Loading
Cllr Humphreys chaired in Cllr Moultrie's absence. The Committee scrutinised four Cabinet proposals before Cabinet decides on 16 July: young people's housing support, the social services annual report, the corporate parenting report and Welsh-medium secondary school places. It agreed that the Chair will write to the Cabinet Member with its comments on each, approved the Scrutiny Annual Report and noted its work programme.
In Cllr Moultrie’s absence, Cllr Humphreys was elected to chair the meeting.
The Committee noted that Council, at its Annual meeting on 21st May, appointed Cllr Moultrie as Chair of the Committee and the following as Committee Members: Cllrs S. Ahmed, Boes, Gunter, Hopkins, Humphreys, Melbourne, Reid-Jones and Singh.
The Committee’s Terms of Reference, as agreed by Council at its Annual meeting on 21st May, were noted.
Apologies were received from Cllr Moultrie and Carol Cobert.
Cllr Littlechild declared a personal interest as a family member sat on the board of the 1910 Trust, which supported YMCA Housing. Cllr Gunter also declared a personal interest as a board member of the 1910 Trust. The following Members declared personal interests as school governors: Member School Patricia Arlotte St Bernadette’s Primary School Bid Corr Llanederyn Primary School Robert Hopkins Lakeside Primary School Irene Humphreys St Francis Primary School Emma Reid-Jones Thornhill Primary School
The minutes of the 13th May meeting were approved and signed as a correct record.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee expressing their comments and observations captured during the way forward.
Members were advised that this item provided both CYPSC and CASSC Members with background information to facilitate their pre-decision scrutiny of proposals relating to the Young Persons Housing-Related Support Commissioning, prior to its consideration by Cabinet on 16th July. Cllrs Littlechild, McGarry, Owen, and Naughton were in attendance for this item as members of the Community & Adult Services Scrutiny Committee. The Chair welcomed: Cllr Lynda Thorne Cabinet Member for Housing & Communities (Housing & Homelessness) Cllr Ash Lister Cabinet Member for Social Services (Children’s Services & Safeguarding) Jane Thomas Director of Adults, Housing & Communities Louise Bassett Assistant Director, Adult Services Laura Garvey-Cubbon OM Partnerships & Joint Commissioning Suki Bahara-Garrens Director of Children’s Services Nick Blake OM Business Performance & Policy The Cabinet Members were invited to make opening statements. Cllr Thorne described the report as an important step in shaping support for young people across Cardiff, in particular ensuring that they received the right support at the right time to prevent homelessness, build resilience and improve outcomes. The recommissioning program was intended to strengthen accommodation, advice, prevention and mediation services for 16-24 year olds, against a backdrop of increasing pressures and complex challenges. Joint work with Children’s Services was supported by additional investment and sought to establish a clear pathway towards stable housing focused around independence and wellbeing. Cllr Lister highlighted the work of partners and the need to provide appropriate housing for young people. Officers gave a presentation providing further detail, explaining that the report sought Cabinet approval for the proposed procurement approach regarding recommissioning of contracts for young persons’ accommodation and support provision. It was the council’s statutory duty under the Housing (Wales) Act to prevent homelessness and safeguard young people, and they had received £27.7m Housing Support Grant funding from the Welsh government in 2026/27, leading to the ambitious four-year, three-phase Housing Support Programme Commissioning Plan. Officers highlighted the Young Person’s Accommodation and Support Gateway, which provided 207 units of supported accommodation for 16-24 year olds, as well as the Young Person’s Advice and Mediation service, which was jointly funded by the Housing Support Grant and the Children & Communities grant. The gateway had helped reduce reliance on high-cost residential provision, with children looked after and care leavers accounting for 51% of placements compared to 39% last year. This had resulted in a £4.32m reduction in residential and foster placement spend, and had also improved equity of access, housing outcomes and independence. Officers added that the change of approach was needed due to the increasing complexity of need. Young people were remaining in supported accommodation for longer due to barriers in accessing move-on housing, in particular affordability pressures and the wider housing emergency, and the current model was becoming financially unsustainable. Consultation activity had been undertaken with stakeholders, and had found that young people valued on-site support, contracts with a mix of support levels, support for neurodiverse needs, specialist LGBTQ+ accommodation and expanded move-on options. The new model would put advice and prevention in Lot 1, then mixed-support accommodation in Lots 2 and 3, rebalancing the system away from crisis response towards prevention, earlier intervention and lower intensity support where appropriate. It sought to better match placements and improve stability with a more flexible range of accommodation and more trauma-informed and psychologically informed services. Officers emphasised the importance of early intervention and delivering whole family support in close partnership with Youth Services, with Lot 2 providing supported accommodation and sustained support, as well as specialist provision and a pathway