Print

SERVICE DELIVERY CHILD CARE POLICY & SENIOR CITIZENS POLICY COMMITTEE

NOTICE OF MEETING
Wednesday, 15th December 2010


Thursday 9th December, 2010


His Worship The Mayor and Councillors,


I have by direction to inform you that a meeting of the Service Delivery Child Care Policy & Senior Citizens Policy Committee of the Council will be held at the Civic Centre, Hurstville on Wednesday, 15th December 2010 at 7.00 pm for consideration of the business mentioned hereunder.


Victor G D Lampe
General Manager


BUSINESS

1. Apologies

2. Disclosures of Interest

3. Consideration of Reports


COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

Councillor S McMahon (Chairperson)
Councillor V Badalati
Councillor B Giegerl, OAM
Councillor N Liu

The Quorum for the meeting is 3

Print
SERVICE DELIVERY CHILD CARE POLICY & SENIOR CITIZENS POLICY COMMITTEE

SUMMARY OF ITEMS
Wednesday, 15th December 2010



ITEMS


SD143-10 MINUTES: TRAFFIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE - 02/12/2010 (09/345)

SD144-10 2011 OATLEY PARK FUN RUN (10/53)

SD145-10 FUNDING OFFER FROM THE LOWER GEORGES RIVER SUSTAINABILITY INITIATIVE FOR ON GROUND WORKS AT WEBBS DAM, EVATT PARK, LUGARNO (09/240)

SD146-10 MULTI-PURPOSE YOUTH FACILITY (10/2385)

SD147-10 CHILDREN'S SERVICES ANNUAL PARENT SURVEY RESULTS (09/2240)

SD148-10 LIVE MUSIC CONDITION - BEVERLY HILLS WITH KINGSGROVE ANGLICAN CHURCH - KINGSGROVE COMMUNITY CENTRE (10/2088)

SD149-10 CONCESSIONAL RENTAL – THE BODY OF CHRIST MISSION CENTRE INC – KINGSGROVE COMMUNITY CENTRE (D10/128528)

SD150-10 CONCESSIONAL RENTAL - BURMESE ORGANISATION OF NSW – MARANA ENTERTAINMENT CENTRE (10/2088)



Print
SERVICE DELIVERY CHILD CARE POLICY & SENIOR CITIZENS POLICY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, 15th December 2010
Addendum


SD144-102011 OATLEY PARK FUN RUN
Report Author(s)Sport & Recreation Officer, Ms Christine Irwin
File10/53
Reason for ReportFor approval
Existing Policy?NoNew Policy Required?No
Financial ImplicationsYes, within existing program budget
Previous Reports ReferencedNo



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

St George District Athletics Club have requested to hold a Fun Run through Oatley Park on Sunday 3rd April 2011 and close the roadway throughout the Park from 5:30am to 10:00am. They have requested in kind support from Council, waiving of park fees and for Representative from Council to present the trophies.



AUTHOR RECOMMENDATION

THAT St George District Athletics Club be permitted to hold a fun run through Oatley Park on Sunday 3rd April 2011.

THAT Council waive the fee for hiring the park.

THAT permission be granted to close the road in Oatley Park to motorised vehicles between the hours of 5:30am and 10:00am.

THAT Council supply all material as requested to be funded from Additional Donations (Parks & Miscellaneous) budget.

THAT St George District Athletics Club supply Council with a copy of their contract of insurance/and or indemnity which Indemnifies Council of any liability, this should be in the amount of not less then $10millon.

THAT the provision of the requested materials and services be on the condition that Council receives appropriate recognition on all promotional material and advertising associated with the event and that the St George District Athletics Club is notified of this requirement .

FURTHER THAT an refundable cleaning deposit of $200.00 be imposed.


REPORT DETAILS

The following email was received from Jim Owens (Race Director of the Oatley Park Fun Run) on 8 November 2011:

It is recommended to support this community event.


COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION - SD

THAT St George District Athletics Club be permitted to hold a fun run through Oatley Park on Sunday 3rd April 2011.

THAT Council waive the fee for hiring the park.

THAT permission be granted to close the road in Oatley Park to motorised vehicles between the hours of 5:30am and 10:00am.

THAT Council supply all material as requested to be funded from Additional Donations (Parks & Miscellaneous) budget.

THAT St George District Athletics Club supply Council with a copy of their contract of insurance/and or indemnity which Indemnifies Council of any liability, this should be in the amount of not less then $10millon.

THAT the provision of the requested materials and services be on the condition that Council receives appropriate recognition on all promotional material and advertising associated with the event and that the St George District Athletics Club is notified of this requirement .

FURTHER THAT an refundable cleaning deposit of $200.00 be imposed.
(Moved Councillor N Liu / Seconded Councillor B Giegerl, OAM)



RESOLUTION - CCL

THAT St George District Athletics Club be permitted to hold a fun run through Oatley Park on Sunday 3rd April 2011.

THAT Council waive the fee for hiring the park.

THAT permission be granted to close the road in Oatley Park to motorised vehicles between the hours of 5:30am and 10:00am.

THAT Council supply all material as requested to be funded from Additional Donations (Parks & Miscellaneous) budget.

