Content

10.1

The Assistant Director of Children & Families
introduced the report which sought approval to proceed with a full
replacement of the security system through a single provider,
ensuring a modern, resilient, and future-proof solution that meets
statutory obligations and supports the safe, effective operation of
Aldine House.

 

 

10.2

RESOLVED
UNANIMOUSLY: That Education, Children and Families Policy
Committee:-
 
a)   
It is recommended that approval is given to proceed to commission a
full upgrade and replacement of the security system at Aldine House
Secure Children’s Home.

 

 

10.3

Reasons for
Decision

 

 

10.3.1

The investment is essential to ensure Aldine
House remains legally compliant and able to safeguard children and
staff. The current system is failing and presents clear risk;
upgrading it is therefore a statutory and moral requirement to
maintain safety and meet national safeguarding
standards

 

 

10.4

Alternatives
Considered and Rejected

 

 

10.4.1

Alternative Option 1: Do
Nothing
 
Description of option: Continue
operating with the existing security system and address issues only
as they arise.
 
Why this option was rejected: The
current system presents serious and escalating risks
including:
 

·      
Safeguarding Risk – system failures could delay or prevent
staff from raising alarms or responding to incidents, directly
endangering children and staff.

·      
Operational Disruption – outages in ATUS, CCTV and access
control systems disrupt daily routines, admissions, and emergency
procedures.

·      
Regulatory Breach – failure to maintain compliant systems
could result in regulatory action, reputational damage or loss of
registration.
 
Given these risks, retaining the
current system is not a safe or legally compliant
option.

 

 

10.4.2

Alternative Option 2: Partial
Repairs / Replace Individual
Components
 
Description of option: Repair or
replace failing elements of the system without undertaking a full
upgrade.
 
Why this option was
rejected:
 
·      
The system is made up of obsolete, fragmented and rented
components, many of which are no longer manufactured or
supported.
·      
Loss of specialist support (e.g., ATUS expertise) makes targeted
repair unviable.
·      
Partial repair would not resolve fundamental infrastructure issues
such as overheating servers or outdated capacity
limitations.
·      
Patch repairing would continue to create financial risk due to
ongoing unplanned expenditure.
 
This option was rejected as it
would not address the systemic risks or restore
compliance.

 

 

10.4.3

Alternative Option 3: Delay the
Upgrade Pending External Funding
 
Description of option: Postpone
action until external funding becomes
available.
 
Why this option was
rejected:
 
·      
A £350,000 quote was obtained to support an application to
the DfE match funding process, but this was
declined.
·      
The system is legally required; delaying action would prolong
safeguarding, operational and regulatory
risks.
·      
Delay would also restrict the safe expansion of Aldine House to
accommodate more children, limiting the service’s ability to
meet statutory demand.
 
Given the severity of risks and
lack of viable external funding, delay is not a safe or responsible
option.