http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/ Thu, 17 May 2012 09:36:01 +0000 MyBB http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=940 Tue, 15 May 2012 11:15:07 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=940
To book your place at the CfPS Annual Conference and Good Scrutiny Awards ceremony please visit our conference webpage here.

The shortlist for the Good Scrutiny Awards 2012 is:

Innovation

• Brighton and Hove City Council – Traveller Scrutiny Panel
• Chesterfield Borough Council – Appreciative Inquiry
• Scottish Borders Council – Commuting and Impact of Modern Working Practices
  

Involving Communities

• Gloucestershire County Council – Severn Estuary Commission
• London Borough of Redbridge – End of Life Care
• North East Lincolnshire Council – Coal Dust Select Committee
  

Raising the Profile

• Birmingham City Council – A Music City
• Cardiff Council – Night-time Economy
• London Borough of Ealing – August 2011 Riots
  

Transforming Services/Responding to Change

• Bassetlaw District Council – Future of Services at Bassetlaw Hospital
• Stoke-on-Trent City Council – Business Services Committee
• Surrey County Council – Review of Winter Maintenance Service
  

Working Together

• Bradford City Council – Food Strategy
• Hartlepool Borough Council – Looked After Children and Young People
• North Central London JHOSC
  

In addition there are two further awards which will be given out on 12th June at the Good Scrutiny Awards ceremony.

The 'Scrutineers’ Choice’ awards will be selected by delegates at the CfPS 2012 conference, Powerful, Accountable, Local, from those entries which make the category shortlists. This award is selected by your peers and will be based on short video presentations that will be shown during the conference.

The judges will also present an ‘Overall Impact’ award for the entry which they believe best shows how scrutiny can make a positive contribution to a local area or service.

The standard of entries, as ever, was very high. Congratulations to those organisations that have been shortlisted.

For those who did not make the shortlist this year, commiserations and thank you for taking part. We recognise that a lot of effort goes in to submitting to the awards and that not being shortlisted is disappointing. We hope you will try again next year.

The awards will be presented at a ceremony which follows the CfPS Annual Conference - Powerful, Accountable, Local - more information about the conference can be found here. Details of the categories available to download or view here.]]>
To book your place at the CfPS Annual Conference and Good Scrutiny Awards ceremony please visit our conference webpage here.

The shortlist for the Good Scrutiny Awards 2012 is:

Innovation

• Brighton and Hove City Council – Traveller Scrutiny Panel
• Chesterfield Borough Council – Appreciative Inquiry
• Scottish Borders Council – Commuting and Impact of Modern Working Practices
  

Involving Communities

• Gloucestershire County Council – Severn Estuary Commission
• London Borough of Redbridge – End of Life Care
• North East Lincolnshire Council – Coal Dust Select Committee
  

Raising the Profile

• Birmingham City Council – A Music City
• Cardiff Council – Night-time Economy
• London Borough of Ealing – August 2011 Riots
  

Transforming Services/Responding to Change

• Bassetlaw District Council – Future of Services at Bassetlaw Hospital
• Stoke-on-Trent City Council – Business Services Committee
• Surrey County Council – Review of Winter Maintenance Service
  

Working Together

• Bradford City Council – Food Strategy
• Hartlepool Borough Council – Looked After Children and Young People
• North Central London JHOSC
  

In addition there are two further awards which will be given out on 12th June at the Good Scrutiny Awards ceremony.

The 'Scrutineers’ Choice’ awards will be selected by delegates at the CfPS 2012 conference, Powerful, Accountable, Local, from those entries which make the category shortlists. This award is selected by your peers and will be based on short video presentations that will be shown during the conference.

The judges will also present an ‘Overall Impact’ award for the entry which they believe best shows how scrutiny can make a positive contribution to a local area or service.

The standard of entries, as ever, was very high. Congratulations to those organisations that have been shortlisted.

For those who did not make the shortlist this year, commiserations and thank you for taking part. We recognise that a lot of effort goes in to submitting to the awards and that not being shortlisted is disappointing. We hope you will try again next year.