THAT St George District Athletics Club supply Council with a copy of their contract of insurance/and or indemnity which Indemnifies Council of any liability, this should be in the amount of not less then $10millon.

THAT the provision of the requested materials and services be on the condition that Council receives appropriate recognition on all promotional material and advertising associated with the event and that the St George District Athletics Club is notified of this requirement .

FURTHER THAT an refundable cleaning deposit of $200.00 be imposed.
(Moved Councillor S McMahon / Seconded Councillor D Perry)





APPENDIX


Print
SERVICE DELIVERY CHILD CARE POLICY & SENIOR CITIZENS POLICY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, 15th December 2010
Addendum


SD145-10FUNDING OFFER FROM THE LOWER GEORGES RIVER SUSTAINABILITY INITIATIVE FOR ON GROUND WORKS AT WEBBS DAM, EVATT PARK, LUGARNO
Report Author(s)Manager Environmental Sustainability, Mr I Curtis
File09/240
Reason for ReportFor approval
Existing Policy?NoNew Policy Required?No
Financial ImplicationsYes. Council has been offered $300,000 from the Initiative to undertake the proposed works.
Previous Reports ReferencedYes



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council has been offered $300,000 from the Lower Georges River Sustainability Initiative (LGRSI) to undertake Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) focused on ground works at Webbs Dam, Evatt Park, Lugarno. This report briefly describes the process that was undertaken by Council staff in identifying the Project as the preferred project submitted to the LGRSI Steering Committee for funding consideration, and requests that Council formally accept the funding offer.


AUTHOR RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council accept the funding offer of $300,000 from the Lower Georges River Sustainability Initiative, as described in this report.

FURTHER THAT Council delegate its authority to the General Manager to formally accept the funds by writing to the Lower Georges River Sustainability Initiative Project Manager and Steering Committee, accepting its offer.


REPORT DETAILS

Background

In April 2010, Council considered a report on the draft Business Plan for the Lower Georges River Sustainability Initiative (LGRSI). The Plan described a number of key Programs that would be delivered during the life of the Initiative, including the More Effective Urban Water Management Program. Approximately $900,000 has been allocated within the Program for on ground works that will promote the application of Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) throughout the lower catchment. WSUD can be described as a sequential treatment approach to urban stormwater management that is focused on minimising the impact of stormwater flows (quantity and quality) on receiving waterways.

In order to access these funds the Project Steering Committee devised a set of selection criteria to ensure successful projects would not only deliver sound environmental outcomes, but also assist participating partner Councils in building their organisational capacity to apply WSUD. Within this framework each of the partner Councils (Hurstville, Rockdale, Sutherland and Kogarah) were guaranteed a minimum funding allocation of $100,000.

In October 2010 Council staff, together with a specialist consultant provided by the LGRSI, assessed a series of potential WSUD projects for possible funding under the Program. These, together with the projects nominated by the other partner Councils were assessed by the Project Steering Committee in November 2010. Since that time Council has received correspondence from the LGRSI Project Manager advising that the Evatt Park WSUD project has been approved by the Steering Committee, subject to the provision of a brief report outlining why the Evatt Park Project was the preferred choice of Council staff, and how the Project is linked to the organisations WSUD Action Plan. A copy of the correspondence is provided as Appendix 1.

The purpose of this report is to present to Council a brief description of the sites, the assessment process and how the preferred project was identified, and to seek Councils formal approval to accept the funding offer. The report also provides an indicative time line for the Project, which must be completed by January 2012.

Site Assessment Process

A total of 5 sites were assessed for potential funding through the Program:

· Webbs Dam, Evatt Park, Lugarno
· Heinrich Reserve, Lugarno
· Clarendon Road (at the junction with Ogilvy Street), Riverwood
· Seaforth Avenue Reserve, Oatley Heights
· Miles Dunphy Reserve, Oatley

Each site was assessed in terms of its ability to support the installation of a WSUD treatment device, the environmental performance of the device, the ease with which the project could be completed prior to January 2012, and the capacity of the site to promote WSUD skills and knowledge within the organisation and the broader community. A summary of the key assessment outcomes are provided in Table 1, and are discussed below.

Table 1 Potential WSUD project assessment outcomes
Location
Potential device
Size (m2)
Environmental Performance (pollutant removal kg/yr)
Total Nitrogen
Total Phosphorous
Total Suspended Solids
Evatt Park
Wetland
2000
87
20
12,080
Heinrich Reserve
Raingarden
200
30
8
4,930
Clarendon Road
Raingarden
200
70
30
22,000
Seaforth Avenue
Raingarden
200
37
11
6,830
Miles Dunphy Reserve
Wetland
1000
65
16
10,300
At each location the most appropriate device was estimated and sized based on the individual site conditions. Preliminary MUSIC (Model for Urban Stormwater Improvement Conceptualisation) modelling was also undertaken to determine the likely capacity of the device to remove nitrogen, phosphorous and suspended solids from the stormwater flows. The results indicate that the Evatt Park project was able to remove the highest amount of nitrogen, and the second highest amount of phosphorous and suspended solids from the storm flows (Table 1). The Clarendon Road site was able to capture the highest level of suspended solids and phosphorous, primarily because it was located within the largest catchment of the 5 sites.


