] * Children where the council cannot provide the distance data (e.g. because the parent(s) refused to divulge their address or were of no fixed abode or where the child is currently abroad) (distance value of 999.9)
p.116
Measuring unit
Percentage to one decimal place * Children placed at home with parent(s) (placement code P1)
p.116
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.116
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 3085SC]
p.116
Lancashire
3085SC - PAF CF/C69: Percentage of children newly looked after in the year, and still looked after at 31 March, who were placed at 31 March more than 20 miles from their home address from which first placed
p.117
Guidance/interpretation
2068SC PAF CF/B79: % of children aged at least 10 and under 16 who were in foster placements or placed for adoption - see p.74 There is evidence that while in some cases a distant or out-of-authority placement may be the right decision for a child, for many children such placements are not in their best interests. Children placed at a distance from home (especially out-of-authority) are likely to achieve poorer educational and other outcomes than those placed within their home area. Local authorities will find it harder to act as an attentive corporate parent where children are living far away. In general, children will be less likely to thrive if they are living well away from their own communities. This indicator addresses the capacity of councils to have sufficient placements near to home to allow contact with natural parent(s), siblings and other relatives and local communities to be facilitated. Apart from in very few cases, the further from home
p.117
Guidance/interpretation
a child is placed, the harder it is to maintain links with their family and for them to return to their community when they leave school or care. A key issue with this indicator is the reasoning behind why a child would be placed far from home and involves elements of both placement choice and placement availability (2043SC, 2059SC, 3085SC). Educational performance is also an important element to be considered (3071SC-3074SC). The results for this indicator need to be treated with caution. While it is true of all indicators that no one p.i. should ever be used on its own to make a judgement, it is particularly the case with this indicator. So, for example, the extent to which children thrive may not be influenced by distance at all. Also, a move of 5 miles in an urban area can have the same, or worse, dislocating consequences for a child as one of 30 miles in a rural area. In 2006-07, 39% of authorities had figures of between 1 and 5 in their numerator: results should be interpreted carefully for all authorities
p.117
Guidance/interpretation
where numbers of children newly placed are small.
p.117
Related measures
1037SC PAF CF/C19: Health of looked after children - see p.36 2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69
p.117
Related measures
2067SC PAF CF/D78: Long term stability of children looked after - see p.71 2059SC PAF CF/C23: Adoptions of children looked after (BVPI 163) - see p.77
p.117
Related measures
3073SC The % of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with 5 or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or GNVQ equivalent - see p.122 3074SC PAF CF/C24: Children looked after absent from school [joint working] - see p.124 3071SC The % of children looked after who were pupils in year 11 who were eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations who sat at least one GCSE or equivalent exam - see p.118 3072SC PAF CF/A2: Educational qualifications of children looked after [joint working] (BVPI 50) - see p.120
p.117
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 3085SC]
p.117
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08
LA 48.6 49.4 65.1 53.7 66.7 66.3 71.4 . = Data not applicable SN 58.6 61.3 63.8 58.9 57.7 61.4 74.5 .. = Data not available Eng 54.1 57.9 56.8 59.1 64.0 65.6 67.7 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.118
Data definition
Continued on following page 3071SC - Percentage of looked after children who were pupils in year 11 and eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations who sat at least one GCSE or equivalent examination
p.118
Data definition
This indicator measures the extent to which a council is able to ensure that children looked after are able to sit GSCE or equivalent exams. Educational attainment is one of the most important determinants of future outcomes and no attainment can be achieved if a looked after child does not get to sit an exam. There is clearly a need for cooperation between local authorities, schools, and other partners with an interest, to improve the attainment of children looked after. This should be orchestrated through the children’s trust partnership arrangements. The indicator includes those children looked after for at least one year and emphasises the council’s corporate responsibility for the education of vulnerable children.
p.118
Guidance/interpretation
Conversely, frequent moves between placements (2043SC PAF CF/A1), school absence (3074SC PAF CF/C24) offending (4015SC PAF CF/C18) and distance from home (3085SC PAF CF/C69) may be related to poor educational attainment. A high figure is an indicator of good performance and a low figure of poor performance. This is a potentially volatile indicator because it can deal with quite small numbers of young people; small changes can have large consequences for the resulting indicator values. It is, nonetheless, a good guide to the extent to which a council is successfully helping its cohort of young people get to the exam room door. As always with educational indicators, though, consideration needs to be given to the proportion of children educated out-of-authority. Sometimes the more proximate the council's corporate parenting support system is to the child, the more effective that support tends to be.
p.118
Guidance/interpretation
A sustained high, or improving, figure in this indicator, in the three years prior to the end of the relevant period, should feed through to an improved 3072SC PAF CF/A2 figure over time and, to a lesser extent, to an improved 3073SC.
p.118
Measuring unit
Unaccompanied asylum seeker children are still included in this measure if they have been looked after for at least one year N.B. In 2006-07, for this indicator and 3074SC CF/C24, the data for 30 September 2006 relates to the school year 2005-2006, i.e. the school year that ended in July 2006. [Source - OC2 question 6a]
p.118
Numerator
The number of children looked after at 30 September who at that time had been looked after continuously by the council for at least 12 months who were in, or should have been in, School Year 11 in the school year prior to the 30 September date who were eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations.
p.118
Denominator
[Source - OC2 question 6b] Of the children in the denominator, the number who on 30 September had sat at least one GCSE or equivalent examination Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.118
Denominator
This indicator differs from 3072SC PAF CF/A2 and 3073SC, however, in that it provides snapshots of those looked after for at least a year at 30 September, as opposed to aggregate data on those who ceased to be looked after, after being looked after for any period, in the year prior to the relevant 31 March. It also includes unaccompanied asylum seeking children looked after for one year, whereas the other two indicators require such children to be looked after for at least two.
p.118
(or equivalent) who sat at least one GCSE/equivalent exam
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08
p.118
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 3071SC]
p.118
Lancashire
3071SC - Percentage of looked after children who were pupils in year 11 and eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations who sat at least one GCSE or equivalent examination
p.119
Lancashire
3072SC PAF CF/A2: Educational qualifications of children looked after [joint working] (BVPI 50) - see p.120
p.119
Lancashire
4015SC PAF CF/C18: Final warnings/reprimands and convictions of children looked after - see p.141 4016SC PAF CF/C63: Participation of looked after children in reviews - see p.143 5022SC PAF CF/A4 Employment, education and training for care leavers [joint working] (BVPI 161) - see p.167 3073SC The % of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with 5 or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or GNVQ equivalent - see p.122 3074SC PAF CF/C24: Children looked after absent from school [joint working] - see p.124 3085SC PAF CF/C69: Distance children newly looked after are placed from home - see p.116
p.119
Related measures
2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69
p.119
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 3071SC]
p.119
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 48.3 45.1 53.3 42.5 46.9 . = Data not applicable SN 51.8 48.7 54.7 53.8 55.1 .. = Data not available Eng 48.6 50.4 53.0 55.1 57.3 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.120
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz 2003-08 0<25 25<45 45<50 50<70 70<=100
p.120
Data definition
Continued on following page 3072SC - PAF CF/A2: Percentage of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with at least one GCSE at grade A*-G or a GNVQ (BVPI 50)
p.120
Measuring unit
N.B. *Young people who died (SSDA903 reason episode ceased code E2) during the year ending 31 March 2008 aged 16 or over are included. *From 2003-04 the definition of this indicator changed to exclude children whose date of birth suggests that they would not have taken exams before leaving care and Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children (UASC) who had been looked after for less than 2 years at the time that they left care. For the year ending 31 March 2007, the data will be come from exams sat in the years 2004 or 2005 or 2006, depending on the age of the young person who ceases to be looked after. [Source - SSDA903] Of the young people in the denominator, the number who on leaving care had obtained at least 1 GCSE at grade A*-G or a GNVQ. Qualifications gained before the young person was looked after and qualifications from examinations sat while the young person was looked after are included, even if the results were announced after the young person ceased to be looked after. Qualifications gained from
p.120
Measuring unit
examinations sat after the young person ceased to be looked after are not included. GCSE short courses, part one or full GNVQs at either foundation or intermediate level, and GNVQ language units are included; NVQs are not.
p.120
Denominator
The number of young people who ceased to be looked after during the year at the age of 16 or over regardless of how long they had been looked after, excluding: * those aged 15 at 31 August in the preceding year who leave between 1 April and 31 May of the year and those aged 14 at 31 August in the preceding year who leave care before 31 March of the year; * unaccompanied asylum seeking children (UASC) who have been looked after for less than two years at the time that they leave care (i.e. less than 730 days inclusive of the date they leave care); and * young people who ceased being looked after who had only been looked after during the year under an agreed series of short term placements (legal status codes V3 and V4). [Source - SSDA903]
p.120
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.120
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 3072SC]
p.120
Lancashire
3072SC - PAF CF/A2: Percentage of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with at least one GCSE at grade A*-G or a GNVQ (BVPI 50)
p.121
Guidance/interpretation
3071SC The % of children looked after who were pupils in year 11 who were eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations who sat at least one GCSE or equivalent exam - see p.118
p.121
Related measures
Research has shown that the family and social backgrounds of looked after children suggest a higher likelihood of lower achievement and that looked after children achieve less well than their peers. Adverse factors in the backgrounds of children looked after, though, need to be taken into account. The high percentage of children with statements of special needs, for example, in the looked after population is an important element (around 27% in the looked after population compared to around 3% in the general school-age population). Other factors include not having English as a first language or coming from poorer families (as evidenced by use of free school meals). See the DCSF website for tables on attainment analysed against some of these factors: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000759/index.shtml This indicator provides data on achievement by LAC at all pass grades in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the council's corporate
p.121
Related measures
parenting in the area of attainment. Educational attainment is one of the most important determinants of future outcomes and a measure that is supported by readily available information. There is clearly a need for cooperation between local authorities, schools, and other partners with an interest, to improve the attainment of children looked after. This should be orchestrated through the children’s trust partnership arrangements. The indicator includes the majority of children looked after (for specific exclusions see the denominator), regardless of how long they have been looked after, as this emphasises the council’s corporate responsibility for the education of vulnerable children.
p.121
Related measures
Frequent moves between placements (2043SC CF/A1), school absence (3074SC CF/C24) and offending (4015SC CF/C18) may be related to educational attainment. So too may distance from home (3085SC PAF CF/C69) and the timeliness of reviews (2064SC PAF CF/C68). Low scores in this indicator will feed through to employment, education and training for care leavers (5022SC PAF CF/A4). High figures indicate good performance and low figures, generally, indicate low performance. This is, though, a volatile indicator because it often deals with quite small numbers of young people. Small changes can have large consequences for the resulting indicator values. In addition, the presence in the cohort of: young people looked after for a brief period, over whose education a council can have limited or non-existent influence; young people with severe disabilities, who are unable to take any exams; and young people with mental health issues, can also have a significant effect on a council’s resulting indicator score.
p.121
Related measures
Consistent high performance in this indicator is, therefore, is difficult to maintain and is good evidence of a council's corporate parenting in relation to attainment. As always with educational indicators, though, consideration needs to be given to the proportion of children educated out-of-authority. Sometimes the more proximate the council's corporate parenting support system is to the child, the more effective that support tends to be. The most recent target set for children looked after to achieve 1 A*-G GCSE was the national Quality Protects target for 2002-03 of 75%. The England average for this indicator in 2006-07 was 55%, an increase on the previous year, but still well short of this target. Overall performance remains very distant from the comparable figure for the general population of 16 year olds which, in 2006, was 98%.
p.121
Related measures
4016SC PAF CF/C63: Participation of looked after children in reviews - see p.143 The construction of this indicator is similar to 3073SC, but differs from 3071SC, in that it provides aggregate data on those who ceased to be looked after, after being looked after for any period, in the three years previous to the relevant 31 March, rather than a snapshot of those looked after for at least a year. It also only includes unaccompanied asylum seeking children when they have been looked after for at least two years, rather than one.
p.121
Related measures
5022SC PAF CF/A4 Employment, education and training for care leavers [joint working] (BVPI 161) - see p.167 4015SC PAF CF/C18: Final warnings/reprimands and convictions of children looked after - see p.141 Performance on this indicator has made only slow progress because, often as a result of the small numbers involved and the fact that much depends on exactly when the young person ceases to be looked after, a good result in one year for a council does not necessarily lead to a good result the following year.
p.121
Related measures
3073SC The % of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with 5 or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or GNVQ equivalent - see p.122 3074SC PAF CF/C24: Children looked after absent from school [joint working] - see p.124 3085SC PAF CF/C69: Distance children newly looked after are placed from home - see p.116 2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69 2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67
p.121
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 3072SC]
p.121
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 23.0 6.0 5.0 7.8 - - . = Data not applicable SN 5.6 7.1 4.1 9.0 8.6 10.6 .. = Data not available Eng 7.5 7.2 8.0 8.5 9.9 10.7 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.122
Data definition
Continued on following page 3073SC - Percentage of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with five or more GCSEs at grade A*- C or GNVQs equivalent to grades A*- C
p.122
Measuring unit
For the year ending 31 March 2008, the data will be come from exams sat in the years 2005 or 2006 or 2007, depending on the age of the young person who ceases to be looked after. [Source - SSDA903] Each young person is counted only once, even if they ceased to be looked after more than once. N.B. Young people who died (reason episode ceased code E2) during the year ending 31 March aged 16 or over are included. * young people who ceased being looked after who had only been looked after during the year under an agreed series of short term placements (legal status codes V3 and V4). * unaccompanied asylum seeking children (UASC) who have been looked after for less than two years at the time that they leave care; and * those aged 15 at 31 August in the preceding year who leave between 1 April and 31 May of the year and those aged 14 at 31 August in the preceding year who leave care before 31 March of the year;
p.122
Numerator
The number of young people who ceased to be looked after during the year to 31st March aged 16 or over regardless of how long they had been looked after but excluding:
p.122
Denominator
[Source - SSDA903] N.B. The PI data from 2002-2006 was sourced from data collected by CSCI. The 903 data collection for 2006-07 and 2007-08 was not configured to include GNVQ equivalencies. Consequently, Ofsted has collected GNVQ data and matched it with the relevant GCSE data from the 903 collection to calculate the final value for 2006-07 and 2007-08. Of the young people in the denominator: the number who on leaving care had obtained at least 5 GCSE at grade A* - C or GNVQ at foundation or intermediate level equivalent to grade A*-C. Qualifications gained before the young person was looked after and qualifications from exams sat while the young person was looked after are included, even if the results were announced after the young person ceased to be looked after. Qualifications gained from examinations sat after the young person ceased to be looked after are not included. Traffic lights have not been
p.122
at grade A*-C or GNVQ equivalents
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.122
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 3073SC]
p.122
Lancashire
3073SC - Percentage of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with five or more GCSEs at grade A*- C or GNVQs equivalent to grades A*- C
p.123
Lancashire
Placements moves (2043SC CF/A1), distance from home (3085SC CF/C69), school absence (3074SC CF/C24) and offending (4015SC CF/C18) may be related to lower educational attainment. Similarly, low scores on frequency of review (2064SC CF/68) and participation at review (2022SC CF/63) may have an adverse effect. Lower scores in this indicator may feed through to a lower score in the indicator on employment, education and training for care leavers (5022SC PAF CF/A4). This indicator provides data on the highest achieving LAC in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the council's corporate parenting in the area of attainment. High figures indicate good performance and low figures indicate, generally, poor performance, though both need to be seen in relation to comparator data and great caution needs to be exercised in the assessment of a council's performance here. This is a very volatile indicator because it often deals with quite small numbers of young people. Small changes can have large
p.123
Lancashire
consequences for the resulting indicator values. In addition, the presence in the cohort of: young people looked after for a brief period, over whose education a council can have limited or non-existent influence; young people with severe disabilities, who are unable to take any exams; and young people with mental health issues, can also have a significant effect on a council’s resulting indicator score.
p.123
Guidance/interpretation
2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69 2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67 As always with educational indicators, though, consideration needs to be given to the proportion of children educated out-of-authority. Sometimes the more proximate the council's corporate parenting support system is to the child, the more effective that support tends to be. The England average for this indicator in 2006-07 was 10%. Overall performance remains very distant from the comparable figure for the general population of 16 year olds which, in 2007, was 62%. Performance on this indicator has made only slow progress because, often as a result of the small numbers involved and the fact that much depends on exactly when the young person ceases to be looked after, a good result in one year for a council does not necessarily lead to a good result the following year.