The awards will be presented at a ceremony which follows the CfPS Annual Conference - Powerful, Accountable, Local - more information about the conference can be found here. Details of the categories available to download or view here.]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=939 Wed, 09 May 2012 15:26:52 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=939
We already produce easy read agendas for meetings of our Social Care OSC (see attached) but we'd be very interested to see other examples from other authorites.

Many thanks
Caroline

  Easy read agenda comp ver 1 040412.doc (Size: 181 KB / Downloads: 42) ]]>
We already produce easy read agendas for meetings of our Social Care OSC (see attached) but we'd be very interested to see other examples from other authorites.

Many thanks
Caroline

  Easy read agenda comp ver 1 040412.doc (Size: 181 KB / Downloads: 42) ]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=938 Wed, 09 May 2012 09:11:12 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=938 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=936 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 08:12:05 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=936
We are looking at getting our Policy and Resources Scrutiny Committee involved in looking at a new system and any information would be most helpful.

Many thanks in advance

Neil]]>
We are looking at getting our Policy and Resources Scrutiny Committee involved in looking at a new system and any information would be most helpful.

Many thanks in advance

Neil]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=935 Fri, 27 Apr 2012 11:03:20 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=935
CfPS is seeking to recruit six to eight interested councils to take part in a national learning set programme.

Participants will be asked to attend up to three face-to-face meetings (reasonable travel expenses will be met) and take part in telephone conferences to support the work. Local areas will also be asked to implement the learning locally, to aid the development of protocols.

For more information visit the scrutiny and CQC webpage]]>
CfPS is seeking to recruit six to eight interested councils to take part in a national learning set programme.

Participants will be asked to attend up to three face-to-face meetings (reasonable travel expenses will be met) and take part in telephone conferences to support the work. Local areas will also be asked to implement the learning locally, to aid the development of protocols.

For more information visit the scrutiny and CQC webpage]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=934 Fri, 27 Apr 2012 08:55:50 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=934 I was wondering if CfPS will be doing a bitesize guide to the impact of the Health and Social Care Act on Health Scrutiny, or a document highlighting the changes brought about by the act?
I know this sounds as my being lazy, but there still seems to be confusion around things such as substantial variations, and also if the Health and Wellbeing Board has to be a Committee of the Council or could it be constructed like an LEP (and if so what difference does this mean to scrutinising it).
Thanks,
Leanne]]> I was wondering if CfPS will be doing a bitesize guide to the impact of the Health and Social Care Act on Health Scrutiny, or a document highlighting the changes brought about by the act?
I know this sounds as my being lazy, but there still seems to be confusion around things such as substantial variations, and also if the Health and Wellbeing Board has to be a Committee of the Council or could it be constructed like an LEP (and if so what difference does this mean to scrutinising it).
Thanks,
Leanne]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=932 Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:49:22 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=932


Freedom from central control means that local accountability needs strengthening so that local people have confidence that commissioners and providers are focused on safe services that provide good quality and value. Communities need confidence that public services are focused on sustainable long term improvement not short term financial gain. Councillors – with their unique democratic mandate to speak up for people about everything that happens in an area - should be at the heart of this new approach. Building on the theme of councillors as ‘guardians’ of people and places, it is important to be clear about how they can use processes for challenge and accountability to provide assurance for local people that their needs and aspirations are understood, that services are being planned and delivered around their long term needs and that public agencies understand (and are working together to mitigate) risks to the resilience and prosperity of communities. Councillors will have an important role helping local people to navigate the increasingly complex service landscape and they will be able to provide a highly-visible source of accountability for wider, strategic issues arising from the increase in choice, personalisation and more complex delivery partnerships. Councillors should be ‘people’s voice to services’ rather than ‘services voices to people’ and need to make sure their councils build dynamic and proportionate governance frameworks to maximise accountability and transparency, while not imposing bureaucracy or slowing down decision-making. Relying on traditional forms of governance will not be sufficient to be truly enabling, transparent and accountable to local people.