The capacity of each of the systems/devices to be enhanced was also considered. While several of the sites had the potential to be augmented, the Evatt Park Project was considered to have the most potential in that it could be designed to enable the treated water to be captured and reused as irrigation water on the playing fields to the south of the existing dam. This would provide a dual environmental benefit where harvested stormwater could be substituted for potable irrigation water, while also improving the quality of stormwater discharges to Salt Pan Creek and the Georges River catchment.

In terms of promoting WSUD capacity within the organisation, all of the nominated projects would have individual elements which would help develop the technical skills of Council staff. However, given their relative size, both the Evatt Park and Miles Dunphy Reserve projects would most likely provide the greatest advantage in this regard. Moreover, the wetland sites would build on the expertise staff have already gained during the design and near completion of the Bundara Reserve raingarden, which is similar to what would be constructed at the 3 raingarden sites (Table 1). With respect to promoting knowledge and understanding of WSUD within the broader community, Evatt Park was also considered the preferred location given that it provides a combination of sporting, picnicing/leisure and bushwalking opportunities, and therefore the widest potential WSUD exposure within the local community.

Based on the outcomes of the assessment process, the Evatt Park site has been identified as the preferred project given that:


Project Delivery Time Frame

Following on from the initial assessment that has been undertaken, the next steps in developing the preferred option would be the preparation of an initial concept plan followed by a set of detailed design/construction plans . This phase of the process would take up to 3 months to complete and cost in the order of $30-40,000. A simple project delivery time frame is presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Preliminary Project delivery time frame

Item
Completion date
Engage design consultant
February 2011
Concept/detailed design plans
May 2011
Community/stakeholder consultation
July 2011
Tender for construction works
October 2011
Completion of works and Project launch
January 2012

Funding conditions

The funding that has been offered through the LGRSI is dependent on two conditions that have been applied to all the approved projects nominated by the partner Councils:
  1. The provision of a short report that describes the factors in the identification of the preferred project (in this case the Evatt Park Project).
  2. The provision of a project brief that describes the elements of the planning process that are linked to organisational capacity building, and a project budget and corresponding payment schedule.

Should Council choose to accept the funding offer, the information contained in this report will be provided to the LGRSI Project Manager, together with a Project brief and delivery time frame that is consistent with the information contained in this report and the conditions of the funding offer.

Conclusion

The Evatt Park Project presents an ideal opportunity for Council to continue to demonstrate its commitment to applying contemporary stormwater management techniques within the LGA. Moreover, the Project will also enable staff to build on the skills and knowledge that have been gained during the recent design and construction of the Bundara Reserve raingarden. Should Council choose to accept the funds it is anticipated that the works will be completed in early 2012.


COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION - SD

THAT Council accept the funding offer of $300,000 from the Lower Georges River Sustainability Initiative, as described in this report.

FURTHER THAT Council delegate its authority to the General Manager to formally accept the funds by writing to the Lower Georges River Sustainability Initiative Project Manager and Steering Committee, accepting its offer.
(Moved Councillor N Liu / Seconded Councillor B Giegerl, OAM)



RESOLUTION - CCL

THAT Council accept the funding offer of $300,000 from the Lower Georges River Sustainability Initiative, as described in this report.

FURTHER THAT Council delegate its authority to the General Manager to formally accept the funds by writing to the Lower Georges River Sustainability Initiative Project Manager and Steering Committee, accepting its offer.
(Moved Councillor S McMahon / Seconded Councillor D Perry)





APPENDIX
Correspondence received from the LGRSI.pdf


Print
SERVICE DELIVERY CHILD CARE POLICY & SENIOR CITIZENS POLICY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, 15th December 2010
Addendum


SD146-10MULTI-PURPOSE YOUTH FACILITY
Report Author(s)Manager Community Services, Mr D Linden
File10/2385
Reason for ReportFor a decision of Council
Existing Policy?NoNew Policy Required?No
Financial ImplicationsNil
Previous Reports ReferencedNo



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report recommends a process to progress the investigation to determine a suitable location for a multi-purpose youth facility.


AUTHOR RECOMMENDATION

THAT feasibility studies be undertaken on the sites identified as possible locations for the provision of a multi-purpose youth facility.

FURTHER THAT the Pole Depot Community Centre be advised accordingly.


REPORT DETAILS

Council has received representations from the Pole Depot Community Centre in regard to the future provision of a purpose built multi-purpose youth facility to replace the existing commercial premises currently occupied by YouthZone at 143 Forest Road, Hurstville.

The need for a multi-purpose youth facility was first identified back in 1996 and is even more valid today given the demographics of the LGA and the social, recreation, health and general support needs of young people. The need has also been further reinforced in the Hurstville Open Space and Recreation Community and Library Facilities Strategy recently adopted by Council.

The YouthZone service (and until recently St George Youth Services) has occupied the 143 Forest Road premises since 2005 when it relocated from premises in The Avenue and Park Road and although it is ideally located in regard to public transport and within easy walking distance of other parts of the CBD the building itself is not easily accessible apart from a ground floor drop-in centre fronting Treacy Street. In addition there is no outdoor recreation space.

Several proposals have been suggested to address this need including the redevelopment of the existing site. Other options have included alternate locations in and around the CBD which may be suitable. An assessment has been undertaken in regard to the redevelopment of the existing site and similar assessments should follow for the other sites suggested.