p.123
Guidance/interpretation
4016SC PAF CF/C63: Participation of looked after children in reviews - see p.143 5022SC PAF CF/A4 Employment, education and training for care leavers [joint working] (BVPI 161) - see p.167 4015SC PAF CF/C18: Final warnings/reprimands and convictions of children looked after - see p.141 3071SC The % of children looked after who were pupils in year 11 who were eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations who sat at least one GCSE or equivalent exam - see p.118 3072SC PAF CF/A2: Educational qualifications of children looked after [joint working] (BVPI 50) - see p.120 3074SC PAF CF/C24: Children looked after absent from school [joint working] - see p.124 3085SC PAF CF/C69: Distance children newly looked after are placed from home - see p.116
p.123
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 3073SC]
p.123
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08
LA 11.4 10.3 11.2 11.0 5.8 6.9 9.1 . = Data not applicable SN 13.9 12.3 11.9 12.8 14.2 15.5 13.5 .. = Data not available Eng 11.8 12.0 12.4 12.3 12.6 13.3 13.0 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.124
Bands Low High
zzzzz zzzz zzz zz z 2001-08 0<5 5<10 10<15 15<20 20+
p.124
Denominator
Percentage to one decimal place 3074SC - PAF CF/C24: Percentage of children who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months and were of school age, who missed a total of at least 25 days of schooling for any reason during the previous school year
p.124
Measuring unit
N.B. In 2006-07, for this indicator and 3071SC, the data for 30 September 2006 relates to the school year 2005-2006, i.e. the school year that ended in July 2006. [Source - OC2 Question 2a] Of the children in the denominator, the number who missed a total of at least 25 days of education of any kind for any reason during the previous school year.
p.124
Measuring unit
The number of children looked after at 30 September who had been looked after continuously at that date for at least 12 months and were old enough to receive full time schooling during the school year that ended in the previous July.
p.124
3074SC - PAF CF/C24: Looked after children absent from school
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08
p.124
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.124
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 3074SC]
p.124
Lancashire
3074SC - PAF CF/C24: Percentage of children who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months and were of school age, who missed a total of at least 25 days of schooling for any reason during the previous school year
p.125
Lancashire
3073SC The % of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with 5 or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or GNVQ equivalent - see p.122
p.125
Lancashire
4015SC PAF CF/C18: Final warnings/reprimands and convictions of children looked after - see p.141
p.125
Related measures
The rates of looked after children missing 25 days or more of school are not directly comparable to data for all children in a council area. The data collected by the DCSF from schools on absence differentiate between authorised and unauthorised absence, whereas C24 does not. The data from schools do not allow the calculation of rates of children missing at least 25 days of school. As always with educational indicators, though, consideration needs to be given to the proportion of children educated out-of-authority. Sometimes the more proximate the council's corporate parenting support system is to the child, the more effective that support tends to be. Low figures generally indicate good performance and high figures generally indicate poor performance. Where there has been a recent rise in the indicator value score, consideration needs to be given to whether the council is using a dedicated data collection resource, whether in-council or commissioned from a third party. Some preliminary research has shown that the
p.125
Related measures
advent of the use of such a resource increases the indicator value because it reveals the true figure. Better data management and the gathering of better intelligence is evidence of good corporate parenting and it is this, rather than the increased value, on which assessment of performance should focus in this instance. Consideration needs to be given to the proportion of children that may not have a school place for some time following a placement move, particularly where it was not anticipated. Also frequent moves between placements (2043SC PAF CF/A1) and offending (4015SC PAF CF/C18) may be related to school attendance. There may be connections between participation in, and timeliness of, reviews (4016SC CF/C63 & 2064SC PAF CF/C68) where school non-attendance should be addressed. Low scores in this indicator will feed through to educational attainment (3071SC, 3073SC & 3072SC PAF CF/A2) and, later, to
p.125
Related measures
employment, education and training for care leavers (5022SC PAF CF/A4). Perhaps most notably there is a likely link between attendance, which is declining on average, and the very slow progress made by many councils in 3072SC PAF CF/A2.
p.125
Related measures
2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69 2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67 3071SC The % of children looked after who were pupils in year 11 who were eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations who sat at least one GCSE or equivalent exam - see p.118
p.125
Related measures
5022SC PAF CF/A4 Employment, education and training for care leavers [joint working] (BVPI 161) - see p.167 4016SC PAF CF/C63: Participation of looked after children in reviews - see p.143 This indicator is a measure of the effectiveness of the local authority as the corporate parent for the children it looks after. It attempts to ensure that they have the maximum opportunity to benefit from their education. Access to school is a key factor in improving the stability of their lives. Continuous attendance will lead to improving education achievement. Local authorities, schools and other partners with an interest need to work together to ensure that when children become looked after they continue to access school, or that if a change of school is unavoidable, appropriate school provision is arranged before the care placement is finalised. Procedures should be in place to ensure that the absence of looked after children for any reason is
p.125
Related measures
closely monitored and dealt with appropriately.
p.125
Guidance/interpretation
3072SC PAF CF/A2: Educational qualifications of children looked after [joint working] (BVPI 50) - see p.120
p.125
Guidance/interpretation
3085SC PAF CF/C69: Distance children newly looked after are placed from home - see p.116
p.125
Guidance/interpretation
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 3074SC]
p.125
Lancashire
Type Year Area SN Nat Primary 2005 6.69% 9.32% 8.50% Traffic lights have 2006 n/a n/a n/a not been applied 2007 3.24% 6.91% 10.18% to this indicator Secondary 2005 26.70% 29.63% 28.70% 2006 26.48% 31.26% 31.56% 2007 31.52% 31.32% 33.40%
p.127
Lancashire
0% = Data not available # = Less than 3 pupils
p.127
Lancashire
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3106DE] 3106DE: Percentage of fixed term exclusions for pupils with statements in mainstream schools (broken down into Primary and Secondary phase)
p.127
Lancashire
In 2005/06 no termly exclusions data was collected for primary schools. The termly exclusions survey which previously collected this data was discontinued as the collection of fixed period exclusions was moved to the School Census. However, primary schools made their first return under the new arrangements for the academic year 2006/07.
p.127
Lancashire
Health warning : Please use with caution: high exclusion rates are a measure of how an area deals with behavioural issues - but a high rate may not always be an indication that an area has particularly poor behaviour. All %s are based on low numbers of students. [ Source: School Census, although prior to 2006 it was collected via the DCSF Termly Exclusions Survey (fixed-term exclusions). Statistical Neighbours comparisons calculated by Ofsted.] Data Definition: A fixed period exclusion refers to a pupil who is excluded from a school but remains on the register of that school because they are expected to return when the exclusion period is completed. Where a student receives more than one fixed period exclusion during the year, each exclusion will be counted separately. Fixed term exclusions of less than a day are counted as one full day. Exclusion rates based on less than 3 pupils are not shown (indicated by #). This indicator shows
p.127
Lancashire
the number of fixed period exclusions expressed as a percentage of the number (headcount) of pupils in the local authority. The national figures are DCSF published figures. They are median averages of the sum of each type of exclusion in all LAs, divided by the sum of the pupils in all LAs. However, the SN figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of all the % for all the local authorities statistical neighbours (as in 3099DE).
p.127
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
3095DE: Percentage of pupils with a statement of special educational needs (SEN)
p.128
Lancashire
Traffic lights have not Year LA SN Nat been applied to this 2006 4.1% 2.9% 2.9% indicator 2007 3.9% 2.9% 2.8% 2008 3.7% 2.9% 2.8%
p.128
Lancashire
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3095DE]
p.128
Data Definition:
Data is taken from January for each year. The % is calculated by dividing the total number of children with statements of SEN by the total number of children. Figures includes Nursery, Primary, Middle, Secondary, Independent and Special schools, Pupil Referral Units, City Technology Colleges and Academies. The national figures are DCSF published figures. Statistical Neighbours comparisons calculated by Ofsted.
p.128
Data Definition:
Health warning : Please note that this data refers to the local authority where the pupil attends school, which may not be the local authority where they live. Numbers of statements should be reducing steadily over time. If not, this could be an indication that inclusion or funding policies are not being effective in supporting early intervention and would need following up in the inspection. SN figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of the %s for all of the LA's Statistical Neighbours. [Source: DCSF Schools' Census (SC).]
p.128
ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING
3063DE: DCSF SEN2 – number of new statements of special educational needs SEN
p.129
Lancashire
No. of children for whom statements were newly made this year
p.129
Lancashire
Year LA Nat Traffic lights have not 2005 821 24,040 been applied to this 2006 402 22,600 indicator 2007 435 23,510
p.129
Lancashire
% of children with new statements placed in mainstream schools.
p.129
Lancashire
Year LA SN Nat 2005 77.3% 65.7% 72.3% 2006 62.4% 66.2% 69.3% 2007 56.3% 63.9% 68.7%
p.129
Lancashire
.. = Data not available # = 1 or 2 pupils or a rate based on 1 or 2 pupils
p.129
Lancashire
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3063DE]
p.129
data
Health warning : Please note that data refers to the local authority where the child lives (as they issue their statement), but they may go to a school in another local authority. Numbers of new statements should be reducing steadily over time. If not, this could be an indication that inclusion or funding policies are not being effective in supporting early intervention and would need following up in the inspection. Comparisons with other LAs can be misleading because of different responses to the national drive to reduce the number of statements overall through early intervention and funding arrangements. SN figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of the %s for all of the LA's Statistical Neighbours. [Source: . DCSF SEN2 Survey 2006-2008. Statistical Neighbours comparisons calculated by Ofsted.]
p.129
Data Definition:
Data is taken from the SEN2 survey, which local authorities complete each January. This indicator refers to all new statements issued by the local authority in the calendar year (i.e. data shown for 2007 is taken from the January 2008 return). Data includes resourced provision/units/special classes in maintained mainstream schools and SEN units in maintained mainstream schools.
p.129
mainstream schools
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0%
p.129
newly made
5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000
p.129
Lancashire
Percentage of new statements of SEN prepared within 18 weeks, including and excluding 'exceptions'
p.130
Lancashire
Area Statistical Neighbours Lower Quartile Median Upper Quartile Quartile position Improving? 2004-05 BVPI43a - % of statements of SEN issued within 18 weeks - excluding 'exceptions' 94.9% 98.3% 93.0% 98.1% 100.0% 3rd Q'tile Improving BVPI43b - % of statements of SEN issued within 18 weeks - including 'exceptions' 79.8% 76.6% 65.9% 77.9% 90.2% 2nd Q'tile Improving
p.130
Lancashire
2005-06 BVPI43a - % of statements of SEN issued within 18 weeks - excluding 'exceptions' 94.3% 99.1% 95.7% 99.4% 100.0% Worst Q'tile Not Improving BVPI43b - % of statements of SEN issued within 18 weeks - including 'exceptions' 81.9% 89.9% 72.5% 85.9% 95.4% 3rd Q'tile Improving
p.130
Lancashire
2006-07 BVPI43a - % of statements of SEN issued within 18 weeks - excluding 'exceptions' 97.4% 98.7% 97.5% 100.0% 100.0% Worst Q'tile Improving BVPI43b - % of statements of SEN issued within 18 weeks - including 'exceptions' 89.7% 91.7% 80.5% 91.3% 98.5% 3rd Q'tile Improving
p.130
Lancashire
[Data contact: r-james@audit-commission.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3070AC] Health warning: SN figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of the %s for all of the LA's statistical neighbours. 3070AC: BVPI – Percentage of new statements of special educational needs prepared within 18 weeks
p.130
Lancashire
* = Doubts expressed about the reliability of the council's arrangements for producing the data.
p.130
Lancashire
Percentage of proposed statements of Special Educational Need issued by the authority in a financial year and prepared within 18 weeks including and excluding exceptions under the Education (Special Educational Needs) (England) (Consolidation) Regulations 2001 and set out in Annex A of the SEN Code of Practice.
p.130
Lancashire
The end of the period is the date on which the authority issues the proposed statement or the date on which the authority notifies the parent that a statement is not necessary.
p.130
Lancashire
[ Source: Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPIs) 43a and 43b] Scope: Metropolitan Authorities, London Boroughs, Unitary Authorities, County Councils, Council of the Isles of Scilly, Common Council of the City of London. Further guidance: The 'exceptions' are those set out in the Education (Special Educational Needs) (England) (Consolidation) Regulations 2001, paragraphs 12.5, 12.7 and 12.9. The regulations are reproduced in Annex A of the SEN Code of Practice 2001. See www.teachernet.gov.uk/SEN Refusal to assess: where a request is refused, it should not be included in the count. If an order to carry out an assessment is later made by the SEN and Disability Tribunal (SENDIST), the authority must notify the child’s parent that they will make an assessment within 4 weeks of the date of the order. (See Part IV, section 25 – (2) of the Consolidation Regulations 2001). A Note in Lieu is not part of the statutory requirement but the Code of Practice makes it clear that it is good practice to issue one following the notice to parents.
p.130
Lancashire
Year Area SN Nat Traffic lights have 2005 0.45% .. 0.31% not been applied 2006 0.27% .. 0.23% to this indicator 2007 0.36% .. 0.20%
p.131
Lancashire
.. = Data not available # = Exclusion rate based on less than 3 pupils
p.131
Lancashire
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3097DE] 3097DE: Percentage of permanent exclusions in relation to the number of pupils in special schools
p.131
Data Definition:
A permanent exclusion refers to a pupil who is excluded and their name is removed from the school register. This indicator shows the number of permanent exclusions during the academic year expressed as a percentage of the number (headcount) of pupils in maintained and non-maintained special schools in the Local Authority. Data will be missing if the local authority does not have any schools of this type. Exclusion rates based on less than 3 pupils are not shown (indicated by #). This missing data means that SN figures could be misleading, so they are not provided (indicated by ..) Dual registered pupils are not included. The National figures are DCSF published figures. They are mean averages of the number of exclusions in all LAs, divided by the sum of the pupils in all LAs.
p.131
Data Definition:
[Source: DCSF Pupil Level Annual School Census (permanent exclusions). Statistical Neighbours comparisons calculated by Ofsted.]
p.131
Data Definition:
Health warning : There should be no permanent exclusions of pupils in special schools because the statement review process should be used to identify placements which are no longer appropriate. The LA should be able to provide details of these exclusions if there are concerns. Please use with caution - %s are based on low numbers of students. These figures are based on the local authority in which the pupil studies. This may not be the same authority in which they live, and who maintains their statement of Special Educational Needs.
p.131
% of permanent exclusions
0.00% 0.05% 0.10% 0.15% 0.20% 0.25% 0.30% 0.35% 0.40% 0.45% 0.50%
p.131
Lancashire
Year Area SN Nat 2005 23.85% 15.61% 18.91% Traffic lights have 2006 n/a n/a n/a not been applied 2007 22.07% 13.86% 17.38% to this indicator
p.132
Lancashire
.. = Data not available # = Exclusion rate based on less than 3 pupils
p.132
Lancashire
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3099DE] 3099DE: Percentage of fixed period exclusions of one day or more in relation to the number of pupils in special schools
p.132
Data Definition:
A fixed period exclusion refers to a pupil who is excluded from a school but remains on the register of that school because they are expected to return when the exclusion period is completed. Where a student receives more than one fixed period exclusion during the year, each exclusion will be counted separately. Fixed term exclusions of less than a day are counted as one full day. This indicator shows the number of fixed period exclusions during the academic year expressed as a percentage of the number (headcount) of pupils in maintained special schools in the Local Authority. Please note that non- maintained special schools are excluded. Data will be missing if the local authority does not have any schools of this type. Exclusion rates based on less than 3 pupils are not shown (indicated by #). The National figures are DCSF published figures. They are mean averages of the number of exclusions
p.132
Data Definition:
in all LAs, divided by the sum of the pupils in all LAs. However the SN figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of the %s for all of the local authorities' statistical neighbours.
p.132
Data Definition:
[Source: DCSF Termly Exclusions Survey (fixed-term exclusions). Statistical Neighbours comparisons calculated by Ofsted.]