In concluding our submission, we emphasised our thoughts about the principles we believe should underpin public sector reform and local governance in the 21st century. We believe that councillors have a unique role to play to tackle the challenges everyone encounters wherever they live and to help communities build resilience and secure prosperity and we included some examples of councillors using different ways of working, going beyond traditional methods, to make a difference in their areas.]]>


Freedom from central control means that local accountability needs strengthening so that local people have confidence that commissioners and providers are focused on safe services that provide good quality and value. Communities need confidence that public services are focused on sustainable long term improvement not short term financial gain. Councillors – with their unique democratic mandate to speak up for people about everything that happens in an area - should be at the heart of this new approach. Building on the theme of councillors as ‘guardians’ of people and places, it is important to be clear about how they can use processes for challenge and accountability to provide assurance for local people that their needs and aspirations are understood, that services are being planned and delivered around their long term needs and that public agencies understand (and are working together to mitigate) risks to the resilience and prosperity of communities. Councillors will have an important role helping local people to navigate the increasingly complex service landscape and they will be able to provide a highly-visible source of accountability for wider, strategic issues arising from the increase in choice, personalisation and more complex delivery partnerships. Councillors should be ‘people’s voice to services’ rather than ‘services voices to people’ and need to make sure their councils build dynamic and proportionate governance frameworks to maximise accountability and transparency, while not imposing bureaucracy or slowing down decision-making. Relying on traditional forms of governance will not be sufficient to be truly enabling, transparent and accountable to local people.



In concluding our submission, we emphasised our thoughts about the principles we believe should underpin public sector reform and local governance in the 21st century. We believe that councillors have a unique role to play to tackle the challenges everyone encounters wherever they live and to help communities build resilience and secure prosperity and we included some examples of councillors using different ways of working, going beyond traditional methods, to make a difference in their areas.]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=931 Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:29:08 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=931 ‘Musical Chairs’ on 19 April 2012 and we have now published the report on our website, along with two appendices which show a ‘spectrum of council governance’ and the report methodology. Coverage of the report was the first item in the printed version of the LGC magazine and on the website LGCplus.com. The report has been keenly awaited as a contribution to the debate about the opportunities and pitfalls presented by freedoms in the Localism Act 2011 to move away from leader and cabinet models.

The report sets out key findings about how some councils are approaching the opportunity to choose a committee style of governance, in particular the extent to which governance arrangements are seen in the wider context of checks and balances in local government. The report warns that, far from being an internal administrative exercise, changing governance arrangements needs to be seen in the context of the wider implications and impacts on planning and delivering services. Councils hoping to solve organisational and/or political problems, or become more democratic, through a committee system, should first consider their organisational culture and values before deciding to change structures and processes.

The report identifies four key messages for council leaders and senior managers:

- be clear about the reasons for change, the expected outcomes and plans to evaluate against them. Being clear about culture and values will help councils assess how councillors can best add value to their communities and to the running of the council.

- get others involved. The public sector has changed significantly since councils last changed governance arrangements - different approaches to service planning and delivery (for example through commissioning, partnerships or innovative collaborations) may significantly influence the style of governance councils adopt.

- forward planning and effective delegation are crucial so that councillors focus on strategic issues where they can add value, fitting in with the business cycle of partners and presenting citizens' views when they can best have influence.

- there is a clear case for maintaining a “scrutiny” function. Councils should be clear about what checks and balances service committees will employ to mitigate risks and drive improvements. Citizens need assurance that scrutiny is empowered to horizon-scan and investigate cross-cutting issues of community interest, for example crime and disorder, health and other partners.

Download Musical chairs here
To complement the publication of the report there is a discussion thread running on our website]]> ‘Musical Chairs’ on 19 April 2012 and we have now published the report on our website, along with two appendices which show a ‘spectrum of council governance’ and the report methodology. Coverage of the report was the first item in the printed version of the LGC magazine and on the website LGCplus.com. The report has been keenly awaited as a contribution to the debate about the opportunities and pitfalls presented by freedoms in the Localism Act 2011 to move away from leader and cabinet models.

The report sets out key findings about how some councils are approaching the opportunity to choose a committee style of governance, in particular the extent to which governance arrangements are seen in the wider context of checks and balances in local government. The report warns that, far from being an internal administrative exercise, changing governance arrangements needs to be seen in the context of the wider implications and impacts on planning and delivering services. Councils hoping to solve organisational and/or political problems, or become more democratic, through a committee system, should first consider their organisational culture and values before deciding to change structures and processes.