The adoption by Council of a firm proposal to provide a multi-purpose facility and the allocation of a site would then enable concept plans to be prepared which in turn would then place Council in a much stronger position to apply for Federal or State Government capital funding programs as they become available.

It is proposed therefore that feasibility studies be undertaken in respect of the sites identified as possibly being suitable for the development of a multi-purpose youth facility.


COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION - SD

THAT feasibility studies be undertaken on the sites identified as possible locations for the provision of a multi-purpose youth facility.

FURTHER THAT the Pole Depot Community Centre be advised accordingly.

(Moved Councillor B Giegerl, OAM / Seconded Councillor N Liu)



RESOLUTION - CCL

THAT feasibility studies be undertaken on the sites identified as possible locations for the provision of a multi-purpose youth facility.

FURTHER THAT the Pole Depot Community Centre be advised accordingly.
(Moved Councillor S McMahon / Seconded Councillor D Perry)





APPENDIX


Print
SERVICE DELIVERY CHILD CARE POLICY & SENIOR CITIZENS POLICY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, 15th December 2010
Addendum


SD147-10CHILDREN'S SERVICES ANNUAL PARENT SURVEY RESULTS
Report Author(s)Manager Children's Services, Ms J Ribarovski
File09/2240
Reason for ReportFor the information of Councillors
Existing Policy?NoNew Policy Required?No
Financial ImplicationsNil
Previous Reports ReferencedNo



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council presently operates four child care services – Hurstville Family Day Care Scheme, Penshurst Long Day Care Centre, Jack High Child Care Centre and the Hurstville Preschool and Occasional Care Centre. Families of children attending these services are asked annually at the end of each year to complete a survey to indicate their level of satisfaction with various aspects of the services provided and to make recommendations for improvements. This annual survey is a formative evaluation following up on diverse and ongoing summative evaluation measures undertaken throughout the year, in keeping with quality early childhood practice. This report provides a summary of the results of the annual parent satisfaction surveys for all of Council’s children’s services.


AUTHOR RECOMMENDATION

THAT the outcomes of the annual child care parent surveys be received and noted.



REPORT DETAILS

The detailed results of the surveys are as follows:

Hurstville Preschool and Occasional Care Centre

Parent Survey 2010 results.
Received 18 surveys from 40 families


1. How would you describe the care provided at the service?
50% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

38.9% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

11.1% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

0% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “The staff are very professional”; “The children can learn a lot before they start kindi”; “Excellent care – I was very anxious about leaving my kids in care but they made the transition as smooth as possible”; “Not too sure on how much kids learn (ABC, 123….)”

2. How would you describe the communication between the staff, children and families?
55.5% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

33.3% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

5.6% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

5.6% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “Very open, I’m given feedback on my child on an ongoing basis”; “We can find out the best way to make good progress for the child at home and at school”; “Found that some staff lacked motivation”; “Constantly updated and listen and answer to any concerns/questions”

3. How would you describe the quality of relationships between staff, children and families?
55.5% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

33.3% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

5.6% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

5.6% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “Good understanding”; “Good quality, the child can learn discipline and more familiar to the staff”; “Happy, professional, caring, trusting”; “Always treated like someone they’ve known for a long time”

4. How would you describe the information you receive about the service?
88.3% indicated Well Informed

16.7% indicated like more information

Comments: “New visiting parents should be given a timetable of activities, day-to-day plan”; “I was handed paperwork at the beginning which answered most of my questions and the staff answered all others”; “Teaching material and teaching methods”

5. How would you describe the program and how it caters for your child’s interests and development?
33.3% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

33.3% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

33.3% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

0% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “Very interactive”; “Child is now toilet trained and extremely happy to go to childcare on his booked days and has learnt everything from colours, improved speech to confidence since arriving”

6. How would you describe the facilities, equipment, and physical environment of the service?
33.3% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

33.3% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

27.8% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

5.6% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “High quality for the age of children”; “Improving all the time”; “Need more space for kids to move around, phone always engaged from 3-5pm (2 occasions) – in case of emergency no form of contact”; “No injuries to date and kids are well entertained”; “Lots of play facilities, toys”

7. Are there adequate opportunities for parents to be involved in the service?
77.8% indicated YES

11.1% indicated NO

Comments: “Staff are very inviting to parents to be involved”; “Often asked if I would like to come and cook for children – which I was extremely pleased about”

8. Overall are you satisfied with the quality of care at the service?
94.4% indicated YES

5.6% indicated NO

Comments: “Good job by Staff”; “Feel welcome as a family and also working together as one team to make a good progress especially in education for every child”; “Find some staff to be less caring and uninterested with parents and children”; “Yes, will pass it on to others”

9. Further comments?
“I am very happy for my child to attend this Day Care, as it provides a high level of standards. A very warm atmosphere by staff. A pleasant experience.”
“Well done to all the staff at Hurstville Preschool and Occasional Care – keep up the good work – Thank you”
“My children have never said they don’t want to go to pre-school. They have great friends and adore all of the staff.”
“Kindly reflect to Westfield Centre in regards to the non-smoking area immediately outside the Child Care Centre. Smokers are still smoking irrespective of the non-smoking signs!!!”
“Thank you Helen, Vanessa, Katie, Dimitra, Jessie, Rania and few new staff in the centre for all the wonderful work you have been doing.”
“It would be good if you teach the children more rhymes”
“Staff to assist children in toilet and teach to wash hands!”
“Staff to interact with parents more with eye contact and with interest”
“I was referred here by a previous customer – my friend and she spoke highly about the service provided and I’m in 100% agreeance”
“Would like to know if children with challenging behaviour are referred on to another separate centre in order to protect other children. I would prefer if my child would not learn this behaviour by being exposed to it.


