Maidstone Borough Council’s response to Kent County Council’s Community Services Consultation

It is clear that the impact of the proposals on Maidstone has not been properly evaluated and a response should be made to ensure that Maidstone residents have the access they need to vital community support services.

 

The main areas of the consultation proposals that this response seeks to respond to and highlight is:

·         The impact on vulnerable residents in Marden & Yalding and East Ward

·         The wider impact of the proposals on High Street and Shepway North wards (as a result of the closure of the two children’s centres).

 

The Council’s concerns are substantiated with data from the 2021 Census and health inequalities data.

The Consultation proposals also asks for comment on the following areas without explaining what this would mean for Maidstone (or other districts):

·         Co-location of services

·         Outreach

·         The Family Hub model

·         Accessing Service online

 

These areas are all mentioned as supporting the current proposals at some point in the future, but the consultation documents do not provide details on how these will be developed, nor does it provide a timeline. We are concerned that  decisions that will have such a significant impact on residents in Maidstone is missing the next steps in terms of identifying alternative service provision and access to service.

An assessment of the consultation process has also been included as the engagement events being held for Maidstone are both at Sessions House which isn’t in line with the offer for other districts.

Our response structured around the consultation questionnaire questions that were available to us to respond to.

 

 

Q7.  If you think we have missed out any data that should be used, please tell us what it is below.

 

Yes, we feel a significant amount of data has been missed.

 

KCC have made a very clear statement as part of this consultation. It says, “our proposals have been designed by considering where there is greatest need for our services.”  However, the reasons for the proposed changes appear to be primarily about property rather the need.

The consultation document talks about the needs of residents in each individual ward in Maidstone.  The consultation document recognises that there are more deprived wards than others but fails to recognise the impact of the proposals on those wards.  The needs-based assessment that accompanies the consultations identifies High Street Ward and Shepway (North) as two of Maidstone’s most deprived wards.

It is proposed that two children’s Centre will close in Maidstone - in East ward and Marden and Yalding ward as well as the relocation of Adult Education from High Street Ward to Heath Ward

In assessing ‘need’ we are not confident that this has been considered as comprehensively as we would have expected for a number of reasons highlighted below.

 

Proposed closure of Marden Children’s Centre

Impact on Marden & Yalding residents

 

As highlighted in the consultation documentation Marden has high need and poor connectivity. It should be noted that services have already been cut before in rural areas such as bus services – so this is cutting services in an area where services are already considered inadequate.

 

The alternative Children’s Centre for Marden, as indicated in the consultation document, is Cranbrook Library or Greenfields in Shepway (North).  However, the co-location of the Children’s Centre in Cranbrook Library is not confirmed, the alternative Children’s Centre for Marden Residents is therefore Greenfields in Shepway.

The proposals say that ‘96% of Maidstone households would be within a 30 minute public transport catchment of a community services building (3,034 people outside)’. 

We have identified that Marden residents will be disproportionately affected.

The table shown below outlines the actual journey times to alternative Children’s Centres.  The most vulnerable residents in Marden will be most affected. Residents who rely on public transport will have a significant journey time and an additional financial burden.  It is likely that residents will choose not to make the journey. Additionally there are significant access issues at Marden at station – making train travel with a pushchair almost impossible and therefore traveling by car to Tonbridge the only option.

We have been informed, and therefore have anecdotal knowledge that Tonbridge Youth Hub and Children’s Centre is being suggested as a nearest alternative to Marden residents.  However, this is not what is included in the Consultation.  Cranbrook library is the primary alterative in the consultation documentation, despite the co-location of the children’s centre not yet being agreed.  Greenfields is the secondary alternative for Marden residents.

If Tonbridge is a viable alternative, why is it not included in the consultation documentation?

Actual Journey times for Marden residents

 

Data from the 2021 census tells us that in Marden & Yalding:

Marden and Yalding ward is not considered to be an area of deprivation but recent census data reveals the ward has significant need.

·                     There are 1,832 children aged 15 years and under living in Marden and Yalding ward. An increase of 42.2 % compared to 2011 Census.

·                     There has been a 55.8% increase in the number of 0 – 4 year olds (55.8% increase) and a 147.3% number of 5 – 9 year olds (147.3% increase). This compares to an overall increase in population in Marden and Yalding of 21.6%, suggesting that the number of 0 – 9-year-olds is increasing faster than the rest of the population.

·                     There has been a 16.3% increase in lone parent households

·                     Kent County Council predict that the 0 – 5-year-old age bracket will continue to increase in Maidstone, with an average increase across the borough of 10.1% by 2040. The current Census increase suggests again that Marden and Yalding’s younger population is growing significantly quicker than the average predictions for Maidstone.