The report identifies four key messages for council leaders and senior managers:

- be clear about the reasons for change, the expected outcomes and plans to evaluate against them. Being clear about culture and values will help councils assess how councillors can best add value to their communities and to the running of the council.

- get others involved. The public sector has changed significantly since councils last changed governance arrangements - different approaches to service planning and delivery (for example through commissioning, partnerships or innovative collaborations) may significantly influence the style of governance councils adopt.

- forward planning and effective delegation are crucial so that councillors focus on strategic issues where they can add value, fitting in with the business cycle of partners and presenting citizens' views when they can best have influence.

- there is a clear case for maintaining a “scrutiny” function. Councils should be clear about what checks and balances service committees will employ to mitigate risks and drive improvements. Citizens need assurance that scrutiny is empowered to horizon-scan and investigate cross-cutting issues of community interest, for example crime and disorder, health and other partners.

Download Musical chairs here
To complement the publication of the report there is a discussion thread running on our website]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=930 Thu, 26 Apr 2012 09:56:54 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=930
You can fill in the survey here


We’d like to take the opportunity to sincerely thank those who have submitted responses so far, and who have taken the time to provide us with detailed information on scrutiny in their authority.]]>
You can fill in the survey here


We’d like to take the opportunity to sincerely thank those who have submitted responses so far, and who have taken the time to provide us with detailed information on scrutiny in their authority.]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=929 Thu, 26 Apr 2012 08:48:16 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=929
The committee has not heard a great deal of evidence yet about FOI and local government, or wider issues of transparency insofar as they affect local government. I'm advised that the session in which we will participate will focus on these issues, and as such I'm keen to gather evidence from practitioners - both informal and formal - that we can use to give the committee a rounded view of the challenges and opportunities around transparency in local government. I'm keen to encourage the committee to think about FOI less in the context of the mechanics of the FOI regime itself, and more about how the Government has sought to build on FOI through measures such as the code of practice on information and other injunctions from DCLG about publishing more local information. It's only by examining the wider issues, I think, that a rounded view of FOI can be reached.

As such, any thoughts and views on these issues would be valued. You can contact me directly on ed.hammond@cfps.org.uk or 020 7187 7369 if you would prefer not to post below!]]>
The committee has not heard a great deal of evidence yet about FOI and local government, or wider issues of transparency insofar as they affect local government. I'm advised that the session in which we will participate will focus on these issues, and as such I'm keen to gather evidence from practitioners - both informal and formal - that we can use to give the committee a rounded view of the challenges and opportunities around transparency in local government. I'm keen to encourage the committee to think about FOI less in the context of the mechanics of the FOI regime itself, and more about how the Government has sought to build on FOI through measures such as the code of practice on information and other injunctions from DCLG about publishing more local information. It's only by examining the wider issues, I think, that a rounded view of FOI can be reached.

As such, any thoughts and views on these issues would be valued. You can contact me directly on ed.hammond@cfps.org.uk or 020 7187 7369 if you would prefer not to post below!]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=928 Wed, 25 Apr 2012 14:12:45 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=928
Do any of you undertake specific scrutiny of schools? If so how do you do it and what do your schools think of this?

Thanks

Neil]]>
Do any of you undertake specific scrutiny of schools? If so how do you do it and what do your schools think of this?

Thanks

Neil]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=927 Wed, 25 Apr 2012 13:09:47 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=927
This is my first post on here so would be really grateful if anyone could help.

I have recently been appointed scrutiny officer for Cardiff’s partnership board and the scrutiny panel have requested some information on topics that other authorities have scrutinised with regards local service boards, local strategic partnerships and general partnership scrutiny.

I was wondering if anyone has any experience of this form of scrutiny and can give some advice on which topic areas were effective, and any points of learning from overall partnership scrutiny.

Thanks in anticipation and I hope to become much more involved in the general discussions as I get more experienced myself.]]>
This is my first post on here so would be really grateful if anyone could help.

I have recently been appointed scrutiny officer for Cardiff’s partnership board and the scrutiny panel have requested some information on topics that other authorities have scrutinised with regards local service boards, local strategic partnerships and general partnership scrutiny.