Penshurst Long Day Care Centre

Parent Survey 2010 results.

Received 24 surveys from 84 families


1. How would you describe the care provided at the service?
54% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

37.5% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

4.3% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

4.2% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “Best Centre I have experienced”; “committed staff and well qualified”

2. How would you describe the communication between the staff, children and families?
37.5% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

50% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

8.4% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

4.1% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “staff very approachable and friendly, children happy to be there” ; “Great, clear communication” ; “Consistent and respectful communication” ; “we haven’t always been advised of an accident and only found out about as our kids have told us” ; “sometimes the baby communication sheet is not filled out properly”.

3. How would you describe the quality of relationships between staff, children and families?
41.6% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

45.9% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

8.4% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

4.1% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “the staff noticeably care for our kids, this is why we send them to your centre” ; “friendly and addresses concerns immediately”; “between staff and children- a secure base to meet emotional needs, Staff and Families – respectful and great”

4. How would you describe the information you receive about the service?
83.4% indicated Well Informed

16.6% indicated like more information

Comments: “like receiving Directors newsletters, Marion’s notes are good too” ; “We miss receiving the monthly newsletter this year”

5. How would you describe the program and how it caters for your child’s interests and development?
37.5% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

50% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

4.2% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

8.3% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “Structured but relaxed”; “Lots of interesting activities and plenty of time for free play”.

6. How would you describe the facilities, equipment, and physical environment of the service?
45.8% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

50% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

0% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

4.2% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “Love the gardening program and outside space, some parts look a bit worn out, but staff utilise well”; “Ambient surroundings, allowing exploration”

7. Are there adequate opportunities for parents to be involved in the service?
91.7% indicated YES

8.3% indicated NO

Comments: “Very Difficult to achieve, however asking for volunteers, fundraising etc works well”; “to special events and fundraising – feel invited and a part of. But sometimes wonder how we could be involved more / help out, if needed? And How?”; “Little staff parent communication” ; “Have not been Approached”

8. Overall are you satisfied with the quality of care at the service?
91.7% indicated YES

8.3% indicated NO

Comments: “Very happy with the Service”; “Excellent centre, feel very lucky for our child to be there”; “My child is very happy”; “Don’t like the mixed group – kids are paid unequal attention during their care”

9. Further comments?
“If still want to keep mixed group format, each teacher’s responsibility should be clearly clarified, i.e. 1 teacher /staff should keep an close eye for 5 specific kids in order that the hand over can be done properly”.
“Could the centre display the ‘breastfeeding welcome here’ sticker at the entrance?”
“The relationship between parents, staff and children is wonderful and my child has always had a wonderful day at day care... thank you to all the staff”
“We are happy with the care provided for our children. In recent months we have noticed there have been changes in staffing which can be confusing for kids when they form a bond with an adult, but we understand that this happens in all work places. Perhaps next year there will be more consistency in staff”
“Update child’s profile book more often”
“My child has attended PLDC for the last 3-4 years. This is her last year. I am grateful for the quality of care that has been given to her. I have found the outside play area particularly good. I am sure my child will be leaving with many fond memories”
“Eftpos facilities for school fees at the centre”
“In regards to the sandpit, maybe you could put a container whereby they can step into to wash their feet at the end of the day so parents don’t have to clean sand inside their houses”.
“Would like a written report of my child’s progress, would like my child to be further encouraged to take part in activities, would like to be informed of changes in my child’s routine e.g. moving from cot to bed, any chance of a school readiness program being implemented?”
“We are very happy with the model of care at the centre- based on meeting children’s needs where they are at and learning from their point of interest and ability”


Jack High Child Care Centre

Parent Survey 2010 results.
Received 16 surveys from 81 families

1. How would you describe the care provided at the service?
25% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

40.5% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

18.75% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

6.25% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “New staff are great!”

2. How would you describe the communication between the staff, children and families?
25% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

25% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

25% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

25%of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “staff always happy to answer question or concerns, day book often missing, communicate more with kids in English not mother tongue”

3. How would you describe the quality of relationships between staff, children and families?
31.25% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

37.5% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

25% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

6.25% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “there are some wonderful staff but some still need to put in effort”

4. How would you describe the information you receive about the service?
81.25% indicated Well Informed

18.75% indicated like more information

Comments: “Newsletters are excellent, very pleased with information and communication sent home, its up to parent to find information.”

5. How would you describe the program and how it caters for your child’s interests and development?
12.5% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

56.25% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

18.75% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

6.25% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

(1 unanswered)

Comments: “great programs that interest children, improved with student”

6. How would you describe the facilities, equipment, and physical environment of the service?
37.5% of surveys returned indicated HIGH Quality

43.75% of surveys returned indicated Good Quality

12.5% of surveys returned indicated Satisfactory

6.25% of surveys returned indicated Needs improvement

Comments: “facilities need constant maintenance; some toys need to be updated, needs to be safer.”