Deprivation

The Census data allows us to see how many households are deprived and by how many dimensions. There are four levels of deprivation dimensions:

o        Education

o        Employment

o        Health

o        Housing

 

·                     In Marden and Yalding ward 1,249 households suffering from at least one level of deprivation, an increase of 18.5%.  Households of this type, account for 32% of all households in this ward.

·                     10% of households in this ward have no access to a car or van for travelling.

·                     There are 585 low-income households, with a total of 377 children. Low-income is defined as claiming welfare support from the Local Authority.  Of those households, 207 of them are living below the poverty line, which includes 177 children.

·                     97 of these low-income households have been impacted by Welfare Reforms over the last ten years and are currently (on average) £25.80 worse off each week because of this.

Additionally, Health Inequalities data for Marden (Kent Public Health Observatory) tells us:

·                     The rates for emergency hospital admissions for children under 19 years are greater for Marden and Yalding than for Maidstone overall at 57 per 10,000 children and young people, compared to 49 per 10,000 for Maidstone overall.

Impact of closure of Marden’s Children’s Centres on areas of deprivation.

Greenfields’s Children Centre is identified in the proposals as an alternative Children’s Centre for both users of Marden and East Borough Children’s Centres.  Greenfield’s is located in Shepway (North), one of the top three deprived LSO areas in Maidstone.

The existing need and cumulative impact of the proposals on residents in Shepway does not appear to have been considered.

Data from the 2021 census tells us that in and Shepway (North) ward:

There are 1,901 children aged 15 years and under living in Shepway North ward.

Whilst there has been a decline in the age bracket 0 – 4 years (-11.6%) here has been an increase in the number of 5 - 9-year-olds (8.4% increase).

Deprivation

1,275 households in Shepway are suffering from at least one level of deprivation, an increase of 11.16%.This accounts for 36.9% of all households in this ward.

17% of households in this ward have no access to a car or van for travelling. This equates to 593 households.

There are currently 676 low-income households, with a total of 523 children. Of those households, 293 of them are living below the poverty line, which includes 314 children.

102 of these low-income households have been impacted by Welfare Reforms over the last ten years and are currently (on average) £20.60 worse off each week because of this.

In terms of Health Inequalities:

·                     The percentage of babies born with a low birth rate is also significantly higher than both Maidstone and Kent percentages, with 6.4% of births being born with a low birth weight (under 2.5kg). This compares to 5.5% in Maidstone and 5.8% in Kent.

·                     New mothers living in the area are much less likely to breastfeed, with only 46.6% choosing to breastfeed their infants, compared to 59.1% in Maidstone and 58.1% in Kent.

·                     Obesity in reception aged children (aged 4 and 5 years) is more prevalent, with 12.3% being recorded as obese, compared to 8.5% on average in Maidstone and 9.4% on average in Kent.

·                     Obesity prevalence also continues into year six children (aged 10 and 11 years) with 23.7% being recorded as obese, compared to 17.2% on average in Maidstone.

 

Proposed closure of East Borough Children’s Centre.

Impact on East Ward residents

 

The alternative Children’s Centre for East Borough users, as indicated in the consultation document is Sunshine Children’s Centre which is an approximate 27-minute walk from East Borough Children’s Centre.  The other alternative is Greenfields in Shepway which is an approximate 45–48-minute walk from East Borough Children’s centre. Whilst both alternative options for East Borough users are more accessible in terms of transport links than Marden, the change is significant.

An issue that needs to be highlighted regarding East Borough Children’s Centre is it location on the periphery of High Street Ward.  Its users are not going to be geographically ringfenced to East Ward.  Its service users are most likely are mostly to come from High Street ward which is the highest deprived ward in Maidstone borough

Data from the 2021 census tells us that in East ward:

o        There are 1,649 children aged 15 years and under living in East ward, an increase of 7.7%

o        There has been an increase across all the age brackets, but most notably in the 5–9 year old bracket, which increased by 10.7%

o        The 0–4 year old bracket increased by 10.0%.

o        Overall, the total population of East Ward increased by 5.1% in between censuses, which suggests that the population of 5-9 year olds is increasing faster than the rest of the population. 

o        The number of lone parent families (with dependent children) living in East ward has increased by 1.61% (insert numbers and compare with housing stats etc from Housing to follow)

Deprivation

o        1,886 households in East Ward are suffering from at least one level of deprivation, an increase of 7.46% Whilst this is only a small increase, this number of deprived households accounts for 50% of all households in this ward.

o        19.4% of all households living in East ward have no access to a car or van. This is 723 households.

o        There are currently 540 low-income households, with a total of 240 children. Of those households, 186 of them are living below the poverty line, which includes 90 children.

o        86 of these low-income households have been impacted by Welfare Reforms over the last ten years and are currently (on average) £25.20 worse off each week because of this.