p.132
Data Definition:
Health warning : Fixed term exclusions may have risen in order to avoid permanent exclusions but should be used sparingly by special schools. The LA should be able to provide details of these exclusions if there are concerns. Please use with caution - %s are based on low numbers of students. These figures are based on the local authority in which the pupil studies. This may not be the same authority in which they live, and who maintains their statement of SEN (where applicable). Due to changes in the data collection information on fixed period exclusions the data for this is not available for maintained special schools for 2006.
p.132
% of fixed exclusions
0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00%
p.132
Wales
Over time (a) Against neighbour (b) Against England & Wales(c)
p.134
Wales
2002 cohort after 12 months 923 318 34.5% 36.6% 38.4% - -2.2% -3.9% 2003 cohort after 12 months 1050 358 34.1% 37.5% 39.5% -0.4% -3.4% -5.4% 2004 cohort after 12 months 797 269 33.8% 36.2% 38.1% -0.3% -2.5% -4.4% 2005 cohort after 12 months 1113 398 35.8% 37.1% 37.4% 2.0% 0.9% -0.7%
p.134
Wales
(a) Variation over time: % change between data periods. (b) Variation against statistical neighbour: % difference between YOT and statistical neighbour (c) Variation against England & Wales: % difference between Youth Offending Team and national average
p.134
Wales
Source: Youth Offending Team case management systems & YJB MIS. If you have any queries concerning this data please contact Nick Read on 020 7271 3068 Ref: 2061YJ
p.134
Wales
Over time (a) Against neighbour (b) Against England & Wales(c)
p.134
England and
Wales Over time (a) Against neighbour (b) Against England & Wales(c) Data Definition: Between October and December each year, a cohort of offenders is identified and the disposal or pre-court decision recorded. These offenders are tracked for 2 years and any re-offending recorded. The re-offending rate is calculated by dividing the number of those who re-offend into the total number in the cohort. Full counting rules are posted on the YJB website.
p.134
KPI Performance Variation
2002 cohort after 12 months 2003 cohort after 12 months 2004 cohort after 12 months 2005 cohort after 12 months YOT Performance Statistical Neighbour England and Wales -6% -4% -2% 0% 2% 4%
p.134
KPI Performance Variation
2002 cohort after 12 months 2003 cohort after 12 months 2004 cohort after 12 months 2005 cohort after 12 months
p.134
KPI Performance Variation
Over time (a) Against neighbour (b) Against England & Wales(c)
p.134
Neighbour National
Apr-Jun 06 593 414 24,283 - 43.1% n/a Jul-Sep 06 484 355 21,845 -18.4% 36.4% n/a Oct-Dec 06 514 392 23,552 6.2% 31.0% n/a Jan-Mar 07 455 388 24,050 -11.5% 17.2% n/a Apr-Jun 07 635 441 24,932 39.6% 44.1% n/a Jul-Sep 07 555 383 22,168 -12.6% 44.9% n/a Oct-Dec 07 483 353 19,953 -13.0% 37.0% n/a Jan-Mar 08 497 351 19,441 2.9% 41.7% n/a
p.135
Neighbour National
(a) Variation over time: % change between data periods (b) Variation against statistical neighbour: % difference between YOT and statistical neighbour (c) Since this is an absolute measure, not a proportion of population, no average between the YOT England & Wales total is calculated
p.135
Variation
Source: Youth Offending Team case management systems & YJB MIS. If you have any queries concerning this data please contact Nick Read on 020 7271 3068 Ref: 2062YJ
p.135
KPI Performance
Data Definition: A First Time Entrant is a young person receiving his/her first substantive outcome, i.e. a Reprimand, Final Warning or Court Order. The target is to reduce year on year, the number of first time entrants to the youth justice system by identifying children and young people at risk of offending or involvement in anti-social behaviour through a YISP or other evidence based targeted means of intervention designed to reduce those risks and strengthen protective factors as demonstrated by using ONSET or other effective means of assessment and monitoring. Full counting rules are posted on the YJB website. (d) Prior to Jan 2008 there has been a re-submission of the FTE data that collected. This re-submission was part of a data validation exercise.
p.135
Variation
Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar 19,000 21,000 23,000 25,000 27,000 YOT Area Statistical Neighbour National
p.135
Variation
Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar YOT Performance Statistical Neighbour
p.135
Youth offending information Lancashire
Yot Area YJB Statistical Neighbour National
p.136
Youth offending information Lancashire
Over time (a) Against neighbour (b) Against England & Wales(c) Apr-Jun 06 79.9% 77.8% 68.6% - 2.0% 11.3% Jul-Sep 06 70.0% 74.7% 67.8% -9.9% -4.7% 2.2% Oct-Dec 06 75.0% 75.1% 69.5% 5.0% -0.1% 5.5% Jan-Mar 07 66.8% 69.9% 69.0% -8.2% -3.0% -2.2% Apr-Jun 07 67.7% 66.0% 68.7% 0.8% 1.7% -1.0% Jul-Sep 07 63.2% 68.0% 70.7% -4.5% -4.8% -7.5% Oct-Dec 07 68.8% 70.8% 72.9% 5.5% -2.1% -4.2% Jan-Mar 08 73.6% 70.8% 72.5% 4.8% 2.8% 1.1%
p.136
Youth offending information Lancashire
(a) Variation over time: % change between data periods (b) Variation against statistical neighbour: % difference between Yot and statistical neighbour (c) Variation against England & Wales: % difference between Youth Offending Team and national average
p.136
Youth offending information Lancashire
Source: Youth Offending Team case management systems & YJB MIS. If you have any queries concerning this data please contact Nick Read on 020 7271 3068 Ref: 3080YJ Data Definition (April 2006 onwards): The YJB has set YOTs a target to ensure that 90% of young offenders supervised by YOTs are in full time education, training or employment. Five offending populations are included for measurement. These are those offenders on final warnings, referral orders, reparation orders, community based penalties and custodial sentences. Full time ETE is defined as 25 hours per week for those of statutory school age and 16 hours per week for those over statutory school age. Full counting rules are posted on the YJB website. The YJB includes only young people who disposals closed during the reporting period. 3080YJ: The proportion of supervised juveniles in full time education, training and employment.
p.136
Youth offending information Lancashire
Apr-Jun 06 Jul-Sep 06 Oct-Dec 06 Jan-Mar 07 Apr-Jun 07 Jul-Sep 07 Oct-Dec 07 Jan-Mar 08 Over time (a) Against neighbour (b) Against England & Wales(c)
p.136
Youth offending information Lancashire
Apr-Jun 06 Jul-Sep 06 Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun 07 Jul-Sep 07 Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Yot Area YJB Statistical Neighbour National
p.136
% Reached Year-on-Year Change
2005 29.8% .. 25.0% 25.1% 04/05 n/a n/a n/a n/a 2006 33.1% .. 25.0% 27.6% 05/06 3.2% .. n/a 2.5% 2007 32.5% .. 25.0% 28.0% 06/07 -0.6% .. n/a 0.5%
p.138
No. of Young people reached Year-on-Year Change
Year Area Year Area 2005 33,139 04/05 n/a 2006 35,607 05/06 7.4% .. = data not available 2007 36,383 06/07 2.2% n/a = not applicable
p.138
No. of Young people reached Year-on-Year Change
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 4021OF] 4021OF: Contact - Percentage of young people aged 13 to 19 reached by publicly funded youth services
p.138
No. of Young people reached Year-on-Year Change
Year Year Nat Average Nat target Area Nat average
p.138
No. of Young people reached Year-on-Year Change
Health warning: Data is supplied by external parties and Ofsted are unable to validate its accuracy. The NYA's annual audit is a voluntary survey, and not all services choose, or are able, to submit data each year. The National figure is a median average based on submissions of 128 services for 2004-05, 138 for 2005-06 and 139 for 2006-07. Missing data means it is not possible to calculate a robust figure for statistical neighbours or show traffic lights. Data Definition: The current definition of a contact with a young person is that the face and name of the young person are known to the Youth Worker. It is an 'informed' contact where the Youth Worker is consciously building a relationship with the young person. The young person may attend events occasionally, or the young person may seek information or advise, or the young person may be involved in issue-based session/s with a group at a school (but attendance at school assemblies does not count). The percentage of young people reached divides the young people
p.138
No. of Young people reached Year-on-Year Change
reached aged 13-19 by the total 13-19 population. The benchmark of 25% of the target population contacted can include figures from (contacts only): Local authority provided services and commissioned services; Youth provision secured through grants to voluntary and community organisations and partnerships . The calculation does not take account of other young people in the 11-25 age group who may have used the service during the period. The Year-on-Year change calculations simply deduct one % from another. Nat target SN SN Area Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.138
No. of Young people reached Year-on-Year Change
[Source: Office of National Statistics (ONS) Mid Year Population Estimates of 2004, 2005 and 2006. National Youth Agency (NYA) Annual Audits of financial years 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07. Calculations performed by Ofsted.]
p.138
funded Youth Services
0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0%
p.138
Staffing ratio Year-on-Year Change
Year Area SN Nat Year Area SN Nat 2005 1: 480 .. 1: 651 04/05 n/a .. n/a 2006 1: 399 .. 1: 587 05/06 -16.8% .. -8.0% 2007 1: 437 .. 1: 611 06/07 9.5% .. -8.0%
p.139
No. of FTE Youth Workers Year-on-Year Change
Year Area Year Area 2005 231 04/05 n/a 2006 270 05/06 16.5% 2007 256 06/07 -5.1%
p.139
No. of FTE Youth Workers Year-on-Year Change
.. = data not available n/a = not applicable
p.139
No. of FTE Youth Workers Year-on-Year Change
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 4022OF] 4022OF: Ratio of full-time equivalent youth workers to young people aged 13 to 19
p.139
Health warning:
Data is supplied by external parties and Ofsted are unable to validate its accuracy. The NYA's annual audit is a voluntary survey, and not all services choose, or are able, to submit data. The National figure is a median average based on submissions of 137 services for 2004- 05, 144 for 2005-06 and 140 for 2006-07. Missing data means it is not possible to calculate a robust figure for Ofsted's Statistical Neighbours or show traffic lights. The Youth Worker to young people ratio is an indication of the local authority's investment in the youth service. It is background information to help inspectors form a view of the service. However, it is not in itself an indication of the quality of the service provided, or its effect on young people. Caution should be employed when interpreting this indicator. The 2006 National figure has changed since the previous APA.
p.139
Data Definition:
Data is for 13-19 year olds only, and does not include other young people in the 11-25 age group, although they may choose to use the service. Youth Workers excludes volunteers. The full-time equivalent calculation comprises professional youth workers, youth workers with other qualifications, and youth support workers. FTE is considered to be the equivalent of 1924 hours a year (52 weeks) based on a 37- hour week. [ Source: Office of National Statistics (ONS) Mid Year Population Estimates of 2004, 2005 and 2006. National Youth Agency (NYA) Annual Audits of financial years 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07. Calculations performed by Ofsted.]
p.139
Lancashire
Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.139
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08
LA 4.0 4.0 1.5 2.0 2.4 2.5 1.7 . = Data not applicable SN 2.5 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.4 2.3 .. = Data not available Eng 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.5 2.3 2.3 2.3 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.141
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz zzzz zzz zz z 2001-08 · 0<1 1<3 · · · . 3+ ·
p.141
divided by
4015SC - PAF CF/C18: Percentage of children aged 10 or over who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months, who were given a final warning/reprimand or convicted during the year for an offence committed while they were looked after, expressed as a ratio of the percentage of all children aged 10 or over given a final warning/reprimand or convicted for an offence in the police force area
p.141
divided by
[Source - OC2, Question 7b] The number of children looked after at 30 September aged 10 or over, who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months and who had, during these 12 months, been given a final warning/reprimand for or convicted of an offence that had been committed while they were looked after. This is a ratio consisting of:
p.141
Denominator
[Source - OC2, Question 7a] The total number of children looked after at 30 September aged 10 or over, who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months.
p.141
Denominator
The total number of children (aged 10-17) living in the local police force area who had been given a final warning/reprimand or convicted for an offence during the previous calendar year. [Source - the Home Office] N.B. Data for 2006-07 has been updated with 2006 Home Office data. Data for 2007-08 uses 2006 data.
p.141
after children
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 Unbanded
p.141
after children
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.141
after children
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 4015SC]
p.141
Lancashire
4015SC - PAF CF/C18: Percentage of children aged 10 or over who had been looked after continuously for at least 12 months, who were given a final warning/reprimand or convicted during the year for an offence committed while they were looked after, expressed as a ratio of the percentage of all children aged 10 or over given a final warning/reprimand or convicted for an offence in the police force area
p.142
Lancashire
5022SC PAF CF/A4 Employment, education and training for care leavers [joint working] (BVPI 161) - see p.167
p.142
Related measures
2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67 3071SC The % of children looked after who were pupils in year 11 who were eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations who sat at least one GCSE or equivalent exam - see p.118 3072SC PAF CF/A2: Educational qualifications of children looked after [joint working] (BVPI 50) - see p.120 3073SC The % of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with 5 or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or GNVQ equivalent - see p.122
p.142
Related measures
4016SC PAF CF/C63: Participation of looked after children in reviews - see p.143 3074SC PAF CF/C24: Children looked after absent from school [joint working] - see p.124 In 2006-07 the percentage of looked after children that received a final warning/reprimand or conviction (the numerator) was 9.6%. This is still above the previous PSA target level of 7.2% that was to be achieved by 2004. Although the looked after offending rate has been falling in the past few years, the rate of offending in the 10 to 17 year old population as a whole has fallen more sharply. Consideration, therefore, should be given to the trend of the looked after offending rate within the council as this is, by itself, good evidence of good (or, indeed, poor) performance. There is a relationship between offending and educational attendance & attainment (3071SC, 3073SC, 3072SC CF/A2 & 3074SC CF/C24) and a young persons situation as a care leaver (5022SC CF/A4), as well as a potential one with the conduct of reviews (4016SC
p.142
Related measures
CF/C63 & 2064SC PAF CF/C68). The nature of the complex ratio that forms this indicator means that making a clear link is not straightforward, hence the need to consider the looked after component on its own. Nearly one in three councils had relatively small numbers of looked after children, that is fewer than 10, that fell into the required category for inclusion in 4015SC PAF CF/C18 in 2006-07. Small changes in numbers can have large consequences to the end result and the measure may, therefore, be subject to large swings from year to year. It is important to look separately at the numerator and denominator for this indicator. The trend data is also key, because a council may be successfully reducing its looked after numerator ratio while the denominator ratio for the police force area is reducing at a faster rate. A figure of one shows that children looked after are given final warnings/reprimands or are convicted at the same rate as all children in the
p.142
Related measures
area; less than one would show children looked after are given final warnings/reprimands or convicted less than all children. Such low values would be unlikely and may be due to poor data quality. Consideration should always be given to the proportion of the relevant young people who are placed outside of authority and the extent to which data is captured effectively on these young people. Offending is both a factor in the past history of a significant number of children who become looked after and is a measure of the quality of care and support children receive once in care. Caution should be exercised in the interpretation of this indicator. It is a complex ratio rather than a number of young people in the area as it compares final warnings/ reprimands or convictions for children looked after by each council with the rate for all children in the police force area, which may cover several adjoining councils. Those councils may either be advantaged or disadvantaged by the denominator.
p.142
Guidance/interpretation
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 4015SC]
p.142
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 74 81 89 . = Data not applicable SN 77 87 91 .. = Data not available Eng 79 87 91 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.143
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz 2005-06 0<65 65<75 75<85 85<95 95<=100 2006-08 0<70 70<80 80<90 90<95 95<=100
p.143
Looked after children and care leavers data
4016SC - PAF CF/C63: Number of children and young people who communicated their views specifically for each of their statutory reviews as a percentage of the number of children and young people who had been looked after at 31 March for more than four weeks
p.143
Looked after children and care leavers data
Of the children in the denominator, the number of children who communicated their views for each of their statutory reviews during the year ending 31 March using a range of mechanisms including personal participation, written or electronic communication or independent representation (method of participation codes PN1, PN2, PN3, PN5 and PN6).