for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children (UASC). Members were invited to ask questions and make comments; the discussion is summarised below: Members asked how prevention worked in practice and heard that it was predominantly referral-based, so it was important to advertise the service to the right people and ensure that officers had the right training. The youth service and education played primary roles in identifying when someone was at risk, and a proactive rather than reactive approach was key. Members warned about the potential impact of recommissioning contracts on young people’s sense of continuity, and heard that all contract changes had a minimum six-week mobilisation period to ensure this was mitigated. Young people were engaged with early on in the process to ensure stability. The Committee highlighted the needs of NEETs (young people not in education, employment or training), in particular those who were care leavers. Members asked what the Housing Support Grant covered, and heard it was used for a range of services within Cardiff, fundamentally to prevent homelessness and provide housing-related support, for instance sustaining a tenancy. Members noted that any service reliant on this sort of funding stream had questions around stability, and were reassured by officers that the HSG had been in place for a long time, with no indication from the Welsh government that it was likely to be reduced. The service sought to plan for the long-term wherever possible. The Cabinet Members added that the HSG was a long-established example of investing to save, where the cost of not providing consistent funding would be far greater, while the Homelessness and Social Allocations Act passed just before the Senedd elections had strengthened a lot of the relevant frameworks. Members noted the importance of affordability when it came to securing and sustaining tenancies, and heard that support options included providing bonds and rent in advance, as well as making best use of the private rented sector, as young people were increasingly likely to want to stay in Cardiff. Members asked whether a unit referred to one bed space, and heard that it did. Officers added that accommodation needed to account for a variety of needs, with self-contained units still providing communal spaces. Members asked whether the peripatetic staff were already in-house or if they needed to be recruited, and heard that there would be permanent staffing within the contract depending on where exactly the need was, allowing for a flexible and responsive approach. Members asked how many providers would be commissioned and heard that the model proposed had three lots, each of which could have a different provider. Tenders had a property schedule listing the properties available to bidders, and accommodation would be modernised throughout the contract to become higher quality and more self-contained. Members queried the difference between supported accommodation and supported lodgings, and heard that supported lodgings were provided within someone’s own home, for instance a spare bedroom where a young person could stay. It was particularly suitable for young people who had been fostered, or those with lower-level needs who would get on well in a family setting. Members noted that it could be an avenue for families who had been tempted to foster in the past but had not been able to due to the level of need, with supporting lodgings offering opportunities to support over-16s. Members welcomed specialist provision for neurodiversity and LGBTQ+ support and the trauma-informed approach running throughout, and asked how high levels of service were embedded. Officers explained that staff training was key, as they were the people working one-to-one with young people and offering wraparound support. Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) were tracked to provide context, and consultation was embedded throughout to ensure new and emerging needs didn’t come as a surprise. Members asked how young people’s vulnerability to exploitation was taken into account, and heard that crime and exploitation hotspots were considered, in conjunction with the police and Children’s Services, to ensure accommodation was appropriately placed. Members asked how young people with unfulfilled potential were supported, and heard that all young people were assessed according to a strength-based approach considering their education, employment and training needs. It was a key part of the new Homelessness Act to look at what their aspirations were, not necessarily singling out high achievers but rather considering a wide range of support needs. The Young Person’s Gateway also took into account proximity to higher education and schooling. Members noted the delivery of Upstream Cymru in schools and asked whether teaching staff were expected to do this alongside their existing roles. Officers clarified that this would not be the case, and officers would go into schools to deliver the service. It would not be offered to every secondary school, but Education were providing data about where it could be most effectively targeted. Members requested a further update on progress once the contracts had been recommissioned, and assessments had been made of how well the needs of young people were being met. Members also highlighted the important of risk assessment when it came to the procurement of properties and services. RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee expressing their comments and observations captured during the way forward.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee expressing their comments and observations captured during the way forward.