Additionally, Health Inequalities data for East ward (Kent Public Health Observatory) tells us:

·                     The data suggests that obesity in children is an issue in the East ward. East ward has a greater proportion of reception age children measured as obese at 10.8% compared to 9.4% in Kent overall and a greater proportion of children at year 6 (10-11 years) also measuring as obese at 18.5% compared to 18.0% in Kent.  

 

·                     East ward has a greater proportion of live births where the child has a low weight (2500 grammes or less) at 5.9% compared to 5.8% for Kent.

Impact of closure of East Ward Children’s Centre on areas of deprivation.

Sunshine Children’s Centre is identified as the primary alternative for users of East Borough’s Children’s Centre.  Sunshine Children’s Centre is located in High Street Ward which is the most deprived LSO area in Maidstone.

The existing need and cumulative impact of the proposals on residents in High Street Ward does not appear to have been considered.

Data from the 2021 census tells us that in High Street ward:

o        2,298 children aged 15 years and under living in High Street ward, an increase of 20.7%

o        There has been an increase across all of the age brackets, but most notably 5–9-year-olds

o        0–4 year olds increased by 10.0% and the 10–15 year old bracket increased by 15.5%.

o        Overall, the total population of High Street Ward increased by 22.9% which suggests that the population of 5–9-year-olds is increasing faster than the rest of the population.

Kent County Council predict that the 0 – 5-year-old age bracket will continue to increase in Maidstone, with an average increase across the borough of 10.1% by 2040 (which is in line with census data predictions)

There are 397 lone parent families (with dependent children) living in High Street ward, an increase of 3.39%.

Deprivation

There are 1,843 households suffering from at least one level of deprivation, a significant increase of 31.17% compared to 2011 (1,405). This accounts for 31.6% of all households in this ward.

32.1% of all households living in High Street ward have no access to a car or van. This is 1,637 households.

There are currently 1,183 low-income households in High Street ward, with a total of 685 children. Of those households, 467 of them are living below the poverty line, which includes 360 children.

239 of these low-income households have been impacted by Welfare Reforms over the last ten years and are currently (on average) £30 worse off each week because of this.

Health Inequalities data for High Street Ward (Kent Public Health Observatory) tells us:                                                                                                                             

·                     The data suggests that obesity in children is an issue in the High Street ward. High Street ward has a greater proportion of reception age children measured as obese at 10.8% compared to 9.4% in Kent overall and a greater proportion of children at year 6 (10-11 years) also measuring as obese at 22.9% compared to 18.0% in Kent.  

 

·                     There are 110 more premature deaths per 100,00 people (under 75 years) in the High Street ward compared to in Kent overall. The rate for the High Street ward is also significantly greater than that for Kent at 427.4 deaths per 100,000 population compared to 280.2 for Maidstone overall. 

 

·                     Males in High street ward have a life expectancy of 2.6 years less than Kent overall.

 

Proposed relocation of Community Skills and Hubs

The current provision is moving from an established location in the borough’s highest area of deprivation (High Street Ward) to Health ward.

 

The current location in High Street ward is served well by public transport.  The new location can be reached by public transport but would be an additional journey/cost to High Street Ward residents.  For users coming into a central Town Centre location from other areas of the borough

 

Maidstone Borough Council is committed to supporting vulnerable residents to ensure no one is left behind.  On 25 January 2023, The Council’s Executive agreed the Poverty should be included as an additional protected characteristic.  Poverty will be included as part of the Council’s Equalities Impact Assessment, supporting decision making.

It is clear that the impact of these proposals will make vulnerable people in Maidstone more vulnerable.

The consultation proposals appear arbitrary and to have a rigid geographical focus (i.e. the physical, ward location of the existing building rather than the locality it supports).

The population of Maidstone is growing and the proposals are not considering the unidentified and unfulfilled need.

 

The impact on areas of high deprivation as a result of the current proposals regarding Children’s Centres is significant.  The lack of consideration that has been given to the impact of the proposals for High Street ward in particularly is deeply concerning.

 

Kent County Council predicts that the 0 – 5 year old age bracket will continue to increase in Maidstone, with an average increase across the borough of 10.1% by 2040.