p.143
Data definition
[Source - SSDA903] The number of children who were looked after at 31 March who had been reviewed during the year to 31 March 2008. Excludes those who started to be looked after (reason for new episode of S) on or after 4 March. It excludes children looked after under a series of short term breaks (legal status codes V3 and V4). Children under the age of four at the time of a review (method of participation code PN 0) should be excluded.
p.143
Data definition
* Any reviews before their fourth birthday and coded as PN0 should be disregarded. * The participation code[s] for the review[s] following their fourth birthday should determine their inclusion in the numerator. * The child should be counted in the denominator. For children who reach four years of age during the year and who are due to have one or more reviews between their fourth birthday and the end of the year: There was a change to CF/C63, in 2005-06, from the coverage of participation at the most recent review of each relevant looked after child to the coverage of participation in all reviews. The denominator should consist of the number of looked after children who qualify and who were looked after at March 31 [i.e. not the number of reviews of those children in the preceding year]. Therefore, if a child who is looked after at 31 March 2007 has had three reviews in 2006-07 which meet the criteria for inclusion, the child is counted in the denominator, and the numerator should report only
p.143
Data definition
those children from the denominator all of whose reviews in the year involved their participation. Children who reach four years of age during the year.
p.143
%
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.143
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 4016SC]
p.143
Looked after children and care leavers data
4016SC - PAF CF/C63: Number of children and young people who communicated their views specifically for each of their statutory reviews as a percentage of the number of children and young people who had been looked after at 31 March for more than four weeks
p.144
Looked after children and care leavers data
The extent to which a child participates in their reviews may have an impact on the outcomes for the child in key areas, as well as the indicators can cover them, such as health (1037SC CF/C19), offending (4015SC PAF CF/C18), educational attendance & attainment (3071SC, 3073SC, 3072SC CF/A2 & 3074SC CF/C24) and a young persons later situation as a care leaver (5022SC CF/A4). There is a statutory obligation to review the cases of looked after children, first within 28 days of their becoming looked after, then within a further three months, and subsequently at intervals of no more than six months until they cease to be looked after. Councils need to ensure that the views expressed by children and young people are given due consideration and action taken where appropriate to achieve agreed outcomes for the young person. Where children have not participated, councils also need to ensure that they have a good understanding of the reasons for this and plans
p.144
Looked after children and care leavers data
in place to minimise non-participation. Consideration should be given to: the age of these children, in relation to the appropriate engagement of the very youngest children; children placed out-of-authority, in relation to the facilitation of effective participation of those distant from the council area; the extent to which children had a severe disability; and the extent to which the children did not want to participate in their review. All of these factors can have a bearing on the indicator value. The indicator measures participation in the review process as a proxy for the measurement of the effectiveness of the monitoring of the care of looked after children. The active participation of looked after children in planning their care should contribute to improved outcomes. To ensure that the views of looked after children and young people are listened to, good practice dictates that they should either attend and participate in the
p.144
Looked after children and care leavers data
review meeting, or should at least be able to express their views by some other appropriate method. The indicator measures the percentage of looked after children who did so at all their statutory reviews. The definition of the indicator allows for a wide range of ways in which this might happen. Only if the child or young person does not attend or express their views by any other means are they considered not to have participated in the review.
p.144
Guidance/interpretation
2060SC % of looked after children with a named social worker who is qualified as a social worker - see p.79 2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69 1037SC PAF CF/C19: Health of looked after children - see p.36
p.144
Related measures
2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67
p.144
Related measures
3074SC PAF CF/C24: Children looked after absent from school [joint working] - see p.124 3073SC The % of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with 5 or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or GNVQ equivalent - see p.122 3072SC PAF CF/A2: Educational qualifications of children looked after [joint working] (BVPI 50) - see p.120 3071SC The % of children looked after who were pupils in year 11 who were eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations who sat at least one GCSE or equivalent exam - see p.118
p.144
Related measures
4015SC PAF CF/C18: Final warnings/reprimands and convictions of children looked after - see p.141 5022SC PAF CF/A4 Employment, education and training for care leavers [joint working] (BVPI 161) - see p.167 6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184
p.144
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 4016SC]
p.144
Lancashire
Percentage of young people by LA achieving level 2 by age 19 Traffic lights have not been applied Year Area SN Nat to this indicator 2005 67.2% 67.3% 65.7% 2006 70.0% 68.5% 67.7% 2007 71.5% 71.0% 69.8%
p.146
Percentage of young people by LA achieving level 3 by age 19
Year Area SN Nat 2005 42.6% 42.8% 43.1% 2006 43.9% 43.2% 44.3% 2007 45.7% 44.8% 45.4%
p.146
Health Warning:
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 5038LS] The DCSF Statistical First Release explains the differences in more detail: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000774/index.shtml. 5038LS: Percentage of young people by local authority/district achieving level 2 and level 3 by age 19
p.146
Data Definition:
This indicator shows the percentage of young people by LA achieving level 2 & 3. This includes those that were of 19 years of age at the end of the academic year which begins from September to the end of August of each year.
p.146
Data Definition:
This indicator is not traffic lighted as Local authority figures are measured in a different way to national/regional/LLSC level figures. Please use with caution when comparing LA and national %s. Some of the LSC's data indicates which local Learning & Skills Council the young person studies in, but not which local authority. Around 3% (20,000 young people) are not accounted for. Statistical neighbour figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors, and are median averages of the %s for all of the LA's statistical neighbours. The data above is not final, as providers are allowed to resubmit data in January and February whilst the data matching is done in December – and DCSF’s contractors have re-matched data using the latest available data. They continue to refine their data matching techniques and in some cases this leads to small changes to earlier years as well. Percentage of young people by LA achieving level 2 by
p.146
Data Definition:
Area 'SN' 'NAT' Percentage of young people by LA achieving level 3 by age 19
p.146
Post 16 education and training data
A Level Area SN Nat Area SN Nat 2003 327.54 264.72 265.66 V 2004 330.93 270.91 272.16 V 03/04 3.39 6.19 6.50 2005 334.41 277.18 277.21 V 04/05 3.48 6.27 5.05 2006 880.99 742.57 740.10 V 05/06 n/a n/a n/a 2007 910.42 744.54 747.99 V 06/07 29.43 1.97 7.89
p.147
Post 16 education and training data
A Level Area SN Nat Area SN Nat 2003 80.78 74.95 76.79 V 2004 81.10 75.06 77.52 V 03/04 0.32 0.11 0.73 2005 80.40 76.46 78.36 V 04/05 -0.70 1.40 0.84 2006 203.61 198.22 202.62 V 05/06 n/a n/a n/a 2007 209.96 197.85 203.05 V 06/07 6.35 -0.37 0.43
p.147
Post 16 education and training data
.. = data not available V = Validated data n/a = not applicable U = Unvalidated data
p.147
Post 16 education and training data
CE/VCE A/AS Average point score per GCE/VCE A/AS entry Subject Area SN Nat Subject Area SN Nat aps/studen 2003 327.54 264.72 265.66 aps/entry 2003 80.78 74.95 76.79 2004 330.93 270.91 272.16 2004 81.10 75.06 77.52 2005 334.41 277.18 277.21 2005 80.40 76.46 78.36 2006 880.99 742.57 740.1 2006 203.61 198.22 202.62 2007 910.42 744.54 747.99 2007 209.96 197.85 203.05
p.147
Post 16 education and training data
RAI, Ofsted Ref: 5003OF 5004OF Above In Line Year-on-Year Change
p.147
Post 16 education and training data
Below Well Below Health warning: These figures include mainstream schools only (i.e. no special schools or independent schools are included). Therefore figures may be different from DCSF published figures . Discontinuous data. Before 2006 the average point scores were based on the UCAS tariff. 2006 figures are based on the QCA tariff, a new scoring system that extends to cover all Level 3 qualifications. Details of the QCA scoring system can be found on DCSF website http://www.dfes.gov.uk/performancetables/16to18_06/d3.shtml. Therefore, extra care should be taken when comparing 2006 figure with those from previous years as they do not include the wider range of qualifications and are based on a different point scoring system. Schools with sixth forms: average point scores of students entered for GCE/VCE A/AS and average point scores per GCE/VCE A/AS entry Ref. 5003OF, Ref. 5004OF
p.147
Post 16 education and training data
Average point score of 16-18 year old students entered for GCE/VCE A/AS
p.147
Post 16 education and training data
Data Definition: Data only includes students in mainstream maintained schools. For data on level 3 qualifications in colleges please refer to indicator 5008OF. The average point score per student entered is calculated as the sum of the points awarded to each 16-18 year old student, divided by the number of 16-18 year old students studying in the schools in the area. The average point score per examination entry is calculated as the sum of the points awarded to each 16-18 year old student, divided by the total number of entries. [Source: DCSF Achievement + Attainment Tables] Year-on-Year Change
p.147
Post 16 education and training data
Area Average point score per GCE/VCE A/AS
p.147
Post 16 education and training data
Well Above GCE/VCE Average Point Score per entry
p.147
Post 16 education and training data
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 GCE/VCE Average Point Score per student entered
p.147
Post 16 education and training data
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please Quote Ref: 5003OF 5004OF ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Post 16 education and training data
p.147
Lancashire
2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 GFE/Tertiary Colleges 4 Notional Level 3 15,809 15,312 14,846 78 77 81 64 68 70 Notional Level 2 5,781 6,249 6,774 61 67 71 56 61 66 Notional Level 1 5,073 5,248 5,657 60 65 70 61 65 69 Sixth Form Colleges 4 Notional Level 3 4,387 5,092 5,165 80 86 90 80 82 83 Notional Level 2 1,195 1,287 1,252 82 86 89 74 73 78 Notional Level 1 163 98 41 45 33 46 67 64 71 Specialist Colleges Notional Level 3 492 729 396 49 52 62 66 69 74 Notional Level 2 543 774 506 59 64 67 62 68 73 Notional Level 1 786 1,009 538 55 63 71 62 65 78
p.148
Lancashire
continued on following page Indicator: Further Education institutions/sixth form colleges/specialist colleges: success data by level
p.148
Lancashire
Success rate by notional level for students aged 16-18 at the start of courses with the expected end years 2003/04, 2004/05, and 2005/06
p.148
Lancashire
Institution and Notional level Area Starts excluding transfers Area Rate (%) National Rate 3 (%) ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Post 16 education and training data
p.148
Lancashire
Indicator: Further Education institutions/sixth form colleges/specialist colleges: success data by level
p.149
Lancashire
Institution and Qualification Type 1, 2 GFE/Tertiary Colleges 4 A Level Subjects 3,953 94 87 AS level Subjects 6,982 81 67 GNVQ Level 3 245 82 66 NVQ Level 3 252 73 71 Other Long Level 3 3,414 68 65 GCSE Subjects (Grades A*- G) 1,891 67 68 GNVQ Level 2 151 77 69 NVQ Level 2 1,089 65 65 Other Long Level 2 3,643 74 66 GNVQ Level 1 66 58 72 NVQ Level 1 584 77 72 Other Long Level 1 5,007 70 69 Sixth Form Colleges 4 A Level Subjects 1,839 97 93 AS level Subjects 2,998 87 79 GNVQ Level 3 142 87 74 NVQ Level 3 n/a n/a n/a Other Long Level 3 186 77 75 GCSE Subjects (Grades A*- G) 1,153 90 82 GNVQ Level 2 45 89 77 NVQ Level 2 n/a n/a 70 Other Long Level 2 54 78 70 GNVQ Level 1 n/a n/a 79 NVQ Level 1 n/a n/a n/a Other Long Level 1 41 46 71 Specialist Colleges A Level Subjects n/a n/a n/a AS level Subjects n/a n/a 76 GNVQ Level 3 16 31 n/a NVQ Level 3 3 100 n/a Other Long Level 3 519 63 73 GCSE Subjects (Grades A*- G) n/a n/a n/a GNVQ Level 2 n/a n/a n/a
p.149
Lancashire
NVQ Level 2 51 35 n/a Other Long Level 2 958 68 75 GNVQ Level 1 n/a n/a n/a NVQ Level 1 34 59 72 Other Long Level 1 752 71 78 Source: Learning and Skills Council (LSC) - calculations performed by Ofsted
p.149
Lancashire
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please quote ref 5007OF Health Warning 1. The data is for students aged 16-18, therefore excluding students aged 19+ 2. The data excludes the Key Skills qualification Area Starts excluding transfers Success rate by qualification type for students aged 16-18 at the start of courses with the expected end year 2005/06
p.149
Lancashire
Data Definition: 1. Grades A-E for GCE A and AS Levels, Grades A*-G for GCSEs, pass, merit and distinction for GNVQs and achieved for NVQs, are classified as passes. 2. Qualifications are grouped according to their NVQ level or notional equivalent according to the categorisation of each qualification on the Learning and Skills Council’s qualification database. Data are presented for long (>=24 weeks) qualifications at notional levels 1 (includes level E), 2 and 3. Key skills qualifications and qualifications with unknown, unspecified, mixed or invalid notional levels are excluded. 3. Where “n/a” appears, there were less than 500 starts nationally or there were too few colleges to produce a valid national rate. 4. Separate benchmarking data have been used for areas with very high widening participation factors. 5. n/a indicates that data for the relevant section is not applicable as there is no data for the relevant college type.
p.149
Lancashire
6.The student success rate is based on the local authority of where the young person studies, and not on the local authority of where the young person lives. 7. Success rate is defined as the number of qualifications learners have fully achieved divided by the number of qualifications started, excluding transfers out. For programmes of study of two years or more, success is calculated across the whole programme, that is, from the start to the end of the qualification.
p.149
Lancashire
NVQ Success Rate for all work-based learners living in the area.
p.150
Overall success rate Year-on-year change
Year Area National Year Area Nat 2004 58.1% 46.0% 2005 57.9% 50.4% 04/05 -0.2% +4.5% 2006 64.6% 56.7% 05/06 +6.7% +6.3% 2007 67.3% 64.8%
p.150
Timely success rate Year-on-year change
Year Area National Year Area Nat 2004 35.9% 28.2% 2005 34.4% 31.3% 04/05 -1.6% +3.1% 2006 39.9% 36.7% 05/06 +5.6% +5.4% 2007 48.1% 45.7%
p.150
Success rate by learning programme (2007) Success rate by learner characteristics (2007)
Programme Overall National Timely National Characteristic Overall National Timely National All-WBL NVQ 67.3% 64.8% 48.1% 45.7% Male 69.1% 65.1% 49.1% 44.2% AA Framework 56.3% 57.7% 45.9% 37.4% Female 63.6% 64.5% 46.1% 47.4% AA NVQ 8.8% 6.5% 1.9% 5.4% White 67.4% 59.9% 48.0% 41.6% A Framework 65.8% 61.3% 42.7% 43.9% Non-white 65.4% 65.4% 50.3% 46.2% A NVQ 2.8% 3.8% 2.3% 3.1% LDD 58.5% 65.1% 41.3% 46.0% NVQ only 62.9% 64.9% 50.8% 47.5% Non-LDD 68.1% 59.7% 48.7% 41.1%
p.150
ethnicity and disability)
Traffic Lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.150
ethnicity and disability)
In contrast to other school and college indicators presented in this toolkit, WBL analysis is based on the local authority where the young person lives, not the local authority where they study. The overall success rate measures the percentage of work-based learners who successfully completed their apprenticeship framework or the main NVQ element of their programme at any time. Learners are counted in the later of their planned end year and their actual end year. The timely success rate measures the percentage of work-based learners who successfully completed their framework or NVQ by their planned end date, or within one month of it. Learners are counted in their planned end year. For more details please see the LSC's WBL Success Rate Methodology 2005/06.
p.150
ethnicity and disability)
The figures in all the success rate calculations are limited to learners aged under 19 as at 1st August in the year which they started their learning.
p.150
ethnicity and disability)
These figures use a different methodology from those which has historically been used by the LSC and the inspectorates. The change should not have a significant effect on performance at local authority level. The matching process used to generate the dataset for calculating this indicator means that not every learner could be allocated to a local authority which could have an impact on the figures. [Source: Learning & Skills Council Individual Learner Record. Data supplied to Ofsted by the Adult Learning Inspectorate.]
