1. Development of the National Indicator Set and Tellus Survey
Rob Sinclair
Alison Thompson
(DCSF)
Rob – the balance of the NIS across the 5 outcomes

2. NIS Development: Aims and Timescale
Aim to develop the second version of the NIS to:
Reflect emerging policy priorities for next spending period
Address gaps in the current NIS
Consider whether balance of NIs across ECM outcomes and DSOs is right
Incorporate better data that has since become available
Timing:
Uncertain, as SR timing not confirmed
but this project runs from late ’08 to late summer ’09
Currently:
Producing initial thinking on ‘NI theory’, gaps and balance – share some of this in following slides
Gathering feedback from policy and will then circulate note to ADCS standards, performance and inspection cttee

3. Purpose of NIS
NIS: Set of indicators central Govt can use to performance manage local authorities
But two alternative methods:
Use NIS to drive change, including what central Govt wants local areas to focus on; or
Use NIS to measure as comprehensively as possible the performance of the system in delivering good outcomes for children, young people and families
Unclear which currently being followed
Joined up Children’s Services
How should the NIS fit with other perf mgmt frameworks?

4. Processes vs Outcomes Guidance from HMT/CLG: outcomes focus
But only gives you part of picture
Friedman: both outcomes and process
Shows how and whether outcomes achieved
Measurement issue:
Outcomes difficult to measure and subject to inaccuracy

5. Balance of NIs? Often Claimed: But: Cross-cutting indicators:
DCSF ‘owned’ NIs are unbalanced across the ECM outcomes, towards attainment
But:
If NIs owned by other Depts are included, NIS looks more balanced
DCSF NIs
DCSF + OGD NIs
Cross-cutting indicators:
We currently only allow NIs to appear under one outcome
If allow multiple times, set more balanced

6. Tellus Update (1)
Tellus is the source of data to inform 5 DCSF NIs and 3 DCSF-led PSAs
NI 50: Emotional health (PSA 12 Improves child health and well-being)
NI 69: Bullying (PSA13 Improve child safety)
NI 110 : Positive activities & NI 115: Substance misuse (PSA 14 Young people on the path to success)
NI 199: Parks and play areas
The survey:
annual survey
covers years 6, 8 and 10
includes all types of mainstream schools (primary, middle, secondary, academies, PRUs and special schools)
inclusive of vulnerable and hard to reach groups such as children with SEN and disabilities
seeks CYP perceptions of, and experiences and satisfaction with universal services available to them (but not specialist services)
With APA and JAR processes coming to a close Ofsted asked Department to take over responsibility for the survey
The Department agreed – the Tellus data informs 5 DCSF national indicators and 3 of its PSA indicators (used to measure Government performance in achieving outcomes)
Although agreed to take over responsibility for survey, Department realised did not have capacity or expertise to delivery the survey in house
In the summer went out to tender for a survey/research specialist company to deliver Tellus.
As you know NFER was awarded contract to do the work

7. Tellus Update (2) New developments Conducted by NfER
Schools can include all CYP in Years 6, 8 and 10
Autumn term rather than the summer term
SEND versions
Question bank schools/LAs can select their own questions from
PSHE & Citizenship curriculum pack to support delivery
Feedback reports to schools
Secure web-based analytical tool for schools to analyse own results
Frequently asked why does Government want to deliver a pupil perception survey? Number of benefits to asking CYP their views
Helps us to deliver services more responsive to CYP needs and develop policies and procedures that reflect their aspirations
Some issues like bullying only way to find out what is happening is to ask CYP themselves
Should not underestimate CYP capacity to come up with practical and innovative solutions or think the unthinkable
Sponsored MSC student in summer to do final research project on Tellus – spoke to CYP who had done Tellus2 & 3 – suggested we did away with don’t know something else option as we made it too easy for them not to answer the question properly

8. Tellus Update (3) Stage Timing Confirm sample size with LAs March 2009
Confirm schools taking part
April 2009
LAs/Schools select from question bank
May/June 2009
PSHE & Citizenship pack
June 2009
Survey live
05 October – 16 November 2009
National Summary of NI results and NI Calculations
Jan/Feb 2010
LA and School reports
Feb/March 2009

9. Some issues to discuss…
What are the limitations and benefits of national indicators as a means of performance managing local areas across the range of their work?
Do you think indicators should be based on processes, outcomes or a mixture of both? And why?
Can CYP interests be met by a national indicator measuring outcomes/processes for all service users? Or do we need more CYP focussed indicators?
What’s the best way of engaging you on the detail of NI proposals for the next indicator set?