I was wondering if anyone has any experience of this form of scrutiny and can give some advice on which topic areas were effective, and any points of learning from overall partnership scrutiny.

Thanks in anticipation and I hope to become much more involved in the general discussions as I get more experienced myself.]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=926 Tue, 24 Apr 2012 15:09:07 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=926
We understand from our briefs on AQP that each PCT cluster has been asked to identify three areas that would benefit from greater choice being open to patients. In April 2012 the PCT's are due to begin the implementation of offering such wider services.

We are treating the proposals like any other inquiry we may receive that may or may not end up being a substantial change in service (i.e. planning on asking the commissioner what services are being proposed, the numbers of patients being affected, q's around performance, 4 tests and engagement/involvement of local people), but wondered if anyone else had treated such cases differently? I know that the key principles of an AQP approach in the operational guidance include that 'commissioners set local pathways and referral protocols which providers must accept', but it makes no reference to how scrutiny might relate to these.

Any thoughts are appreciated, especially (but not exclusively!) Tim and Ed!]]>
We understand from our briefs on AQP that each PCT cluster has been asked to identify three areas that would benefit from greater choice being open to patients. In April 2012 the PCT's are due to begin the implementation of offering such wider services.

We are treating the proposals like any other inquiry we may receive that may or may not end up being a substantial change in service (i.e. planning on asking the commissioner what services are being proposed, the numbers of patients being affected, q's around performance, 4 tests and engagement/involvement of local people), but wondered if anyone else had treated such cases differently? I know that the key principles of an AQP approach in the operational guidance include that 'commissioners set local pathways and referral protocols which providers must accept', but it makes no reference to how scrutiny might relate to these.

Any thoughts are appreciated, especially (but not exclusively!) Tim and Ed!]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=925 Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:04:29 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=925
Funded by the Inclusion Health team and the Department of Health, the programme will recruit six new scrutiny development areas (SDAs), to use scrutiny to investigate the health outcomes and inequalities of 3 vulnerable groups;

Homeless and rough sleepers (two development areas)
Gypsies and travellers (two development areas)
Sex workers (two development areas)

SDAs will receive 5 days support from one of our expert advisers to carry out a scrutiny review about one of the above vulnerable groups using the new model of impactful scrutiny developed in phase two, and building on Peeling the Onion, developed in phase one.

Applications are welcome from all local authorities wishing to scrutinise health inequalities experienced by the above vulnerable groups

For more information, bidding guidance and application form, please use the links below. The closing date for applications is Thursday 17th May.

  Application Form FINAL.doc (Size: 105 KB / Downloads: 19)

  Info and Bidding guidance for new SDAs FINAL.doc (Size: 153.5 KB / Downloads: 29)

For more information on the health inequalities programme (phases one to three) click here]]>
Funded by the Inclusion Health team and the Department of Health, the programme will recruit six new scrutiny development areas (SDAs), to use scrutiny to investigate the health outcomes and inequalities of 3 vulnerable groups;

Homeless and rough sleepers (two development areas)
Gypsies and travellers (two development areas)
Sex workers (two development areas)

SDAs will receive 5 days support from one of our expert advisers to carry out a scrutiny review about one of the above vulnerable groups using the new model of impactful scrutiny developed in phase two, and building on Peeling the Onion, developed in phase one.

Applications are welcome from all local authorities wishing to scrutinise health inequalities experienced by the above vulnerable groups

For more information, bidding guidance and application form, please use the links below. The closing date for applications is Thursday 17th May.

  Application Form FINAL.doc (Size: 105 KB / Downloads: 19)

  Info and Bidding guidance for new SDAs FINAL.doc (Size: 153.5 KB / Downloads: 29)

For more information on the health inequalities programme (phases one to three) click here]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=924 Fri, 20 Apr 2012 11:01:31 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=924
It has also become apparent that, in transferring content over, keywords and descriptors uploaded by website users to enable their reviews to be more easily searchable have not been included.

Over the next couple of weeks we are going to trawl through every entry in the library, putting in place common keywords, simplifying the categories that already exist and ensuring that descriptions of each review are optimised so that, when you use the search function on the website, the right review(s) are coming up when you want them to.

This process may take some time but you will all hopefully begin to see the results bearing fruit in the not too distant future.