p.150
2007 data update:
- As above, data are based on learners aged under 19 at 1st August 2006. - - -
p.151
2007 data update:
- - Source: LSC Work-based Learning (WBL) Qualification Success Rate (QSR) master file period 15 2006/07. In the ethnic group figures, the "white" category includes those classified as White-Irish and White-Other, as well as White-British. The "non-white" category includes all other ethnic groups, including those whose ethnic group was unknown or not stated.
p.151
2007 data update:
There are considerable variations in NVQ success rates across different sectors within work-based learning. There are also significant differences in the proportions of learners with different characteristics within sectors. Variations in success rates between groups of learners with different characteristics may, therefore, relate in part to the different sectors they are learning in. For apprenticeship programmes, the NVQ success rate figures show the success rate for the NVQ element of the framework. This includes the breakdown of success rates by learner characteristics.
p.151
2007 data update:
The methodology used here is broadly equivalent to that used in FE colleges but takes account of the different nature of work-based learning programmes.
p.151
2007 data update:
The disability/learning need figures do not distinguish between learners with a disability, those with a learning need and those with both. Typically, the number with learning needs is higher than those with a disability. In most cases, the learning needs identified are either moderate learning difficulties or dyslexia. Many learners living in the area may be with learning providers based outside the local authority area. Figures for disability/learning need are based on learners' self-declaration. A proportion, usually under 10%, of learners do not respond to the relevant questions. They are included in the non-disabled/learning need group.
p.151
2007 data update:
Data are not directly comparable to previous years as Ofsted methodology differs from that of the former ALI's.
p.151
2007 data update:
Data are based on period 15 2006/07 (31st October 2007) in line with the work-based learning Provider Performance Reports 2006/07. LA are based on postcode using the Office of National Statistics (ONS) National Statistics Postcode Directory. Where it is not possible to identify a learners local authority (LA), the LA of the delivery provider has been assigned, followed by the LA of the providers contract address. This provides 98% coverage of learners allocated to LA. Overall and timely success rate and success rate by learner characteristic are based on those who have achieved a framework and NVQ.
p.151
2007 data update:
If you have any queries concerning this data please contact jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk & quote REF: 5039AL
p.151
Lancashire
Year-on-year Change Year Area National Year Area Nat 2004 19.8% 15.5% 2005 18.3% 15.2% 04/05 -1.5% -0.3% 2006 14.3% 14.5% 05/06 -4.0% -0.6% 2007 14.1% 15.2%
p.152
Lancashire
Proportion of WBLs by Gender Year-on-year Change Year Year Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 2004 64.5% 35.5% 61.6% 38.4% 2005 66.8% 33.2% 62.3% 37.7% 04/05 +2.4% -2.4% +0.7% -0.7% 2006 66.4% 33.6% 62.2% 37.8% 05/06 -0.4% +0.4% -0.1% +0.1% 2007 66.2% 33.8% 61.8% 38.2%
p.152
Lancashire
Proportion of WBLs by Ethnicity Year-on-year Change Year Year White Non-White White Non-White White Non-White White Non-White 2004 97.3% 2.7% 93.8% 6.2% 2005 97.0% 3.0% 94.0% 6.0% 04/05 -0.2% +0.2% +0.2% -0.2% 2006 96.5% 3.5% 93.7% 6.3% 05/06 -0.6% +0.6% -0.4% +0.4% 2007 96.3% 3.7% 93.2% 6.8%
p.152
Lancashire
2007 data update: - As above, data are based on learners aged under 19 at 1st August 2006. - -
p.152
Lancashire
- - Source: LSC Work-based Learning (WBL) Individualised Learner Record (ILR) period 3 2007/08.
p.152
Lancashire
If you have any queries concerning this data please contact jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk & quote REF: 3079AL Figures for disability/learning need are based on learners' self-declaration and so they may be an underestimate. A proportion, usually under 10%, of learners do not respond to the relevant questions. They are excluded from the calculation. [Source: Learning & Skills Council Individual Learner Record. Data supplied to Ofsted by the Adult Learning Inspectorate.]
p.152
Lancashire
In the ethnic group figures, the "white" category includes those classified as White-Irish and White-Other, as well as White-British. The "non-white" category includes all other ethnic groups, including those whose ethnic group was unknown or not stated. The disability/learning need figures do not distinguish between learners with a disability, those with a learning need and those with both. Typically, the number with learning needs is higher than those with a disability. In most cases, the learning needs identified are either moderate learning difficulties or dyslexia.
p.152
Lancashire
The learners do not necessarily live within the local authority where the learning provider is based. The registered address of the learning provider may be their head quarters rather than the site which the learner attended. National
p.152
Lancashire
In contrast to other school and college indicators presented in this toolkit, WBL analysis is based on the local authority where the young person lives, not the local authority where they study. The number of work-based learners living in the area who were aged under 19 at 1st August in the relevant year with the relevant gender, ethnic group or disability/learning need status, as a percentage of all work-based learners living in the area within the same age group. Data Definition : Area National
p.152
Lancashire
Area National Area Traffic Lights have not been applied to this indicator Proportion of WBLs with Learning Difficulties and/or Disabilities Personal characteristics of Work-based learners living in the area aged under 19 (gender, ethnicity and disability)
p.152
Lancashire
Data are not directly comparable to previous years as Ofsted methodology differs from that of the former ALI's.
p.152
Lancashire
Data are based on period 3 2007/08 (31st October 2007) in line with the work-based learning Provider Performance Reports 2006/07. Where it is not possible to identify a learners local authority (LA), the LA of the delivery provider has been assigned, followed by the LA of the providers contract address. This provides 99% coverage of learners allocated to LA. LA are based on postcode using the Office of National Statistics (ONS) National Statistics Postcode Directory. Proportion of WBLs with Learning Difficulties and/or Disabilities
p.152
Lancashire
Area National Proportion of WBLs by Gender
p.152
Lancashire
2004 2005 2006 Proportion of WBLs by Ethnicity
p.152
Lancashire
White Non-White White Non-White Area National
p.152
Year-on-Year Change
Year Area SN Nat Year Area % SN % Nat % Traffic lights have not 2004 1535 659 320 2003/04 .. .. .. been applied to this 2005 1938 779 440 2004/05 26.3% 18.1% 37.6% indicator 2006 2946 1152 650 2005/06 52.0% 47.9% 47.7%
p.153
Year-on-Year Change
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 5048DE] 5048DE: Increase in the number of young people completing an apprenticeship
p.153
Year-on-Year Change
Data Definition: This indicator includes all learners up to the age of 24 (for consistency with national performance indicators). It shows the increase in the number of young people completing an apprenticeship.
p.153
Year-on-Year Change
[Source: Learning & Skills Council - http://www.lsc.gov.uk/providers/Data/statistics/learner/Apprenticeship_completions.htm
p.153
Year-on-Year Change
Health warning : The Local Authority is based on the home postcode of the learner, and only includes those learners who could be matched to an English local authority - 98-99% of the overall total. Figures are not shown where there are less than 10 completions in a local authority. SN figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of the %s for all of the LA's statistical neighbours.
p.153
apprenticeship
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%
p.153
Lancashire
Childminder Full Day Care Sessional Day Care Out of School Day Care Creche Day Care TOTAL
p.155
Lancashire
4 ‘Steady State’ refers to changes in the number of places offered by existing providers.
p.155
Lancashire
5 Net Change: numbers may not add up due to rounding. 1 Joiners are childcare providers who have been newly registered; existing providers who have moved to a local authority from another local authority; and existing day care providers who have started to offer a new type of childcare provision.
p.155
Lancashire
2 Leavers are childcare providers who have been deregistered due to cancellations or voluntary resignations; existing providers who have moved from a local authority to another; and existing multiple day care providers who have ceased to offer a particular type of childcare provision between 01 April 2005 and 31 March 2008.
p.155
Lancashire
3 Registered Places are the maximum number of children that providers are registered to care for, not the number of places occupied, nor the number of children who may benefit from receiving places through providers offering sessions at different times of the day. The number of registered places is likely to be higher than the actual number of registered places as not all providers will immediately inform Ofsted that they have ceased their provision. 6.3% -2.7% Percentage Change: SN -6.2% 17.5% -16.8%
p.155
Lancashire
Percentage Change: SN -3.9% 17.6% -15.0%
p.155
Lancashire
8.2% 10.5% Percentage Change: Area -5.6% 24.8% -20.9% Net Change 5 -324 3675 -929 820 145 3387 Steady State 4 126 Leavers 3170 5294 2214
p.155
Lancashire
3849 119 14646 Joiners 2720 8460 1265 Number of Registered Places 3 5451 18519 3520 10.5% 11.3% -3.6%
p.155
Lancashire
9210 413 37113 Percentage Change: NAT -7.9% 18.1% -17.1% Percentage Change: Area -10.2% 20.7% -20.7% 20 10 -73
p.155
Lancashire
7.0% 71.4% -3.5% Net Change -128 65 -40 152 17 1011
p.155
Lancashire
Leavers 2 724 125 96 132 7 1084 Joiners 1 596 190 56 Changes in childcare providers and places (since April 2005 benchmark)
p.155
Lancashire
Number of Childcare Settings 1127 379 153 304 24 1987
p.155
provider type
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please quote ref: 5040OF
p.155
Inspection findings
Changes in childcare providers and places (since April 2005 benchmark)
p.156
Early Years Definitions of Childcare Types
Crèches: Facilities that provide occasional care for children under eight and are provided on particular premises on more than five days a year. They need to be registered where they run for more than two hours a day, even when individual children attend for shorter periods. Some are in permanent premises and care for children while parents are engaged in particular activities, for example shopping or sport. Others are established on a temporary basis to care for children while their parents are involved in time-limited activities, for example a conference or exhibition.
p.156
Early Years Definitions of Childcare Types
Multiple Day Care Types: Some providers offer more than one type of day care, for example operating full day care and an out of school club. In this profile, these multiple day care types have been counted separately. In the other sections, they multiple day care types have been shown as single entities under their own category, to avoid double counting of inspections and actions issued. Childminder: A childminder is registered to look after one or more children under the age of eight to whom they are not related on domestic premises for reward and for a total of more than two hours in any day.
p.156
Early Years Definitions of Childcare Types
Full Day Care: Facilities that provide day care for children under eight for a continuous period of four hours or more in any day in premises which are not domestic premises. Examples are day nurseries and Children’s centres, and some family centres.
p.156
Early Years Definitions of Childcare Types
Sessional Day Care: Facilities where children under eight attend day care for no more than five sessions a week, each session being less than a continuous period of four hours in any day. Where two sessions are offered in any one day, there is a break between sessions with no children in the care of the provider. This is intended to cover provision which offers children part-time care and the opportunity to engage in activities with their peer group, e.g. playgroups.
p.156
Early Years Definitions of Childcare Types
Out of School Care: Facilities that provide day care for children under eight which operate during one or more of the following periods: before school; after school; and during the school holidays. The total care provided is for more than two hours in any day and for more than five days a year. A main purpose of the provision is to look after children in the absence of their parents. This form of care can include children from three years old and children over eight may use it. Examples are summer camps, holiday play schemes, breakfast clubs, after school clubs. Open Access Schemes are included. These may be permanent of short term schemes and generally cater for older children, however, children aged five to seven may attend. The main purpose of the provision is to provide supervised play opportunities for children in a safe environment in the absence of their parents.
p.156
Early Years Definitions of Childcare Types
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk Please quote ref: 5040OF
p.156
Lancashire
Number of colleges inspected in Lancashire = 4
p.157
1 2 3 4 Grade 2 Good
LA 4 0 2 2 0 4 Grade 3 Satisfactory Nat 294 104 137 48 5 Grade 4 Inadequate
p.157
responsive to local circumstances (Key Question 3b)
Due to the small number of colleges in general and with the inspection cycle not yet complete, care should be taken when drawing conclusions or making comparisons with the national figure. The current cycle incorporates risk assessment when scheduling inspections and as a result stronger colleges may not be inspected until towards the end of the cycle and therefore care must be taken when evaluating these figures. The number of judgements may be less than the number of inspections if inspectors did not have sufficient evidence to record an outcome. Some colleges may have closed since their inspection. Total No
p.157
responsive to local circumstances (Key Question 3b)
[Source: Ofsted Post 16 Education & Training Inspection (2005-07 Common Inspection Framework)] These judgements reflect the outcomes of the inspections undertaken between 4th October 2005 and 31st March 2008. A full description of how these judgements are made by inspectors can be found at http://intranet/NR/rdonlyres/1900C398-C1DC-4531-A08D- 2E29915CC416/0/collegeInspectionHandbook.doc. The figures represent the number of colleges inspected so far in the 4 year cycle that received an outstanding, good, satisfactory or inadequate judgement. Please note figures may be blank where there were no colleges in the LA, or none have been inspected during this period. Where a college has been inspected twice within the cycle, all inspections are shown. Grade
p.157
responsive to local circumstances (Key Question 3b)
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk. Please Quote Ref: 5029OF
p.157
Lancashire County
Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator.
p.159
Area % SN % Nat %
16-18 05-06 103,378 9,080 8.1% 7.3% 8.2% 06-07 98,512 8,260 7.7% 6.8% 7.7% 07-08 33,801 2,657 7.3% 5.8% 6.7%
p.159
Area % SN % Nat %
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk. Please quote ref 5041DE.
p.159
(NEET)
58% of young people who were previously NEET, but who have lost contact with the service, are NEET. [Source: Connexions Customer Information System - CCIS, supplied to Ofsted by DCSF]
p.159
(NEET)
8% of young people who are previously in employment education or training, but who have lost contact with the service, are NEET, and; Data Definition: Young people can only be counted in the NEET group once they have completed compulsory education. Data is taken from the Partnership's submissions of November to January for each year. The numerator is the number of young people not in education, employment or training (NEET), and the denominator is the number of young people who are NEET + number of young people who are EET. The figures for this indicator are average figures taken from November to January of each year. The data is for a single local authority and not the whole Partnership area.
p.159
(NEET)
Health warning: Young people undertaking personal development opportunities are counted as NEET for the purposes of this indicator. All NEET and EET figures are adjusted by the DCSF to allow for young people whose current activity is not known. This assumes that: - ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Employment and NEET data
p.159
(NEET)
Independent schools 2004 2.0% 6.0% Traffic lights have not been Sixth form college 2004 10.0% 8.0% applied to this indicator. Other FE 2004 31.0% 23.0% Total FT Education 2004 56.0% 60.0% Work Based Learning 2004 11.0% 9.0% Part-time education 2004 5.0% 5.0% Total Education and WBL 2004 72.0% 74.0%
p.160
(NEET)
Independent schools 2005 2.0% 6.0% Sixth form college 2005 10.0% 9.0% Other FE 2005 34.0% 25.0% Total FT Education 2005 60.0% 63.0% Work Based Learning 2005 11.0% 8.0% Part-time education 2005 6.0% 5.0% Total Education and WBL 2005 77.0% 76.0%
p.160
(NEET)
Independent schools 2006 3.0% 6.0% Sixth form college 2006 11.0% 9.0% Other FE 2006 36.0% 27.0% Total FT Education 2006 63.0% 65.0% Work Based Learning 2006 10.0% 8.0% Part-time education 2006 5.0% 5.0% Total Education and WBL 2006 78.0% 78.0%
p.160
(NEET)
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk. Please quote ref 5047DE. Health warning: The local participation estimates for end 2006 academic year is the latest published information available. Local estimates lag a year behind national estimates as the LSC's Individual Learner Record (ILR) data is not sufficiently complete at that stage to produce reliable local authority figures. The figures include only those young people in full time education and work based learning, and those in other forms of education and training (employer funded training, private training organisations, etc) are excluded. This indicator measures those that had their 17th birthday within the academic years highlighted above. Figures for the 14 individual Inner London LAs cannot be estimated reliably so data is not shown. Figures will not match Connexions data shown in this dataset.
p.160
(NEET)
5047DE: Connexions Partnership data: increase in participation rates of 17-year-olds in education and training
p.160
(NEET)
Data Definition: This indicator shows the % participating in each type of education and training. Training only covers Work Based Learning (training funded by the government). It does not include other forms of training that are privately or employer funded, as robust information is not available at LA level.
p.160
(NEET)
[Source: DCSF: Participation rates Statistical First Release]
p.160
Lancashire County
Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator.
