In a critical letter of comment on proposals before the States this week, Scrutiny said it accepted that accommodation for children’s services needed to improve, but that this did not justify the proposed spend.
‘Identifying shortcomings in existing premises and describing the advantages of a modern building does not, in the committee’s view, establish that spending up to £22m. on the proposed Children’s Services Hub represents the best use of public money,’ it said.
‘A desirable project still requires a demonstrable business case.’
The hub, being proposed by the Committee for Health & Social Care, would refurbish and extend Raymond Falla House in Burnt Lane, St Martin’s, to bring together children’s and family services which are currently spread across several sites.
Scrutiny said that the policy letter made ‘substantial claims’ about better service integration, more appointment capacity, improved staff retention and better outcomes, but that the evidence did not establish the scale of those improvements or whether they could be achieved more economically.
Moving professionals into the same building, it argued, would not by itself deliver integrated services or stop families having to repeat their stories.
Its central criticism was the absence of any appraisal of a cheaper alternative – permanently relocating office-based services and consolidating the estate without building the full hub. It noted that HSC had confirmed no such standalone option was developed.
The committee also highlighted an apparent contradiction, that the inability to release Perruque House was cited as a key reason for rejecting the cheaper refurbishment option, yet the Committee for Housing has said the offices there could move earlier into other buildings.
‘The appraisal has therefore not demonstrated that releasing this strategically important site depends on constructing the full hub,’ it said.
It also questioned the £22m. funding ceiling, which is £4.9m. – about 29% – above the current £17.1m. estimate for the project, saying the justification for that headroom had not been adequately explained.
The committee said a costed estate-rationalisation appraisal should be completed before the States approved the scheme, and that members needed evidence the hub was ‘the necessary, proportionate and best-value means’ of improving accommodation.
‘It is the committee’s strongly held view that the Committee for Health & Social Care has not yet sufficiently demonstrated this fact,’ said president Deputy Andy Sloan.
The proposal will be tabled for debate at this week’s States meeting.
You need to be logged in to comment.