Members were provided with background information to facilitate their pre-decision scrutiny of the draft Local Authority Social Services Annual Report (LASSAR) 2025/26, prior to its consideration by Cabinet and Council. The Chair welcomed: Cllr Ash Lister Cabinet Member for Social Services (Children’s Services & Safeguarding) Sarah McGill Corporate Director, People & Communities Suki Bahara-Garrens Director of Children’s Services The Cabinet Member was invited to make an opening statement, explaining that the report was a Welsh government requirement. He highlighted the work done by staff across the service over the last year, with key achievements including a change to the Eclipse system and new front door arrangements like the Family Support, Advice and Protection Hub (FASPH). He welcomed the new Director of Children’s Services and emphasised that it was a challenging policy area that it was vital to get right. Over the next year they would refresh strategies, strengthen front door and locality work, go further in tackling exploitation and supporting young people with transition arrangements, always working closely with Education and Health. Members were invited to ask questions and make comments; the discussion is summarised below: Members welcomed the comprehensive report and the focus on early intervention. They acknowledged the increasingly complex demands on public-facing services and asked which areas of pressure had come to the surface most across the year. Officers highlighted high-cost placements such as those for children with poor health or disabilities. Members noted that children with disabilities were particularly at risk of exploitation, and asked whether there was sufficient capacity in the service to respond to this. Officers noted the importance of recruitment and explained that there had been encouraging progress in recruiting permanent newly qualified staff, though Grade 8s were still a challenge. Members asked which of the changes made had had the biggest impact, and heard that the Family Support, Advice and Protection Hub’s integration of two front doors (Early Help and MASH) allowed for more effective triaging. The professional advice line made a difference by enabling advice to be offered before a referral was made, while community health assessments provided another layer of targeted support. Members explored financial sustainability and heard that although funding had increased, so had the service user base. Spending on external residential provision, for example, had risen from £15m to £40m in recent years, so shifting demand away from the front door by focusing on prevention and early intervention was essential. The recommissioning model would bring costs more within the council’s control, and the Welsh government was removing profit from care. Members noted that the report referred to 50 of 450 young people not having a personal advisor, and asked what the service was doing to address the needs of these individuals. Members also asked if the policy on adaptations and extensions would be applied to foster carers’ homes, and heard that applications for this would be considered shortly, with one already completed and two being worked on. RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee expressing their comments and observations captured during the way forward.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee expressing their comments and observations captured during the way forward.
Members were provided with background information to facilitate their pre-decision scrutiny of the Corporate Parenting Annual Report 2025/26, prior to its consideration by Cabinet on 16th July. The Chair welcomed: Cllr Sarah Merry Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Education (in her role as Chair of the Corporate Parenting Advisory Committee) Cllr Ash Lister Cabinet Member for Social Services (Children’s Services & Safeguarding) Suki Bahara-Garrens Director of Children’s Services Gareth Newell Director of Strategy, Partnerships & Transformation Rebecca Brockway Safeguarding & Policy Development Manager The Cabinet Members were invited to make opening statements. Cllr Lister explained that Corporate Parenting was a council-wide responsibility, and thanked officers and staff for their work. This had been the first year of the annual action plan, which set out key priorities and measures, and they had sought to improve visibility. The annual report outlined progress made against priorities and highlighted achievements, with a strong foundation for continued improvement in the years ahead. Cllr Merry added her thanks to the members of the Corporate Parenting Advisory Committee (CPAC) for their work over the last year. Members were invited to ask questions and make comments; the discussion is summarised below: Members welcomed the progress made, in particular in improving coordination across services and for retaining Child Friendly City status. Members asked about the benefits delivered by partnership pledges, and how councillors could help to support them. Officers explained that there was a report summarising those pledges which could be circulated, which focused on asking partners to commit to tangible actions. Members asked whether the quarterly performance reports received by CPAC were able to report on performance in impact terms, specifically identifying what had changed and improved. Officers explained that this was the case, with a focus on action plan targets and identifying areas for further support or discussion. They were also seeking to create a dashboard of outcomes data and had nearly completed this. Members discussed Priority 2, relating to better connections and improved relationships, and asked how vulnerabilities at key transition points were addressed. Officers explained that various mentoring schemes were in place, including youth mentoring, workplace mentors, aspiration builders and others within the third sector, all of which were advertised on a webpage developed with the youth service. The council acted as a broker trying to match individuals with opportunities, for instance at the Year 6 to Year 7 pinch point. Members noted that 100% of children looked after with ALN were allocated a teacher, and asked whether the Virtual Headteacher could come to the Committee to speak about this. Officers agreed that an update could be provided. RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee expressing their comments and observations captured during the way forward.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee expressing their comments and observations captured during the way forward.