p.161
Area % SN % Nat %
16-18 05-06 903 35,802 2.5% 6.2% 6.6% 06-07 1,605 33,244 4.8% 6.7% 6.9% 07-08 1,681 38,562 4.4% 5.5% 5.6%
p.161
Area % SN % Nat %
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk. Please quote ref 5042DE. Health warning: The period that the data measures is taken as the average between April and March for each year excluding July to September: these 3 months are excluded because a significant proportion of young people will be in transition between activities.
p.161
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
[Source: Connexions Customer Information System - CCIS, supplied to Ofsted by DCSF] Data Definition: The numerator is the number whose activity is not known, and the denominator is the total cohort recorded on Connexions Customer Information System (CCIS). Young people who have lost touch with services, or whose records are not up to date, are recorded as "activity not known". A low % will give assurance that tracking requirements are being followed. The data is for a single local authority and not the whole Partnership area. ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Employment and NEET data
p.161
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator.
p.162
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
Age Year Area No. EET Average NEET Unadjusted Area % SN % Nat %
p.162
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
16-18 05-06 5,724 2,638 217.0% 170.8% 153.7% 06-07 4,419 2,891 152.9% 123.0% 120.2% 07-08 5,562 2,749 202.3% 142.6% 150.4%
p.162
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk. Please quote ref 5044DE. Health warning: This indicator uses the unadjusted NEET figure. The way the data is counted changed in April 2006. This figure will be lower than in previous years as it no longer counts very short duration NEET. Destination is compared with previous month and only where different does an instance of joining/leaving NEET occur. This will exclude those who are in employment one month, leave that job and find another within the next reporting period. 5044DE: Connexions Partnership data: 16-18-year-olds leaving the NEET group to re-engage in employment, education or training
p.162
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
[Source: Connexions Customer Information System - CCIS, supplied to Ofsted by DCSF] Data Definition: Young people are classed as being in this age group once they have completed compulsory education. Data is a cumulative total of young people who left the NEET group in the financial years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 to re-engage in education, employment or training. The calculation divides the cumulative number of young people leaving the NEET group to become EET by the average number of 16-18 year old NEETs. A high % figure indicates a lot of movement into and out of the NEET group. Data is for a single local authority, and not the whole Partnership area. As young people could enter and leave the NEET group during the year, the percentage figure could be over 100%. ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Employment and NEET data
p.162
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
16-19 teenage mothers who are in education, employment or training (EET).
p.163
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
Year Area No. Recorded on CCIS Area % SN % Nat %
p.163
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
05-06 213 750 28.4% 26.0% 25.5% 06-07 225 892 25.2% 28.5% 30.3% 07-08 196 712 27.5% 27.2% 28.0%
p.163
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
16-19 NEET with Learning Disabilities & Difficulties
p.163
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
Year Area No. Adjusted EET Area No. Adjusted NEET Area % SN % Nat %
p.163
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
05-06 1,368 349 20.3% 15.4% 15.7% 06-07 1,632 400 19.7% 14.6% 15.1% 07-08 1,469 319 17.9% 12.7% 13.7%
p.163
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
Year Area No. Adjusted NEET Area No. Adjusted EET Area NEET % SN NEET% Nat NEET %
p.163
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
White 06-07 3,378 35,228 8.7% 8.0% 8.1% White and Black Caribbean 06-07 11 76 12.6% 9.6% 14.5% White and Black African 06-07 # 21 #VALUE! 7.5% 8.6% White and Asian 06-07 # 50 #VALUE! 4.5% 6.6% Other Mixed Background 06-07 # 55 #VALUE! 8.9% 10.0% Black Caribbean 06-07 # 80 #VALUE! 8.6% 10.7% Black African 06-07 # 40 #VALUE! 5.1% 5.7% Other Black Background 06-07 # 19 #VALUE! 7.1% 9.3% Indian 06-07 17 687 2.4% 3.0% 3.1% Pakistani 06-07 161 1,373 10.5% 5.8% 7.8% Bangladeshi 06-07 19 130 12.8% 4.8% 8.3% Other Asian Background 06-07 .. 43 #VALUE! 6.1% 4.7% Chinese 06-07 # 77 #VALUE! 1.5% 1.7% Other 06-07 119 3,303 3.5% 8.2% 6.2% No Ethnicity Information 06-07 65 1,386 4.5% 5.1% 5.2% Total 06-07 3,798 42,568 8.2% 7.6% 7.7%
p.163
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
Year Area No. Adjusted NEET Area No. Adjusted EET Area NEET % SN NEET% Nat NEET %
p.163
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
White 07-08 3,260 37,186 8.1% 7.0% 7.2% White and Black Caribbean 07-08 12 117 9.6% 7.5% 12.1% White and Black African 07-08 # 22 #VALUE! 9.8% 7.9% White and Asian 07-08 # 54 #VALUE! 3.9% 5.8% Other Mixed Background 07-08 # 67 #VALUE! 6.4% 8.5% Black Caribbean 07-08 11 74 12.8% 6.3% 8.9% Black African 07-08 # 53 #VALUE! 5.5% 4.7% Other Black Background 07-08 # 20 #VALUE! 4.2% 8.0% Indian 07-08 27 752 3.5% 1.5% 2.6% Pakistani 07-08 105 1,576 6.3% 8.5% 6.5% Bangladeshi 07-08 17 185 8.4% 3.6% 6.9% Other Asian Background 07-08 # 74 #VALUE! 3.9% 4.0% Chinese 07-08 # 88 #VALUE! 1.6% 1.3% Other 07-08 # 59 #VALUE! 7.9% 6.5% No Ethnicity Information 07-08 139 4,572 3.0% 4.7% 4.6% Total 07-08 3,596 44,899 7.4% 4.7% 6.9% Where the % NEET is above SN, it will be highlighted in red. 5045DE: Connexions Partnership data: young people at particular risk of becoming NEET ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Employment and NEET data
p.163
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
Lancashire County 5045DE: Connexions Partnership data: young people at particular risk of becoming NEET
p.164
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk. Please quote ref 5045DE. Data Definition: For the 16-19 teenage mothers calculation, the numerator is the number of 16-19 year old mothers in employment, education or training, and the denominator is the number of 16-19 year old mothers recorded on CCIS. However, for the LDD calculation, the numerator is the number of 16-19 year olds with learning disabilities or difficulties (LDD) who are NEET, and the denominator is the number of 16-19 year olds with LDD NEET + EET. Similarly, on the ethnic group calculation, the numerator is the number of 16-18 year olds who are NEET and the denominator is the number of 16-18 year olds EET + NEET. The data for each year is taken as of December. Data is for a single local authority, and not the whole partnership area. Data is suppressed where there are less than 10 NEETs in the LA in a particular ethnic group.
p.164
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
[Source: Connexions Customer Information System - CCIS, supplied to Ofsted by DCSF]
p.164
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
Health warning: For the LDD and ethnic indicators the NEET and EET figures are adjusted by the DCSF to allow for young people whose current activity is not known. This assumes that: 8% of young people who are previously in employment, education, or training, but who have lost contact with the service, are NEET, and;
p.164
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
58% of young people who were previously NEET, but who have lost contact with the service, are NEET. The total for 2006 omits the number that refused to give their ethnicity as this figure was not available for preceding years. ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Employment and NEET data
p.164
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator.
p.165
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
Year Area No. of those continuing in learning Number completing Year Area % SN % Nat %
p.165
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
05-06 13,360 15,256 87.6% 87.3% 85.9% 06-07 13,719 15,647 87.7% 88.8% 87.2% 07-08 13,954 15,859 88.0% 90.4% 89.3%
p.165
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk. Please quote ref 5046DE. Health warning: n/a 5046DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of young people completing year 11 who continue in learning
p.165
5042DE: Connexions Partnership data: proportion of 16-18-year-olds whose current activity is not known
[Source: Connexions Customer Information System - CCIS, supplied to Ofsted by DCSF] Data Definition: This indicator is calculated by dividing the numerator of the number of year 11 completers continuing in learning and dividing it by the denominator which is the number of year 11 completers.
p.165
2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 0.54 0.64 0.61 0.49 . = Data not applicable SN 0.74 0.78 0.75 0.70 .. = Data not available Eng 0.70 0.76 0.76 0.78 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.167
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz 2004-08 0<0.4 0.4<0.5 0.5<0.6 . 0.6+
p.167
divided by
All young people who were looked after whose 19th birthday is defined as follows (each young person is counted only once even if they ceased to be looked after more than once):
p.167
divided by
All those young people aged 18-24 surveyed. The number of young people in the population aged 18-24 surveyed for the Labour Force Survey (LFS) who were engaged in education, training or employment.
p.167
Denominator
The responsibility for obtaining, recording and returning this information rests with the council that had looked after the young person before he or she ceased to be looked after. If the council does not know what has happened to the young person, the person should be included in the denominator, but not in the numerator of this component of the indicator. 5022SC - PAF CF/A4: Ratio of the percentage of those young people who were looked after on 1 April in their 17th year (aged 16), who were engaged in education, training or employment at the age of 19 to the percentage of all young people in the population who were engaged in education, training or employment at the age of 19 (BVPI 161)
p.167
Denominator
a. looked after on 1 April year ‘t-2’ at the age of 16 and who ceased to be looked after before their 19th birthday; or The number of young people whose 19th birthday falls in the year ending 31 March of the reporting year 't', who were: The number of young people, in denominator 1, in contact within the period 3 months before to 1 month after their 19th birthday and were engaged in education, training or employment, whether full time or part time (activity at 19 codes F1, F2, F3, P1, P2 and P3).
p.167
Numerator
N.B. For 2006-07, data is on young people looked after on 1 April 2004. [Source - SSDA903] Young people who had been looked after on 1 April of year 't-2' under an agreed series of short term placements (legal status codes V3 and V4) are excluded. b. who were looked after and turned 17 on the 1 April year ‘t-2’ and who ceased to be looked after before their 19th birthday
p.167
Measuring unit
Ratio to two decimal places [N.B. ratio may be a value greater than 1]
p.167
(BVPI 161)
2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Unbanded
p.167
(BVPI 161)
Ask questions about performance Investigate urgently
p.167
(BVPI 161)
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 5022SC]
p.167
Lancashire
5022SC - PAF CF/A4: Ratio of the percentage of those young people who were looked after on 1 April in their 17th year (aged 16), who were engaged in education, training or employment at the age of 19 to the percentage of all young people in the population who were engaged in education, training or employment at the age of 19 (BVPI 161)
p.168
Lancashire
5037SC % of care leavers at age 19 who are living in suitable accommodation (as judged by the council) - see p.171 To be counted as 'in touch' for the purposes of this item, there should be "contact" between the council and the young person sometime within the timeframe of 3 months before and one month after the young person's 19th birthday. Consideration might be given the nature of that contact and the extent to which it is meaningful or perfunctory. Account should also be taken of the reluctance of the young people to be 'in touch'; this can have a very strong influence on this indicator.
p.168
Guidance/interpretation
Research shows that care leavers experience high levels of unemployment and are at risk of homelessness and social exclusion. This indicator shows the performance of local authorities in improving outcomes for young people leaving their care, so that they are enabled to achieve, to make a positive contribution and to be offered the opportunity to secure their future economic well being. Using the new definition of this indicator, introduced in 2004-05 – which applies a denominator of the percentage of local young people in education, employment and training to the percentage of care leavers in education, employment and training, to produce a ratio of one to the other - an outturn ratio of 0.92, for example, shows that the level of care leavers in education, employment and training is at 92% of the level of young people in education, employment and training in the local population.
p.168
Guidance/interpretation
Numbers of young people in the numerator may be small in some smaller councils and the measure therefore subject to large swings from year to year. Nearly one council in three had fewer than 20 care leavers in the numerator for 2006-07. Small changes in the 19 year- old cohort can have large consequences for the end result. Data for the percentage of all young people in employment, training or education were derived from the Labour Force Survey. Since these figures are from a survey and relate to the population aged 18-24 rather than at age 19 they are subject to a margin of error. More importantly, the denominator covers a wider age-range than the numerator because the LFS is a national sample survey and limiting results to those aged 19 at council level could produce unreliable results. Ideally the LFS would have sufficient coverage to provide an estimate for 19 year olds at a local level so that the comparison with data on formerly looked after children at age 19 could be as precise
p.168
Guidance/interpretation
as possible. Sample error, however, would be too great for this and hence the 18-24 year old cohort is used. Data on the regional and national variation in the percentage of 19 year olds in employment, education and training in 2003 suggests that the difference between single years of age is not marked.
p.168
Guidance/interpretation
Consideration needs to be given to the type, duration and quality of the education, employment or training that it being received by the care leavers, as well as the extent to which it will assist the young people in later life. Although there are links with this indicator to the education and offending history of the relevant young people, the most direct connections can be made with the indicators cover pathway plans and personal advisers (2038SC) and the suitability of care leavers' accommodation (5037SC). High scores on all three would indicate the possibility of good outcomes for the young people; low scores would indicate the reverse. Any significant variations between these indicators should prompt further questions about the data, and the practice that lies behind it.
p.168
Related measures
2038SC % of eligible, relevant and former relevant children that have pathway plans, have been allocated a personal adviser and are resident outside the council's boundaries - see p.169
p.168
Related measures
4015SC PAF CF/C18: Final warnings/reprimands and convictions of children looked after - see p.141 4016SC PAF CF/C63: Participation of looked after children in reviews - see p.143 3071SC The % of children looked after who were pupils in year 11 who were eligible for GCSE (or equivalent) examinations who sat at least one GCSE or equivalent exam - see p.118 3072SC PAF CF/A2: Educational qualifications of children looked after [joint working] (BVPI 50) - see p.120 3073SC The % of young people leaving care aged 16 or over with 5 or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or GNVQ equivalent - see p.122 3074SC PAF CF/C24: Children looked after absent from school [joint working] - see p.124
p.168
Related measures
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 5022SC]
p.168
Number of young people in LA who are:
. = Data not applicable 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 .. = Data not available Eligible 184 171 194 201 204 227 - = Data suppressed Relevant 77 68 71 62 69 29 due to small numbers Former Relevant 162 261 390 417 424 383
p.169
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
Percentage with pathway plans who are Eligible LA 75.0 77.2 76.9 65.7 72.6 100.0 SN 63.0 80.7 80.5 79.8 80.4 85.5 Eng 68.7 75.3 79.6 81.6 86.1 86.3 Percentage with pathway plans who are Relevant LA 100.0 86.8 92.5 83.9 73.9 100.0 SN 81.3 85.7 82.5 86.0 91.0 91.4 Eng 74.6 81.7 85.2 83.6 85.4 90.1 Percentage with pathway plans who are Former Relevant LA 50.0 59.4 84.9 84.9 78.5 97.9 SN 78.1 79.3 80.9 82.6 84.1 87.0 Eng 70.8 78.3 82.6 85.8 88.9 92.8
p.169
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
Percentage with allocated personal adviser who are Eligible LA 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.0 88.1 SN 78.3 91.1 91.2 86.7 90.4 91.2 Eng 88.6 91.5 93.9 94.4 95.5 95.3 Percentage with allocated personal adviser who are Relevant LA 100.0 85.3 95.0 91.9 78.3 100.0 SN 86.2 91.4 91.9 86.9 93.8 94.9 Eng 88.1 91.9 92.8 91.5 91.8 94.6 Percentage with allocated personal adviser who are Former Relevant LA 82.5 70.9 90.7 87.5 93.4 99.5 SN 83.4 86.9 83.7 77.4 84.4 90.2 Eng 84.4 86.9 88.1 87.0 89.8 92.6
p.169
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
Percentage resident outside the council's boundaries who are Eligible LA 31.0 22.8 24.2 23.4 19.1 26.3 SN 18.8 27.1 31.4 25.5 29.5 30.6 Eng 27.5 28.4 32.1 32.7 33.7 33.8 Percentage resident outside the council's boundaries who are Relevant LA 13.0 20.6 26.0 22.6 13.0 28.5 SN 22.3 29.2 30.0 29.5 30.8 21.5 Eng 21.3 24.8 28.5 28.8 26.9 27.2 Percentage resident outside the council's boundaries who are Former Relevant LA 32.0 18.0 20.3 21.8 20.1 26.7 SN 21.9 26.1 33.6 28.7 30.1 29.3 Eng 22.6 25.3 28.4 30.0 30.9 31.7 Continued on following page 2038SC - Percentage of eligible, relevant and former relevant children that have pathway plans, have been allocated a personal adviser and are resident outside the council's boundaries
p.169
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.169
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2038SC]
p.169
Lancashire
2038SC - Percentage of eligible, relevant and former relevant children that have pathway plans, have been allocated a personal adviser and are resident outside the council's boundaries
p.170
Lancashire
5037SC % of care leavers at age 19 who are living in suitable accommodation (as judged by the council) - see p.171 Allocated personal adviser: percentage to one decimal place.
