Hounslow Council

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Banks Room, Spring Grove House, West Thames College

Contact: Kay Duffy on 020 8583 2067 or at Email: kay.duffy@hounslow.gov.uk 

No. Item


4.00-4.05pm Welcome

The Chair will open the meeting, invite introductions, welcome attendees and take apologies for absence.


The chair took a round of introduction


4.05-4.10pm Previous minutes and matters arising pdf icon PDF 135 KB

An opportunity for attendees to raise any issues of accuracy before agreeing the minutes, and to raise any matters arising not covered on the agenda.


The minutes were agreed as an accurate record


4.10-4.20pm Update Report pdf icon PDF 326 KB

This item will present updates of the work of other strategic partnerships in the borough, areas of work initiated by the partnership, progress against actions from previous meetings and other matters of interest.


The Chair drew attention to the first report which present updates of the work of other strategic partnerships in the borough and areas of work initiated by the partnership.


Ian Duke summarised the report and drew attention to the work of the Welfare Reform group. We have received contact from the National Audit Office on a possible case study of Hounslow. Ian also noted the work on the Climate Change Strategy and the Infrastructure Subgroup and plans to set up a meeting for the latter.


Ian Duke then gave a short presentation on attendance at Accident and Emergency (A&E) where there is no treatment, it is coded as ‘guidance’ and ‘discharge’ and indicated that the patient may have been treated in another setting.


He noted the cluster of the Lower Super Output Areas (LSOAs) with the highest attendance rates at A&Es and Urgent Care Centres (UCCs) are in the West of the borough. When, the cohort is disaggregated by age or ethnicity no correlation is found. He noted that in the West, attendance at Ashford and St Peters Hospital accounts for most of the ‘Guidance/Discharge’ rates. When the data is overlaid with the Community Resilience tool, there appears some relationship with ‘Competence’. Ian outlined the next steps for this research suggesting profiling of identified LSOAs and examining GP access and satisfaction rates,


Board members suggested looking at GP registrations, bus routes and yearly variations. Ian noted this would be included in the next steps.


David Thomas noted that there is often no correlation with GP satisfaction and A&E attendance. David indicated that the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) is grateful for this piece of work and how this might direct resources and support community care and local resources in this area. It was suggested that this information is shared with the Feltham subgroup who is looking at high service usage in these areas.


Resolved: The update report was noted


4.20-4.40pm Place Based Giving pdf icon PDF 302 KB

A Place-Based Giving scheme has been proposed as a means to support greater collaboration and attract new resources to address key issues and priorities for the borough.  This item sets out the key elements and next steps.


The chair introduced Aine Hayes to discuss proposals for a Place-Based Giving scheme as a means to support greater collaboration and attract new resources to address key issues and priorities for the borough


Aine Hayes introduced herself and referred to the report on Place Based Giving. She noted the Councils engagement with London Councils and the City Bridge Trust on the potential for a Hounslow Giving scheme.


It is becoming more important to think about how to enable strategic giving in a context where there are greater calls for funding and less of it. It asks us how we can make best use of assets and demands coordinated strategic action. Hence this report has been presented at the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) to help guide the strategic approach


Aine showed examples of other Place based giving schemes in Islington, Barnet and Hackney. Islington focusses their funding allocation on addressing poverty and inequality. Barnet’s work is centred on addressing isolation and promoting independence. Hackney has used social value indicators to guide their giving scheme


The next steps are to form a Steering Group who will lead the development Hounslow Giving, support a funding bid for a post to drive the project and guide the development of priorities for the scheme. The group shall also consult with other place-based giving initiatives, City Bridge Trust and the London Funders’ led London’s Giving.


Questions were posed on who would receive the funding and how this would be allocated. Aine clarified that this would be allocated according to the agreed priorities of the scheme to local charities. It may also allow for the sharing of time, skills, and space.


Resolved: The Board endorsed the proposal to adopt a Place Based Giving model and noted that reporting will be to the Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) Partnership Group and then to the Board.


4.40-5.00pm Update on Community Resilience pdf icon PDF 688 KB

This item will provide an update on the new developments in the Hounslow Together Projects, the Cranford Stronger Together project and the Community Resilience tool.   These projects have recently received significant additional funding and attention from external stakeholders.


The Chair noted that this item provides an update on the development of the Cranford Stronger Together project and the Community Resilience tool.


Ian Duke went through the attached presentation and highlighted the following


·       Referrals to Cranford Stronger Together (CST) have been slower than expected but has provided some valuable lessons;

·       Section 16 funding was secured for two years to create a Community Connector post;

·       The partnership with the Skills Hub is working well;

·       Year Here fellows were involved for a second year to look at how to make the Hub Café a more sustainable enterprise and to secure the Hub as a community resource;

·       Funding was secured through the Controlling Migration Fund to expand and developed the community resilience tool and to retrospectively look at resilience in 2001.


Resolved: the report was noted


5.00-5.50pm Future Borough Strategy pdf icon PDF 357 KB

At the last meeting the Board considered a report outlining proposals for the review and revision of the Future Borough Strategy.  In this meeting, the Board will receive an assessment of action against the last strategy and three papers that summarise the evidence that the Board might use to identify priorities for the next Future Borough Strategy.  The Board is also asked to consider proposals around stakeholder engagement and define the extent of this engagement. 

Additional documents:


The Chair noted that at the last meeting the Board considered a report outlining proposals for the review and revision of the Future Borough Strategy.


Ian Duke introduced the item and noted the work to create three evidence base papers to stimulate discussion. He asked the Board to consider the following questions:

  • Have we go the evidence base, right?
  • How do we prioritise actions going forward?
  • To what extent does the proposed engagement strategy enable us to develop a partnership strategy.


Ian Duke went through the attached presentation. He outlined the progress against the last strategy and emphasised the role of leadership and the partnership’s role.


Ian outlined the three papers on outcomes for people, place and relationships.


The subsequent discussion focussed on the following:

  • There are some difference between the data and the anecdotal evidence on Special Educational Need (SEN) and achievement at a post 16 level. This might be reviewed
  • The impact of Brexit on the borough is complex. The CCG has seen a decrease in number of births to European with over 9 months since the Brexit vote which may indicate uncertainty around the future for European migrants. This would obviously affect services and future planning such as school place planning
  • Indications of difficulties in relationships are shown by domestic violence and hate related crime such as acid attacks. However, the question is around when or whether intervention is appropriate
  • In thinking about prioritisation, it’s important to consider the impact, outcome, underlying causes and the evidence, whether joint action is possible and the added value of working on these issues.
  • In engaging the public, it is important to ensure we work with disability groups, the youth council and the VCSE sector as well as potentially providing for general public engagement.
  • The question around identity and why a person may leave Hounslow was thought to be interesting in the context of change and churn. The Board also noted the links to young people leaving for post-school education and churn and change in the private rental sector
  • The evidence that Hounslow has a large proportion of residents in low paid jobs was seen to be an issue of concern



The Board

  • Noted the three papers that make up the evidence base as well as an assessment of performance on the last Future Borough Strategy;
  • Agreed to the prioritisation structure;
  • Endorsed the proposals around stakeholder engagement and define the extent of this engagement.


5.50-6.00pm AOB, Agenda for next meeting and Close