Members were provided with the opportunity to consider the output from the consultation exercise on future provision in relation to Welsh Medium Secondary Education, prior to its consideration by Cabinet on 16th July. The Chair welcomed: Cllr Sarah Merry Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Education Mel Godfrey Director of Education & Lifelong Learning Brett Andrewartha School Organisation Programme (SOP) Planning Manager The Cabinet Member was invited to make an opening statement, in which she explained that the consultation on ensuring sustainable growth in Welsh medium education across the city had been in two parts: concerning both short-term changes in response to the immediate pressures of a ‘bulge year’; and also balancing access to demand for Welsh medium education with pupil numbers falling in the future. This report focused solely on the short-term changes and included a recommendation that there be a temporary two-form entry expansion at Ysgol Gyfun Gymraeg Glantaf. She added that consulting on this had not been a legal requirement, but she felt it was important to hear from the community and the schools themselves. A short-term expansion was the least disruptive option, with the bulge being in one catchment area, and a final decision would be made well before parents put in applications for that year. Members were invited to ask questions and make comments; the discussion is summarised below: Members asked about the school’s capacity to accommodate the increased number of students and heard that there had initially been nervousness about the idea, which had shifted when they looked at the spaces concerned with an architect. The school was reassured that there was sufficient floor space, although some investment was needed into toilet and catering provision, which would have been necessary anyway due to changing guidelines. The alternative was expanding rooms and corridors, which would have been negative investment in the long term due to the lower numbers coming through. Officers noted that catering provision would require further consideration, as take-up of free school meals would increase as well as the number of pupils. Members noted that the consultation had allowed respondents to report other issues, such as imbalance in the size of the different secondary schools, and complications associated with fluctuating numbers. Officers explained that a longer and more in-depth review would take place going forward to consider these issues, with the second part of the consultation also coming back to the Committee. Members highlighted the potential implications on the school appeals process if an additional form of entry were to be implemented. Members asked about the implications for Welsh medium ALN provision and heard that the focus was on Phase 1 at the moment. Phase 2 would review the business case, with surplus capacity needing to be considered when it came to ALN need. Officers noted that the new SRB had been built quickly at Glantaf. RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee expressing their comments and observations captured during the way forward.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To approve the draft Scrutiny Annual Report 2025/26, attached at Appendix A, to be laid before Council.
The Committee was asked to approve the combined Scrutiny Annual Report 2025/26, prior to its consideration by Council on 16th July. RESOLVED: To approve the draft Scrutiny Annual Report 2025/26, attached at Appendix A, to be laid before Council.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To note the contents of the report.
The Committee was provided with information on progress of the CYP work programme for 2026/27. Members noted the commitment officers had made to bring back an update on the progress of school improvement arrangements after the first year, which the Scrutiny Officers agreed to add. RESOLVED: To note the contents of the report.
Part of an issue followed across 2 meetings
There were none.
Tuesday 8th September 2026 at 4.30pm.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Littlechild: Personal interest
A family member sits on the board of the 1910 Trust, which supported YMCA Housing.
Gunter: Personal interest
Board member of the 1910 Trust.
Patricia Arlotte: Personal interest
School governor at St Bernadette's Primary School.
Bid Corr: Personal interest
School governor at Llanederyn Primary School.
Robert Hopkins: Personal interest
School governor at Lakeside Primary School.
Irene Humphreys: Personal interest
School governor at St Francis Primary School.
Emma Reid-Jones: Personal interest
School governor at Thornhill Primary School.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.