p.170
Related measures
Number of young people as at 31.3.07: whole number % of with pathway plans: percentage to one decimal place
p.170
Related measures
Once a young person is 'former relevant' they do not lose this status even if they are living with their family. Even if they are at home they should have a Pathway Plan, regularly reviewed, and a Personal Adviser. The level of support offered, however, should be appropriate to their needs, so if all is going well at home they may not need intensive services. They remain 'former relevant' for statistical purposes.
p.170
Guidance/interpretation
Resident outside the council's boundaries: percentage to one decimal place. A Pathway plan sets out in writing, the manner in which the responsible authority proposes to meet the needs of the care leaver and the date by which, and by whom, any action required to implement any aspect of the plan will be carried out. For complete detail, see Children Leaving Care Act 2000 regulations and guidance.
p.170
Guidance/interpretation
Former relevant: Young people aged 18-21 who have been either eligible or relevant or both. Include young people of 21 and over if they are still being helped by the responsible authority. Eligible: a child who is aged 16 or 17 and has been looked after by a local authority for 13 weeks, or periods which amounted in all to this prescribed period, which began after they reached the age of 14 and ended after they reached the age of 16. The plan should be in place when it is most appropriate: for many young people this means on their 16th birthday; for those who started to be looked after just before their 16th birthday, this will mean when they are 16¼. Exclude any children who were looked after under an agreed series of short term-placements (under the provisions of Reg. 13 of the Arrangement for Placement of Children (General) Regulations, 1991). Relevant: a child who is aged 16 or 17; is not being looked after by any local authority; and was, before last ceasing to be looked after,
p.170
Guidance/interpretation
looked after by a local authority for 13 weeks, or periods which amounted in all to this prescribed period, which began after they reached the age of 14.
p.170
Data definition
[Source - 2002-03 to 2005-06 - CSCI data collection; 2006-08 - Ofsted data collection] Resident outside the council's boundaries: eligible, relevant and former relevant children who are living in the area of another local authority remain the responsibility of the authority which looked after them. Allocated personal adviser: to carry out the functions laid out in section 12 of the Children (Leaving Care) (England) Regulations 2001.
p.170
Data definition
5022SC PAF CF/A4 Employment, education and training for care leavers [joint working] (BVPI 161) - see p.167 Where a 'relevant' young person returns home and, six months later, this is successful and they remain under 18, then they become 'qualifying' and would not become 'former relevant' at 18. Where figures for pathway plans and personal advisers are consistently low, this would suggest further investigation is needed in relation to leaving care indicators on education, employment and training and accommodation (5022SC and 5037SC).
p.170
Measuring unit
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 2038SC]
p.170
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 41.7 61.6 71.1 83.0 83.5 85.2 82.7 . = Data not applicable SN 68.9 74.0 77.6 79.6 86.4 83.8 84.9 .. = Data not available Eng 69.4 74.5 79.6 83.9 87.9 87.3 88.4 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.171
Data definition
5037SC - Percentage of care leavers at age 19 who are living in suitable accommodation (as judged by the council)
p.171
Data definition
a. looked after on 1 April year 't-2' at the age of 16 and who ceased to be looked after before their 19th birthday; or
p.171
Numerator
The number of young people whose 19th birthday falls in the year ending 31 March of the reporting year 't', who were:
p.171
Denominator
[Source - SSDA903] Of the young people in the denominator, the number whose accommodation was deemed to be ‘suitable’ (accommodation at 19 codes ending in a 1). Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.171
Denominator
This indicator measures suitability of accommodation as a proxy for the effectiveness of care leaving services. To be counted as 'in touch' for the purposes of this item, there should be "contact" between the council and the young person sometime within the timeframe of 3 months before and one month after the young person's 19th birthday. Consideration might be given the nature of that contact and the extent to which it is meaningful or perfunctory. [Source - SSDA903] Young people who had been looked after on 1 April of year ‘t-2’ under an agreed series of short term placements (legal status codes V3 and V4) are excluded. b. who were looked after and turned 17 on the 1 April year 't-2' and who ceased to be looked after before their 19th birthday
p.171
Denominator
N.B. If the council does not know what has happened to the young person, the person should be included in the denominator but not in the numerator for this indicator. Percentage to one decimal place
p.171
Guidance/interpretation
There are no hard and fast rules on whether accommodation is deemed 'suitable'; the decision will depend on the circumstances of the individual case, and councils have to use their judgment. The classification set out in the 903 Frequently Asked Questions is intended to give an indication of the kinds of accommodation that would generally be considered 'suitable' or 'unsuitable'.
p.171
Guidance/interpretation
5022SC PAF CF/A4 Employment, education and training for care leavers [joint working] (BVPI 161) - see p.167
p.171
Related measures
2038SC % of eligible, relevant and former relevant children that have pathway plans, have been allocated a personal adviser and are resident outside the council's boundaries - see p.169 Accommodation is to be regarded as suitable if it provides safe, secure and affordable provision for young people. It would generally include short-term accommodation designed to move young people on to stable long-term accommodation, but would exclude emergency accommodation used in a crisis. Accommodation that clearly exposes the person to risk of harm or social exclusion by reason of its location or other factors should be coded as 'unsuitable'. Accommodation that is 'Emergency accommodation' (e.g. night shelter, direct access, emergency hostel), 'Bed and breakfast' or 'In custody' (categories V, W, and X) should usually be considered 'unsuitable'. The suitability of the accommodation, though, is a subjective judgement and consideration should be given to the council's evidence
p.171
accommodation
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.171
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 5037SC]
p.171
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 211 230 247 270 299 293 320 . = Data not applicable SN 210 232 265 295 321 343 371 .. = Data not available Eng 280 315 361 400 427 456 495 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.173
Related
Any significant variation between an area’s budget for children’s social care services and its comparator group needs to be explored. Significantly higher spend suggests a strong commitment to children’s services, but there is a need to explore value for money and partners’ contributions. A high level of spend does not always result in more effective services delivering better outcomes. Conversely, significantly lower budgets suggest a lack of commitment to children’s social care services and the impact of this on the range and quality of services and outcomes for children and young people will need to be explored. There may be patterns of local expenditure on children's services, especially in relation to pooled budgets with partner agencies under the children's trust arrangements, that may impact on this indicator. This measure will reflect the differences in costs incurred in different parts of England. It will also reflect differences in deprivation.
p.173
Related
Total gross expenditure on children and families services (excluding supporting people). [Source - PSS EX1 Incl SSMSS sheet column M line P1*1,000]
p.173
Denominator
The population aged under 18 in the council area. [Source - ONS mid year estimates] (2007-08 data uses the latest 2007 mid year estimates)
p.173
Guidance/interpretation
6006SC - KIGS EX61: Gross expenditure on services to children per capita aged under 18
p.173
Numerator
Total gross expenditure on children and families services (excluding supporting people). [Source - PSS EX1 Incl SSMSS sheet column S line B1*1,000] Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.173
Numerator
6009SC KIGS EX77: Expenditure on family support services per capita aged under 18 - see p.174 6010SC PAF CF/E44: Relative spend on family support - see p.175 6022SC KIGS EX62: Gross expenditure on children looked after per capita aged under 18 - see p.177 6024SC PAF CF/B8: Cost of services for children looked after - see p.178
p.173
per capita aged under 18
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.173
£
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 6006SC]
p.173
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 31 31 34 39 45 52 51 . = Data not applicable SN 30 32 38 45 48 52 55 .. = Data not available Eng 42 46 52 60 64 71 76 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.174
Definition for 2007-08:
Expenditure on family support services. [Source - PSS EX1 Incl SSMSS sheet line OC7 column M * 1,000]
p.174
Denominator
6024SC PAF CF/B8: Cost of services for children looked after - see p.178
p.174
Guidance/interpretation
There may be patterns of local expenditure on children's services, especially in relation to pooled budgets with partner agencies under the children's trust arrangements, that may impact on this indicator. This measure will reflect the differences in costs incurred in different parts of England (see pp.110-111 of the PAF volume 2005-06 (CSCI, November 2006)). It will also reflect differences in deprivation. The population aged under 18 in the council area. [Source - ONS mid year estimates] (2007-08 data uses the latest 2007 mid year estimates)
p.174
Measuring unit
6010SC PAF CF/E44: Relative spend on family support - see p.175 6009SC - KIGS EX77: Expenditure on family support services per capita aged under 18
p.174
Numerator
[Source - PSS EX1 Incl SSMSS sheet line BC7 column S * 1,000] Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.174
Numerator
6022SC KIGS EX62: Gross expenditure on children looked after per capita aged under 18 - see p.177 Some of the variation in this measure may be accounted for by different interpretations of the guidance for PSSEX1, particularly in what is included in 'other children's services' (PSSEX1 row BE3) and in attribution of 'overheads' via SSMSS.
p.174
Numerator
6006SC KIGS EX61: Gross expenditure on services to children per capita aged under 18 - see p.173 Any significant variation between an area’s budget for children’s social care services and its comparator group needs to be explored. If expenditure on family support is significantly lower than comparators this may be due to strong cost effective commissioning arrangements to deliver preventative services, and /or effective pooled budgets with partners. In the absence of these, low expenditure on family support indicates insufficient family support services which is likely to result in more children being looked after and/or more children with child protection plans. High spend on family support should be helping to reduce the numbers of looked after children and/or children with child protection plans. If these numbers remain high it suggests that family support services are ineffectively targeted.
p.174
per capita aged under 18
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.174
£
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 6009SC]
p.174
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 27 31 26 33 33 34 28 . = Data not applicable SN 37 38 41 41 42 43 42 .. = Data not available Eng 37 38 38 39 39 40 41 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.175
Bands Low High
z zz zzz zzzz zzzzz zzzz zzz zz z 2001-08 · 0<27 27<32 32<43 · . 43<48 48<=100 ·
p.175
Numerator
Incl SSMSS column F (Total Expenditure Including joint arrangements) - column E (Grants to Voluntary Organisations): Total (including joint arrangements)) lines (OC7 (Total family support services) + OD2 (Youth offender teams) + OD3 (Other youth justice services) + OE1 (Adoption services) + OE3 (Other children's and families services) + 50% of OE2 (Leaving care services) + a proportionate share of OA1 (Commissioning and social work)).
p.175
Denominator
Gross total cost for all children's services during the year.
p.175
Denominator
Percentage as a whole number Incl SSMSS column I (Gross total cost (Current expenditure including capital charges): Total (including joint arrangements)) lines (BC7 [Source - PSS EX1] That part of the denominator that represents expenditure on children in need but not looked after.
p.175
Denominator
[Source - PSS EX1] 6010SC - PAF CF/E44: Gross expenditure on children in need but not looked after, as a percentage of gross expenditure on all children’s services
p.175
Data definition
Incl SSMSS column I (Gross total cost (Current expenditure including capital charges): Total (including joint arrangements)) line B1 (Total children's and families services).
p.175
Data definition
Incl SSMSS column F (Total Expenditure Including joint arrangements) - column E (Grants to Voluntary Organisations): line P1 (Total children's and families services) minus N4 (Total asylum seekers). N.B. In years previous to 2007-08, expenditure on asylum seekers was not included in the Children's and famillies services section. Therefore, to remain consistant with previous years data, N4 must be deducted from P1.
p.175
6010SC - PAF CF/E44: Relative spend on family support
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.175
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 6010SC]
p.175
Lancashire
6010SC - PAF CF/E44: Gross expenditure on children in need but not looked after, as a percentage of gross expenditure on all children’s services
p.176
Lancashire
6022SC KIGS EX62: Gross expenditure on children looked after per capita aged under 18 - see p.177 6024SC PAF CF/B8: Cost of services for children looked after - see p.178
p.176
Related measures
6006SC KIGS EX61: Gross expenditure on services to children per capita aged under 18 - see p.173 6009SC KIGS EX77: Expenditure on family support services per capita aged under 18 - see p.174 The most recent Children in Need census data, for 2005, may provide some historical evidence on the balance between costs of looked after children's services and other costs. Any significant variation between an area’s budget for children’s social care services and its comparator group needs to be explored. If expenditure on family support is significantly lower than comparators this may be due to strong cost effective commissioning arrangements to deliver preventative services, and /or effective pooled budgets with partners. In the absence of these, low expenditure on family support indicates insufficient family support services which is likely to result in more children being looked after and/or an increase
p.176
Related measures
in the number of children with child protection plans. High spend on family support should be helping to reduce the numbers of looked after children and/or children with child protection plans. If these numbers remain high it suggests that family support services are ineffectively targeted.
p.176
Guidance/interpretation
This indicator acts as a proxy for access to preventative services. Adequate provision of such services can prevent children being looked after later. A low figure would indicate that a council was providing a relatively small amount of preventative services. There may be patterns of local expenditure on children's services, especially in relation to pooled budgets with partner agencies under the children's trust arrangements, that may impact on this indicator.
p.176
Guidance/interpretation
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 6010SC]
p.176
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 120 122 137 137 151 146 165 . = Data not applicable SN 97 102 113 126 134 143 151 .. = Data not available Eng 129 142 161 176 187 196 202 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.177
Related measures
The numerator covers expenditure by the council on services for looked after children other than social work. It includes the costs of children's homes and boarding schools as well as fostering, lodgings, independent living and a range of specialist placements, and all associated overheads.
p.177
Related measures
6022SC KIGS EX62: Gross expenditure on children looked after per capita aged under 18 - see p.177 6024SC PAF CF/B8: Cost of services for children looked after - see p.178 This measure will in part reflect whether the council is in a low or high cost area. It will also reflect the characteristics of the population of the area. If the area is relatively deprived expenditure may be higher - see commentary on 6024SC CF/B8. Similarly the rate will reflect the make-up of children looked after by the council: if there are high proportions of adolescents or disabled children expenditure per head may be higher. If, however, a significant proportion of the looked after children are placed at home with parents the rate may be lower. If the number of disabled children receiving support is significantly lower than comparators this suggests that an inadequate range of support is in place.
p.177
Related measures
6009SC KIGS EX77: Expenditure on family support services per capita aged under 18 - see p.174 6010SC PAF CF/E44: Relative spend on family support - see p.175 6022SC - KIGS EX62: Gross expenditure on looked after children per capita aged under 18
p.177
Related measures
Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.177
Numerator
2042SC KIGS CH39: Children looked after per 10,000 population aged under 18 - see p.65 6006SC KIGS EX61: Gross expenditure on services to children per capita aged under 18 - see p.173 Total gross expenditure on looked after children + secure accommodation.
p.177
Numerator
Total gross expenditure on looked after children + secure accommodation.
p.177
Numerator
The population aged under 18 in the council area. [Source - ONS mid year estimates] (2007-08 data uses the latest 2007 mid year estimates)
p.177
children per capita aged under 18
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.177
£
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 6022SC]
p.177
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 557 566 542 593 650 659 545 . = Data not applicable ACA Grp 1 486 529 575 644 693 731 741 .. = Data not available Eng 487 560 618 676 716 753 772 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.178
Low High
zz zzz zzzz zzz zz 2001-02 £0<£333 £333<£357 £357<£476 £476<£532 >=£532 2002-03 £0<£348 £348<£373 £373<£498 £498<£556 >=£556 2003-04 £0<£366 £366<£393 £393<£524 £524<£585 >=£585 2004-05 £0<£383 £383<£411 £411<£548 £548<£612 >=£612 2005-06 £0<£394 £394<£423 £423<£564 £564<£630 >=£630 2006-07 £0<£409 £409<£439 £439<£585 £585<£653 >=£653 2007-08 £0<£429 £429<£461 £461<£614 £614<£686 >=£686
p.178
Definition for 2007-08:
Gross total cost for children looked after in foster care and children's homes during the year.