In the meantime, apologies for the problems that I know many of you are having.]]>
It has also become apparent that, in transferring content over, keywords and descriptors uploaded by website users to enable their reviews to be more easily searchable have not been included.

Over the next couple of weeks we are going to trawl through every entry in the library, putting in place common keywords, simplifying the categories that already exist and ensuring that descriptions of each review are optimised so that, when you use the search function on the website, the right review(s) are coming up when you want them to.

This process may take some time but you will all hopefully begin to see the results bearing fruit in the not too distant future.

In the meantime, apologies for the problems that I know many of you are having.]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=923 Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:55:43 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=923 Practical issues for local authorities in moving to a committee system
This report is designed to help councillors and officers who expect to be actively involved in developing new governance arrangements where their authority chooses to adopt a "committee system" under the Localism Act 2011.

The report is now available - to download or view here.

To view the appendices - please click here.]]> Practical issues for local authorities in moving to a committee system
This report is designed to help councillors and officers who expect to be actively involved in developing new governance arrangements where their authority chooses to adopt a "committee system" under the Localism Act 2011.

The report is now available - to download or view here.

To view the appendices - please click here.]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=922 Wed, 18 Apr 2012 10:06:39 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=922
Because of this, I have adopted the practice of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board chair's foreword being under the name of the new year's chair. Similarly the chair's mug shot at the start of each committee's section is also that of the new chair. I am conscious that this is not entirely logical because it is the former chair's work that is being reported on. On the other hand, having the new chair reinforces the spirit of continuity and resistance of O&S to political ups and downs.

What do others do? Old chair or new?]]>
Because of this, I have adopted the practice of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board chair's foreword being under the name of the new year's chair. Similarly the chair's mug shot at the start of each committee's section is also that of the new chair. I am conscious that this is not entirely logical because it is the former chair's work that is being reported on. On the other hand, having the new chair reinforces the spirit of continuity and resistance of O&S to political ups and downs.

What do others do? Old chair or new?]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=920 Tue, 17 Apr 2012 11:21:04 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=920
I thought, following a call from a delegate, that I should provide some words of advice on hotel venues in London for those of you who will unavoidably be staying overnight in order to come to the conference.

We don't have deals with any hotels this year, and haven't block-reserved any rooms either, but reference to the below should enable you to get some fairly cheap deals.

The conference is in Westminster, so a cost-effective solution if you're looking for somewhere accessible to stay would be Wembley or Harrow. From Harrow you can get to Westminster by taking a Metropolitan Line service to Finchley Road and then crossing over the platform for a Jubilee train to Westminster. The journey takes around 40 minutes. From Wembley it's about half an hour. Wembley and Harrow are both in northwest London. If you are arriving from the west at Paddington and going that way, don't be tempted to get the Bakerloo line - it takes ages)

Hotels in Harrow

You will want to stay in hotels in Harrow town centre, close to Harrow on the Hill tube station. (Don't stay in Harrow on the Hill itself - from the station, it's a punishing and steep fifteen minute walk to the top of the hill). There are several - Comfort Hotel and Quality Inn are both part of chains, the Harrow Hotel is an independent and is a bit basic. You should be able to get rooms in all three for under £60. (You may wonder why I know so much about hotels in Harrow - several years ago I did a scrutiny review about them. Yes really).

Hotels in Wembley

In Wembley you have a wider choice and it's closer to central London. You will want to stay in a hotel as close as possible to Wembley Park station - not Wembley Central. This is right by the stadium and as long as there are no events on (which I don't believe there are). There's a Hotel Ibis, a Premier Inn and a Quality Inn within a few minutes walk of the station. Again, you should be able to find rooms for no more than £60.

Central London

Central London hotels are obviously convenient for the conference itself but you will pay more for the privilege. If you are arriving at Euston, King's Cross or St Pancras you may want to stay at a hotel in Bloomsbury - there is a selection of interchangeable hotels including the County Hotel and the Royal National Hotel, some of which have seen better days but all of which are relatively cheap for central London (£70 - £90 per night). Closer to the conference venue itself you have the Victoria Park Plaza and the Waterloo Park Plaza - both quite expensive.]]>
I thought, following a call from a delegate, that I should provide some words of advice on hotel venues in London for those of you who will unavoidably be staying overnight in order to come to the conference.

