Decision Maker:

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Date of Decision: April 28, 2025

Purpose:

Content: RESOLVED:   1.  The overall financial position of the Council and in particular the overspend and the impact of the initiatives set out to mitigate this, as at February 2024 was noted.   2.  The Connect to Work (CtW) grant funding of £6m to provide targeted employment interventions over five years was accepted.   3.  A proposal to increase children’s centre fees by withdrawing the subsidy from Band 3, 4 & 5 of the current children’s centre fee structure.  The current children’s centre fee structure is modelled on a graduated subsidy across 5 household income bands 1-5 was approved.   4.  A 7.5% uplift to the fees for bands 1 and 2 of the current children’s centre fee structure to reflect the increased costs of delivering the service and in line with other Council services, was approved.   5.  Proposals for 3.3 and 3.4 to take effect from September 2025, to coincide with the national expansion of the 30-hours funded childcare entitlement for 38 weeks of the year to eligible children from 9-months to 5 years, were approved.   REASONS FOR DECISION   To facilitate financial management and control of the Council's finances and to approve the CfW grant approval and the Children's Centres fee changes.   DETAILS OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED   This budget monitoring report is primarily an update on the Council’s financial position.   On the CfW grant approval, Hackney Council evaluated three options for delivering the CtW programme.  The first option was for Central London Forward (CLF) to manage the programme by commissioning local providers. Although CLF has experience with similar programmes, this approach would not be as well aligned with local needs, might duplicate existing services, and would reduce direct support funding by 10% (£600k). The second option, which we recommend, is for Hackney to deliver the programme directly through the Employment, Skills, and Adult Learning (ESAL) service. This approach ensures that 100% of funding is invested in frontline services, strengthening local capacity and delivering better long-term employment outcomes than an outsourced model. By leveraging local expertise and established partnerships, it enhances coordination among agencies and maximises the impact of the £6 million investment. The third option was not to accept the funding. However, this would mean missing a crucial opportunity to support our residents and would leave key groups without the necessary employment services. Based on these considerations, the Hackney-led direct delivery model is the best choice.   On the Children's Centre Fees changes, the alternative options are considered in the attached Appendix 4