p.178
Definition for 2007-08:
£ per week Continued on following page The total number of weeks children (other than asylum seeking children) spent in foster care, children's homes, residential schools and placed for adoption (placement codes A1, A2, F1 to F6, H3 to H5 and S1 as defined by the SSDA903 collection) during the year. Children's homes include community homes, voluntary homes and hostels and private registered children's homes. Any placements that formed part of an agreed series of short term-placements (under the provisions of Reg. 13 of the Arrangement for Placement of Children (General) Regulations, 1991) and any time spent in respect of respite care are included. Calculation based on the total number of days of care divided by 7. [Source - PSSEX1]
p.178
Definition up to 2006-07:
[Source - PSS EX1 Incl. SSMSS column I (Gross total cost (Current expenditure including capital charges): Total (including joint arrangements)) lines BB1 (Children's homes) + BB3 (Fostering services).
p.178
Definition up to 2006-07:
[Source - PSS EX1 Incl. SSMSS column F (Total Expenditure Including joint arrangements) - column E (Grants to Voluntary Organisations): lines OB1 (Children's homes) + OB3 (Fostering services).] 6024SC - PAF CF/B8: Average gross weekly expenditure per looked after child in foster care or in a children’s home
p.178
Definition up to 2006-07:
Gross total cost for children looked after in foster care and children's homes during the year.
p.178
6024SC - PAF CF/B8: Cost of services for looked after children
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.178
£
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 6024SC]
p.178
Lancashire N.B. England figures are not banded
6024SC - PAF CF/B8: Average gross weekly expenditure per looked after child in foster care or in a children’s home
p.179
Related
2068SC PAF CF/B79: % of children aged at least 10 and under 16 who were in foster placements or placed for adoption - see p.74 6006SC KIGS EX61: Gross expenditure on services to children per capita aged under 18 - see p.173 This measure will reflect the differences in costs incurred in different parts of England. It will also reflect differences in deprivation. There may be patterns of local expenditure on children's services, especially in relation to pooled budgets with partner agencies under the children's trust arrangements, that may impact on this indicator.
p.179
Related
Unlike all other indicators that relate to children looked after, this one includes data on children in receipt of respite care. Consideration could be given to these elements if costs have risen considerably year on year without an obvious change in overall numbers of children looked after or an increase in the use of fostering agencies. The cost of services is an important aspect of efficient delivery of services. Other things being equal, such as quality and all children's needs being adequately met, a lower cost is generally held to be more efficient. With this indicator the overall cost of looking after children (in residential or foster care) can be assessed allowing for potential changes in costs of particular forms of care such as fostering, arising from changes to quality and supply. Performance against all of the measures in the cost and efficiency performance area will be taken as evidence of progress against the improvement in social care efficiency target of at least 2.5% year-on-year required at a national
p.179
Related
6009SC KIGS EX77: Expenditure on family support services per capita aged under 18 - see p.174 6010SC PAF CF/E44: Relative spend on family support - see p.175 6022SC KIGS EX62: Gross expenditure on children looked after per capita aged under 18 - see p.177 High costs may indicate that high numbers of looked after children are being placed with expensive independent providers. If this is the case need to explore the strategy to address it. High costs may also be linked to the cost of covering high levels of sickness absence among residential staff. It is also possible for high costs to occur when numbers looked after reduce, because the cohort remaining may have a proportionately greater need for specialist placements, which are likely to be more expensive. This indicator can be improved by commissioning foster care and residential care at lower unit cost and, more importantly, by shifting the pattern of care away from residential to foster care. Moving children from residential to foster care may increase the unit costs of both as
p.179
Related
more dependent children are cared for in both settings, but still decrease CF/B8.
p.179
Guidance/interpretation
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 6024SC]
p.179
Lancashire
Year Area SN Nat Traffic lights have 2005 16.0% 12.5% 13.0% not been applied 2006 18.0% 13.5% 14.0% to this indicator 2007 19.0% 14.0% 14.0%
p.181
Lancashire
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3089DE] 3089DE: Percentage of primary schools with 25% or more surplus places
p.181
Data Definition:
This indicator shows the % of primary schools with 25% or more surplus places, the data for which is collected from LAs between June and beginning of August and reflects the position as at January for each year. It does not include schools with less than 30 surplus places. Consequently a significant number of local authorities will have a value of zero. It includes first, infant and junior schools with and without nurseries, as well as Middle schools which have been deemed primary. The number on roll includes a headcount of part-time pupils but excludes full-time and part-time pupils in designated nursery classes. SN figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of the %s for all of the LA's statistical neighbours. [ Source: Statistical Neighbours comparisons calculated by Ofsted.]
p.181
Data Definition:
Health warning : Low surplus place numbers are good. LAs should take action to reduce the number of surplus places overall and to reduce the number of schools with more than 25% surplus places. Data does not include academies, city technology colleges (CTCs), nursery units, nursery schools, special schools and PRUs % of primary schools with 25% or more surplus places
p.181
Data Definition:
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% 18.0% 20.0%
p.181
Lancashire
Year Area SN Nat Traffic lights have 2005 9.0% 6.5% 7.0% not been applied 2006 9.0% 6.5% 8.0% to this indicator 2007 13.0% 7.0% 10.0%
p.182
Lancashire
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 3090DE] 3090DE: Percentage of secondary schools with 25% or more surplus places
p.182
Data Definition:
This indicator shows the % of primary schools with 25% or more surplus places, the data for which is collected from LAs between June and beginning of August and reflects the position as at January for each year. It does not include schools with less than 30 surplus places. Consequently a significant number of local authorities will have a value of zero. It includes secondary schools with 11-16s, 11-18s, and non-standard age ranges, plus middle schools deemed secondary.
p.182
Data Definition:
[ Source: Statistical neighbours comparisons calculated by Ofsted.]
p.182
Data Definition:
Health warning : Low surplus place numbers are good. LAs should take action to reduce the number of surplus places overall and to reduce the number of schools with more than 25% surplus places. SN figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of the %s for all of the LA's statistical neighbours. Data does not include academies, city technology colleges (CTCs), nursery units, nursery schools, special schools and PRUs
p.182
Area SN NAT
% of secondary schools with 25% or more surplus places
p.182
Area SN NAT
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0%
p.182
2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 3.0 9.2 5.9 5.9 . = Data not applicable SN 8.1 9.2 7.3 7.3 .. = Data not available Eng 12.1 12.5 11.0 10.9 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.184
Data definition
2064SC PAF CF/C68: Timeliness of reviews of children looked after - see p.67 3085SC PAF CF/C69: Distance children newly looked after are placed from home - see p.116 4016SC PAF CF/C63: Participation of looked after children in reviews - see p.143 2034SC PAF CF/C20: Reviews of child protection cases (BVPI 162) - see p.59 2036SC PAF CF/C21: Duration on the Child Protection Register - see p.62 2043SC PAF CF/A1: Stability of placements of children looked after (BVPI 49) - see p.69 2060SC % of looked after children with a named social worker who is qualified as a social worker - see p.79 2020SC % of initial assessments within 7 working days of referral - see p.47 2022SC PAF CF/C64: Timing of core assessments - see p.49 2024SC % of children and young people on the child protection register who are not allocated to a social worker - see p.52 2028SC PAF CF/A3: Re-registrations on the Child Protection Register - see p.55
p.184
Related measures
2016SC KIGS CH142: % of referrals that are repeat referrals within 12 months - see p.44 NB: this former DIS measure has been subdivided to seek data specifically on staff working with children and families: DIS 3119 reported on the whole workforce for the CSSR. The number of vacant social care directly employed posts which councils are seeking to fill or will seek to fill at 30 September. If a post is "filled" by agency or temporary staff, include it if the intention at 30 September is to fill or seek to fill it on a permanent basis.
p.184
Related measures
Percentage to one decimal place Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator 6012SC - Percentage of social care staff directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September
p.184
Related measures
If, for example, vacancy levels are high, the reasons for this and the area’s strategy to address it need to be explored. High vacancy levels may indicate significant or wider problems that can impact adversely on services (see 2016SC, 2020SC, 2022SC, 2024SC, 2028SC, 2034SC, 2036SC, 2043SC, 2060SC, 2064SC, 3085SC, 4016SC).
p.184
Measuring unit
[Source - 2004-05 to 2005-06 - CSCI data collection; 2006-08 - Ofsted data collection] The total number of social care directly employed posts at 30 September who are working specifically with children and families.
p.184
Denominator
[Source - 2004-05 to 2005-06 - CSCI data collection; 2006-08 - Ofsted data collection]
p.184
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 6012SC]
p.184
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
LA 41 23 64 79 54 51 77 . = Data not applicable SN 47 43 55 62 60 63 73 .. = Data not available Eng 32 36 45 52 57 64 71 - = Data suppressed due to small numbers
p.185
Data definition
6016SC - Percentage of residential child care workers who have obtained the NVQ Level 3 in Health and Social Care (Children and Young People)
p.185
Data definition
Ensuring staff are appropriately trained is an important component of the quality of a service.
p.185
Guidance/interpretation
NB: this question was formerly QP14 Percentage as a whole number N.B. Values of 0 (nil) were changed to "." (not applicable) for some LAs in the years prior to 2007-08. England averages for all years have increased as a result. The SN values for some LAs may also have increased as a result.
p.185
Measuring unit
The total number of staff working for the local authority as residential childcare workers at 31 March who needed to be trained to NVQ level 3. Exclude staff who have already been trained to a higher level.
p.185
Denominator
Of the people in the denominator, the total number who, at 31 March, had obtained the NVQ Level 3 in Health and Social Care (Children and Young People), at any time. N.B. This was previously called Level 3 in the NVQ 'Caring for Children and Young People'. Traffic lights have not been applied to this indicator
p.185
Denominator
6012SC % of SSD directly employed posts for children and families vacant on 30 September - see p.184
p.185
Related measures
[Source - 2001-02 to 2005-06 - CSCI data collection; 2006-08 - Ofsted data collection]
p.185
Related measures
[Source - 2001-02 to 2005-06 - CSCI data collection; 2006-08 - Ofsted data collection]
p.185
People)
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
p.185
%
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: JARandAPAdata@ofsted.gov.uk and quote ref: 6016SC]
p.185
Lancashire
Year Area SN Nat Traffic lights have not 2005 0.8% 0.4% 0.7% been applied to this 2006 0.4% 0.3% 0.6% indicator 2007 0.3% 0.5% 0.6%
p.186
Lancashire
[If you have any queries about this indicator please contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk - Please quote REF: 6049DE] 6049DE: Percentage of unfilled full time vacancies in relation to number of full time equivalent teachers employed as at January
p.186
Data Definition:
This indicator shows the number of advertised vacancies in maintained nursery, primary, secondary and special schools for full-time permanent appointments (or appointments of at least one term's duration) as a percentage of teachers in post ie full-time regular teachers in (or on secondment from) maintained nursery, primary and secondary schools, plus full-time regular divided service, peripatetic, advisory and miscellaneous teachers. Vacancies being filled on a temporary basis of less than one term are counted as vacant posts. The Statistical Neighbours figure is a median average of the percentage figures for each of the local authorities' neighbours. [Source: DCSF annual 618G survey (http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/management/ims/datacollections/618G/LA_618G_documentation/) Statistical Neighbours comparisons calculated by Ofsted.]
p.186
Data Definition:
Health warning : There is no benchmark figure. A lower percentage is better than a higher percentage with positive impact on capacity. The number of years for which the data has been collected is small and therefore trends cannot yet be clearly determined. The vacancy numbers show the position on the survey day in January. Analysis is based on small numbers of vacancies. For this reason data does not have traffic lights. Please use with caution when comparing local authorities with Statistical Neighbours or the National figures. SN figures have been added by Ofsted to assist inspectors. They are median averages of the %s for all of the LA's Statistical Neighbours.
p.186
Area SN NAT
0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.6% 0.7% 0.8%
p.186
Lancashire
Nottinghamshire Bury Calderdale Sefton Derbyshire Stockton-on-Tees Kent Staffordshire Northamptonshire Dudley
p.188
Lancashire
[Data contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk] The NFER groups have been used on the majority of indicators in the datasets from July 2007; affecting the 2007 & 2008 APA and the JAR toolkits from block 16 onwards. Key exceptions are indicators from the Healthcare Commission, Youth Justice Board and HMI Probation, as data may not be at local authority level. The NFER's Children's Services statistical neighbours benchmarking groups were published in February 2007 and are designed to be used across all children's services data. Please see the DCFS website for further information on the model: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/STA/t000712/index.shtml. They replace the old Ofsted and CIPFA groups previously used by Ofsted and CSCI. 7001OF: List of NFER statistical neighbours for Lancashire
p.188
Lancashire
Statistical neighbour models provide one method for benchmarking progress. For each LA, these models designate a number of other LAs deemed to have similar characteristics. These designated LAs are known as statistical neighbours. Any LA may compare its performance (as measured by various indicators) against its statistical neighbours to provide an initial guide as to whether their performance is above or below the level that might be expected. Statistical neighbour comparisons are usually presented in addition to a National comparison.
p.188
Lancashire
Kent Northamptonshire Wessex Hertfordshire Essex Warwickshire Nottinghamshire Gloucestershire Kirklees
p.191
YOT area Local Authorities covered by the data
Leicestershire Leicestershire and Rutland Wessex Isle of Wight, Hampshire, Southampton and Portsmouth Cornwall Cornwall and Isles of Scilly South Tees Redcar and Cleveland, and Middlesborough Tower Hamlets and City of London (one YOT) Tower Hamlets and City of London Halton and Warrington (one YOT) Halton and Warrington Shropshire Telford and Wrekin (one YOT) Shropshire and Telford & Wrekin Reading and Wokingham (one YOT) Reading and Wokingham Bournemouth and Poole (one YOT) Bournemouth and Poole Worcestershire and Herefordshire (one YOT) Worcestershire and Herefordshire
p.191
YOT area Local Authorities covered by the data
If you have any queries concerning this data please contact Nick Read on 020 7271 3068 The majority of YOT areas match local authority boundaries. Please see below for the exceptions, and check whether this affects your local authority or its statistical neighbours. The list above shows each Youth Offending Team (YOT) and the 9 other YOTs in its family. The first YOT listed is the closest ‘relative’; the last YOT listed is the most distant ‘relative’. 7002OF: List of Youth Justice Board statistical neighbours for Lancashire
p.191
Lancashire
Barnsley South Tyneside Blackburn with Darwen Staffordshire Blackpool Stockton on Tees Bournemouth Stoke-on-Trent City of Derby Suffolk City of Nottingham Sunderland City of Plymouth Telford and Wrekin City of York Torbay Cornwall Worcestershire Cumbria #N/A Darlington #N/A Derbyshire #N/A Devon #N/A Doncaster Dorset Durham East Riding of Yorkshire Gateshead Hartlepool Herefordshire Kingston Upon Hull Leicester City Leicestershire Lincolnshire Middlesbrough Newcastle Upon Tyne Norfolk North East Lincolnshire North Lincolnshire North Tyneside North Yorkshire Northumberland Nottinghamshire Poole Redcar and Cleveland Rotherham Rutland Sheffield Shropshire Somerset
p.192
Lancashire
[Data contact: jarandapadata@ofsted.gov.uk] 7003OF: List of ACA statistical neighbours for Lancashire (used for social care indicator 6024SC)
p.192
Lancashire - North West
Knowsley #N/A Liverpool #N/A St Helens #N/A Sefton #N/A Wirral #N/A Bolton #N/A Bury #N/A Manchester #N/A Oldham #N/A Rochdale #N/A Salford #N/A Stockport #N/A Tameside #N/A Trafford Wigan Cheshire Halton Warrington Blackburn with Darwen Blackpool Cumbria #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
p.193
Lancashire - North West
[Data contact: Ade Alao (0207 972 4845) Ade.Alao@dh.gsi.gov.uk 7004OF: List of Government Office Regions Local Authorities for Lancashire (used for 1032OF)
p.193
Discuss this inspection
Members compare notes on inspectors and inspections here. Join free to read and post.
Join the discussion