7. Are there adequate opportunities for parents to be involved in the service?
93.75% indicated YES

6.25% indicated NO

Comments- ”we are working family and it is very difficult to get time off”

8. Overall are you satisfied with the quality of care at the service?
100% indicated yes

9. Further comments?
“Overall staff members are friendly, helpful and knowledgeable about my child, nice to read about the children and the activities in newsletter, maybe a wine and cheese night with parents and staff in a relaxed atmosphere would help and casual update on children and how they are going, opportunity to chat and get feedback."
"I would appreciate being informed on development."
"Many fond memories always look forward to going to day care."
"Toilets can sometimes be messy, all children should learn to flush."


Hurstville Family Day Care Scheme

Parent Survey 2010 results
Received 12 surveys from 140 families



1. How would you describe the care provided at the service?

83% - High Quality

16% - Good Quality

0% -Satisfactory

0% -Needs Improvement

Comments: “Very happy with level of care” “Extremely happy with…..” “As long as our son is coming home happy then we believe the service and care provided is good.”

2. How would you describe the communication between the staff, careproviders and your children and family?

66% - High Quality

33% - Good Quality

0% - Satisfactory

0% -Needs Improvement

Comments: “Very well informed and details are given well in advance.” “Always kept informed of incidents/events.” “Great staff who really care about the children’s wellbeing – very helpful.” ‘Prefer email newsletter”.

3. How would you describe the information you receive about the service?

100% - Well informed
0% - Like more information

Comments: “Enjoy email communication.”

4. How would you describe the program and how it caters for your child’s interests, development and learning?

58% - High Quality

33% - Good Quality

8% -Satisfactory

0% -Needs Improvement

Comments: “Very happy with everything.” “Appropriate program and wonderfully social stimulation.” “Our son comes home and says/does things that appear to be learned at daycare.” 5. How would you describe the facilities, equipment and physical environment of the service?

33% - High Quality

50% - Good Quality

8% - Satisfactory

0% - Needs Improvement

1 x No Response

Comments: “Would like to see more playsessions.” “Our provider has great facilities and equipment is well maintained.” “Clean and tidy, nurturing and relaxed, I have been very happy.”

6. What other initiatives would you like to see to assist in your participation in the service?

25% - Picnic

33% - Parent Information Evening

25%- Parent Consultative Group


Comments: “It’s a real shame that playgroup couldn’t continue. If transport to and from venue was a problem perhaps parents could be invited to drop off and pick children up once a month.” “School readiness.” “More parent info evenings.” “The quality of care is excellent, I feel confident in asking carer and or council questions, more initiatives would just add stress to already busy users.”

7. Overall are you satisfied with the quality of care at the service?

100% -Yes

0% - No

Comments: “All staff are always extremely friendly and helpful.” “FDC is a wonderful service with, in my experience wonderful carers.” “I would like to see less red tape for parents/carers alike. The carers are usually highly qualified and underappreciated. Whilst the council have limited control over this aspect it would be good to see more lobbying of regulatory bodies”

Any further comments:
“We are very happy with the care that our son receives.”
“We have seen great development in ….this last year. He comes home and talks about his day….always talks about his friends at daycare”
“I have been very satisfied with the quality and style of child care and recommend the service to others.”
“I think communicating by emails is overall a good thing…but I prefer a printed document."


COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION - SD

THAT the outcomes of the annual child care parent surveys be received and noted.

FURTHER THAT the staff involved be congratulated on their efforts.

(Moved Councillor B Giegerl, OAM / Seconded Councillor V Badalati)



RESOLUTION - CCL

THAT the outcomes of the annual child care parent surveys be received and noted.

FURTHER THAT the staff involved be congratulated on their efforts.

(Moved Councillor S McMahon / Seconded Councillor D Perry)





APPENDIX


Print
SERVICE DELIVERY CHILD CARE POLICY & SENIOR CITIZENS POLICY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, 15th December 2010
Addendum


SD148-10LIVE MUSIC CONDITION - BEVERLY HILLS WITH KINGSGROVE ANGLICAN CHURCH - KINGSGROVE COMMUNITY CENTRE
Report Author(s)Manager Library Museum & Entertainment – Ms R Schulz
File10/2088
Reason for ReportFor consideration
Existing Policy?YesNew Policy Required?No
Financial ImplicationsNil
Previous Reports ReferencedNo



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council has received a request from Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church requesting that Council allow unamplified live music at Kingsgrove Community Centre hall for their ongoing booking of the facility.



AUTHOR RECOMMENDATION

THAT the request to allow unamplified live music at Kingsgrove Community Centre hall for Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church be considered.

THAT, if approved, Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church must ensure all doors remain closed whilst playing unamplified live music in the Centre.

FURTHER THAT, Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church be notified of the decision of Council.



REPORT DETAILS

Council has received a request from Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church requesting that Council allow unamplified live music at Kingsgrove Community Centre hall for their ongoing booking of the facility:

The Development Consent for 30 Morgan Street, Kingsgrove states: “ZC14 - Amplified music/public address systems must not be audible outside the premises, unless approved by Hurstville City Council.”