 

 

 

 

 

Q9.  What do you think is important for us to consider when co-locating services?

 

Early conversations with district Councils to identify opportunities and sites for co-location is important.

 

It is disappointing that this hasn’t taken place in advance of or as part of the development of current proposals.  It is extremely worrying that the alternative service provision for users of Marden Children’s Centre is co-location at Cranbrook Library and this is not yet confirmed.

 

(We could mention specific options for co-location – such as Trinity House in High Street Ward and others??)

 

We feel that information is missing from the proposals that would provide valuable insight such as primary school outcomes for the affected wards and the wards impacted by the closures and the number of SEN (D) plans in place.  We would welcome

 

Q10.  If you have any comments you would like to make about delivering services through outreach, please tell us below.

 

Similarly, to co-location – working with districts to identify opportunities.

 

It is unclear from the proposals how outreach will change in Maidstone, how it will impact service delivery in Maidstone as the current consultation is only outlining changes to property which for Maidstone is the closure of two children’s centre and the relocation Adult Education.

 

Maidstone Borough Council would welcome early opportunity to work with KCC on identifying the needs of vulnerable residents and the way in which they engage with services to ensure that services are accessible to them.

 

 

Q12.  What is important to you when accessing services online?

 

It is unclear from the proposals which services are being considered.

 

Careful consideration needs to be given to the types of services that can be delivered online and the risks to vulnerable groups such as mothers and small children who benefit from face-to-face contact and engagement with trained staff, particularly around safeguarding maters.

 

We feel that there is a lack of assessment or consideration of digital inclusion. This extends well beyond broadband speed and in to the affordability of both  WiFi/Internet access and devices which allow people to access services reliably online.

 

If services can’t be accessed online due to digital inclusion, it places a burden on other organisations i.e. districts groups and organisations across the Voluntary and Community Sector.

 

We are engaging with KCC on its digital workstreams but have little evidence of how this project has been taken into account supports changes in service delivery – i.e. the proposals in this consultation.

 

 

Q15.  What do you think is important for us to consider when we transition to the Family Hub model?

 

The consultation proposals do not outline what a Family Hub model would affect services in Maidstone and how the model will affect current services.

 

It is important to consider services users – in terms of current and future need. This should be data led and consultative to understand what services local people need and how they want to access them. This process should remain under review.  There needs to be processes in pace for information sharing with district so it remains legal but doesn’t present a barrier

 

KCC should be working closely with its district Councils on co-location opportunities

 

Integrated care board at KCC – its priorities – what is the impact of its proposals??

 

 

Q19.  Please tell us if there are any other options you think we should consider, or if you have any other comments you wish to make about the proposals in this consultation.

 

Yes, we feel that more could be done in terms of engagement with Maidstone to ensure that the needs assessment accurate and data led. The impact of the proposals on areas of deprivation has not been considered; High Street Ward and Shepway North have been completely overlooked (explain as above in first - impact)

In terms of the EqIA completed as part of these proposals, there is no information on any direct promotion of this consultation to targeted groups i.e. centre users. Previous research with these groups is referred to in the EQIAs and EQIAs states that gaps in the data will be filled through this consultation process e.g. religion.

The recent census data (2021) should be used to evaluate need, not only in the wards where the children’s centres are closing (Marden & Yalding and East) but in the wards that will be most impacted by the decisions.  For example, East Borough Children’s Centre is it location on the periphery of High Street Ward.  Its users are not going to be geographically ringfenced to East Ward.  Its service users are most likely are mostly to come from High Street ward which is the highest deprived ward in Maidstone borough



Q20.  We welcome your views on our equality analysis and if you think there is anything we should consider relating to equality and diversity. Please add any comments below.

Yes, we feel that more could be done in terms of engagement with Maidstone to ensure that the needs assessment accurate and data led. The impact of the proposals on areas of deprivation has not been considered; High Street Ward and Shepway North have been completely overlooked (explain as above in first - impact)

In terms of the EqIA completed as part of these proposals, there is no information on any direct promotion of this consultation to targeted groups i.e. centre users. Previous research with these groups is referred to in the EQIAs and EQIAs states that gaps in the data will be filled through this consultation process e.g. religion.

The recent census data (2021) should be used to evaluate need, not only in the wards where the children’s centres are closing (Marden & Yalding and East) but in the wards that will be most impacted by the decisions.  For example, East Borough Children’s Centre is it location on the periphery of High Street Ward.  Its users are not going to be geographically ringfenced to East Ward.  Its service users are most likely are mostly to come from High Street ward which is the highest deprived ward in Maidstone borough.