We don't have deals with any hotels this year, and haven't block-reserved any rooms either, but reference to the below should enable you to get some fairly cheap deals.

The conference is in Westminster, so a cost-effective solution if you're looking for somewhere accessible to stay would be Wembley or Harrow. From Harrow you can get to Westminster by taking a Metropolitan Line service to Finchley Road and then crossing over the platform for a Jubilee train to Westminster. The journey takes around 40 minutes. From Wembley it's about half an hour. Wembley and Harrow are both in northwest London. If you are arriving from the west at Paddington and going that way, don't be tempted to get the Bakerloo line - it takes ages)

Hotels in Harrow

You will want to stay in hotels in Harrow town centre, close to Harrow on the Hill tube station. (Don't stay in Harrow on the Hill itself - from the station, it's a punishing and steep fifteen minute walk to the top of the hill). There are several - Comfort Hotel and Quality Inn are both part of chains, the Harrow Hotel is an independent and is a bit basic. You should be able to get rooms in all three for under £60. (You may wonder why I know so much about hotels in Harrow - several years ago I did a scrutiny review about them. Yes really).

Hotels in Wembley

In Wembley you have a wider choice and it's closer to central London. You will want to stay in a hotel as close as possible to Wembley Park station - not Wembley Central. This is right by the stadium and as long as there are no events on (which I don't believe there are). There's a Hotel Ibis, a Premier Inn and a Quality Inn within a few minutes walk of the station. Again, you should be able to find rooms for no more than £60.

Central London

Central London hotels are obviously convenient for the conference itself but you will pay more for the privilege. If you are arriving at Euston, King's Cross or St Pancras you may want to stay at a hotel in Bloomsbury - there is a selection of interchangeable hotels including the County Hotel and the Royal National Hotel, some of which have seen better days but all of which are relatively cheap for central London (£70 - £90 per night). Closer to the conference venue itself you have the Victoria Park Plaza and the Waterloo Park Plaza - both quite expensive.]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=919 Fri, 13 Apr 2012 12:45:20 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=919
It's something we've always been keen to do, but capacity and resource constraints do make it difficult. That said, given that it's a long-standing request from a number of people, we do need to give more thought to it. For example, watching webcasts of meetings when particularly interesting issues are under discussion might provide us with a cost-effective mechanism to do this in many instances.

I haven't yet discussed this with my colleagues but thought I could use this thread to tease out exactly how we might attend and observe committee meetings in a way that would be useful to you, but which wouldn't end up using up a disproportionate amount of time at our end (remembering that there are only 7 of us).]]>
It's something we've always been keen to do, but capacity and resource constraints do make it difficult. That said, given that it's a long-standing request from a number of people, we do need to give more thought to it. For example, watching webcasts of meetings when particularly interesting issues are under discussion might provide us with a cost-effective mechanism to do this in many instances.

I haven't yet discussed this with my colleagues but thought I could use this thread to tease out exactly how we might attend and observe committee meetings in a way that would be useful to you, but which wouldn't end up using up a disproportionate amount of time at our end (remembering that there are only 7 of us).]]> http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=918 Fri, 13 Apr 2012 10:52:04 +0000 http://www.cfps.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?tid=918 As you will all be aware public health is 'coming home' to local authorities in April 2013, you will also be aware that Transition Plans had to be submitted recently to regional SHA's for sign off.

One of the requirements from Government is that a vision and strategy for public health should be developed. I would be interested to know:
* if your authority has started to develop the vision/strategy
* if this has been completed? If so would it be possible to have sight of this or a draft version?
*who was involved in the development of the vision/strategy for public health?

Thanks

Mike]]> As you will all be aware public health is 'coming home' to local authorities in April 2013, you will also be aware that Transition Plans had to be submitted recently to regional SHA's for sign off.

One of the requirements from Government is that a vision and strategy for public health should be developed. I would be interested to know:
* if your authority has started to develop the vision/strategy
* if this has been completed? If so would it be possible to have sight of this or a draft version?
*who was involved in the development of the vision/strategy for public health?

Thanks

Mike]]>