The Kingsgrove Community Centre Terms and Conditions of Use indicate that “No amplified or live music is permitted in the venue or its surrounds.” This condition is in place as a result of the Development Consent referenced above (ZC14).

Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church is mindful of these restrictions and have indicated that if approved, their request will not impact on the surrounding neighbourhood. To minimise the risk of noise, it is recommended that a condition of approval includes a need to keep all doors closed throughout the performance. Furthermore, Council will take the necessary action required if complaints are received from neighbours and residents.



COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION - SD

THAT the request to allow unamplified live music at Kingsgrove Community Centre hall for Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church be approved for a trial period of eight (8) Sundays.

THAT Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church must ensure all doors remain closed whilst playing unamplified live music in the Centre.

FURTHER THAT, Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church be notified of the decision of Council.

(Moved Councillor V Badalati / Seconded Councillor B Giegerl, OAM)



RESOLUTION - CCL

THAT the request to allow unamplified live music at Kingsgrove Community Centre hall for Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church be approved for a trial period of eight (8) Sundays.

THAT Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church must ensure all doors remain closed whilst playing unamplified live music in the Centre.

FURTHER THAT, Beverly Hills with Kingsgrove Anglican Church be notified of the decision of Council.

(Moved Councillor S McMahon / Seconded Councillor D Perry)





APPENDIX


Print
SERVICE DELIVERY CHILD CARE POLICY & SENIOR CITIZENS POLICY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, 15th December 2010
Addendum


SD149-10CONCESSIONAL RENTAL – THE BODY OF CHRIST MISSION CENTRE INC – KINGSGROVE COMMUNITY CENTRE
Report Author(s)Manager Library Museum & Entertainment, Ms R Schulz
FileD10/128528
Reason for ReportFor approval
Existing Policy?YesNew Policy Required?No
Financial ImplicationsYes, foregone rental
Previous Reports ReferencedYes



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council has received a request from The Body of Christ Mission Centre Inc asking that Council provide a 20% concessional rental for an ongoing booking of Kingsgrove Community Centre hall.



AUTHOR RECOMMENDATION

THAT the application for concessional rental by The Body of Christ Mission Centre Inc for hire of the Kingsgrove Community Centre hall to a total $1,275 (the total year hire fee being $12,750) for the first half of 2011 be considered.

THAT if approved, applicants who receive concessional rental from Council be advised that they must acknowledge Council's sponsorship on all their promotion and marketing material (tickets, flyers, brochures etc) at programs and at the event/function.

FURTHER, THAT in the first week of February of each year, Council write to applicants who have received a concessional rental in the previous two years to invite them to submit a concessional rental application. Council will also call for annual applications for concessional rentals in the ‘Leader’ newspaper. All applications received will be tabled in a report to be considered by Council for the next financial year.



REPORT DETAILS

Council has received a request from The Body of Christ Mission Centre Inc requesting that Council provide a 20% concessional rental for an ongoing, weekly booking of Kingsgrove Community Centre hall:


The Body of Christ Mission Centre Inc requests a 20% concession on their overall hire fees for Kingsgrove Community Centre hall. The organisation has booked the hall for each Sunday, 9am to 2pm at a cost of $250 per week to commence 2 January 2011. The total hire fee for 2011 is $12,750. However, this report only considers the first six months of 2011 on the understanding that The Body of Christ Mission Centre Inc will be invited, with all other community organisations who have current concessional rentals, to re-apply for the 2011-2012 financial year from February 2011. As such, the requested 20% concession on the first six months of the hire fee is $1,275.

In a report to Council on 26 May 2010 (CCL096-10) Council resolved to approve the following concessional rentals for the 2010/2011 financial year totalling $82,046.10.
Organisation
Normal Charge
Subsidy Requested
Recommended Subsidy
Proportion of Total Recommended Subsidy
St George Eisteddfod
$28,425.00
$23,425.00
$23,425.00
28.6%
International Community Fellowship
$37,180.00
$22,740.00
$17,720.00
21.6%
Australian Red Cross - Mobile Blood Bank
$13,860.00
$13,860.00
$13,860.00
16.9%
Kirrawee Gang Show Scouts
$19,080.00
$19,080.00
$9,090.00
11.1%
Rotary Club of Hurstville
$8,790.00
$8,790.00
$8,790.00
10.7%
Chinese Australian Services Society
$10,800.00
$10,800.00
$3,000.00
3.7%
Film Seen
$4,320.00
$4,320.00
$2,160.00
2.6%
St George Christian School
$3,907.60
$3,907.60
$1,457.60
1.8%
Lions Club of Hurstville-St George
$900.00
$900.00
$900.00
1.1%
Australian Shanganise Association
$2,100.00
$2,100.00
$420.00
0.5%
Beverly Hills Primary School
$825.00
$825.00
$313.50
0.4%
St George Community Drug and Action Team
$630.00
$630.00
$205.00
0.2%
Hurstville Adventist School
$825.00
$825.00
$185.00
0.2%
Georges River, Penshurst St George Junior Cricket
$825.00
$185.00
$185.00
0.2%
Rotary Club of Georges River
$825.00
$825.00
$185.00
0.2%
Resourceful Australian Indian Network INC RAIN
$1,500.00
$1,500.00
$150.00
0.2%
LA Sing Singing Group
$880.00
$880.00
$0.00
0.0%
CNEC Partners
$300.00
$300.00
$0.00
0.0%
Total
$135,972.60
$115,892.60
$82,046.10
100.0%
The total budget for concessional rentals in 2010/2011 is $90,000. Therefore, there is $7,953.90 in un-allocated funds in 4065 – Community rental subsidy. It was proposed to leave the surplus amount in the budget as a contingency amount to consider applications that may be submitted to Council throughout the year which could be approved by the General Manager under delegated authority in accordance with Council’s Policy or by Council itself.



Also, Council at its meeting on 19th December 2007 (FIN092-07) resolved to request applicants to provide details of their financial status when applying for a concession / subsidy and in this regard The Body of Christ Mission Centre Inc provided the appropriate information (D10/128528).



COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION - SD

THAT the application for concessional rental by The Body of Christ Mission Centre Inc for hire of the Kingsgrove Community Centre hall to a total $1,275 (the total year hire fee being $12,750) for the first half of 2011 be refused.

FURTHER, THAT the applicant be invited to apply for the concessional rental rebate next year.

(Moved Councillor V Badalati / Seconded Councillor B Giegerl, OAM)



RESOLUTION - CCL

THAT the application for concessional rental by The Body of Christ Mission Centre Inc for hire of the Kingsgrove Community Centre hall to a total $1,275 (the total year hire fee being $12,750) for the first half of 2011 be refused.

FURTHER, THAT the applicant be invited to apply for the concessional rental rebate next year.

(Moved Councillor S McMahon / Seconded Councillor D Perry)





APPENDIX


Print
SERVICE DELIVERY CHILD CARE POLICY & SENIOR CITIZENS POLICY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, 15th December 2010
Addendum


SD150-10CONCESSIONAL RENTAL - BURMESE ORGANISATION OF NSW – MARANA ENTERTAINMENT CENTRE
Report Author(s)Manager Library Museum & Entertainment – Ms R Schulz
File10/2088
Reason for ReportFor consideration
Existing Policy?YesNew Policy Required?No
Financial ImplicationsYes, outside of existing budget
Previous Reports ReferencedYes



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council has received a request from the Burmese Cultural Organisation (BCO) asking that Council provide a 100% concessional rental for a single booking of Marana in Hurstville Entertainment Centre on 3 April 2011.



AUTHOR RECOMMENDATION

THAT the application for concessional rental by the Burmese Cultural Organisation (BCO) for hire of Marana in Hurstville Entertainment Centre on 3 April 2011 to a total $5,790 be considered.

FURTHER THAT if approved, applicants who receive concessional rental from Council be advised that they must acknowledge Council's sponsorship on all their promotion and marketing material (tickets, flyers, brochures etc) at programs and at the event/function.



REPORT DETAILS

Council has received a request from the Burmese Cultural Organisation (BCO) asking that Council provide a 100% concessional rental for a single booking of Marana in Hurstville Entertainment Centre on 3 April 2011:

The Burmese Cultural Organisation (BCO) requests a 100% concession on their hire fees for Marana in Hurstville Entertainment Centre on 3 April 2011 (please note that in their original correspondence above they request 2 April 2011, however this date was unavailable and as a result was moved to 3 April 2011). The organisation has booked the hall for one day, 8am to midnight at a cost of $300 per hour, plus hire of kitchen facilities. The total hire fee is $5,790. The BCO also requests use of a lighting technician but this cost would be at the client’s expense.

In a report to Council on 26 May 2010 (CCL096-10) Council resolved to approve the following concessional rentals for the 2010/2011 financial year totaling $82,046.10.
Organisation
Normal Charge
Subsidy Requested
Recommended Subsidy
Proportion of Total Recommended Subsidy
St George Eisteddfod
$28,425.00
$23,425.00
$23,425.00
28.6%
International Community Fellowship
$37,180.00
$22,740.00
$17,720.00
21.6%
Australian Red Cross - Mobile Blood Bank
$13,860.00
$13,860.00
$13,860.00
16.9%
Kirrawee Gang Show Scouts
$19,080.00
$19,080.00
$9,090.00
11.1%
Rotary Club of Hurstville
$8,790.00
$8,790.00
$8,790.00
10.7%
Chinese Australian Services Society
$10,800.00
$10,800.00
$3,000.00
3.7%
Film Seen
$4,320.00
$4,320.00
$2,160.00
2.6%
St George Christian School
$3,907.60
$3,907.60
$1,457.60
1.8%
Lions Club of Hurstville-St George
$900.00
$900.00
$900.00
1.1%
Australian Shanganise Association
$2,100.00
$2,100.00
$420.00
0.5%
Beverly Hills Primary School
$825.00
$825.00
$313.50
0.4%
St George Community Drug and Action Team
$630.00
$630.00
$205.00
0.2%
Hurstville Adventist School
$825.00
$825.00
$185.00
0.2%
Georges River, Penshurst St George Junior Cricket
$825.00
$185.00
$185.00
0.2%
Rotary Club of Georges River
$825.00
$825.00
$185.00
0.2%
Resourceful Australian Indian Network INC RAIN
$1,500.00
$1,500.00
$150.00
0.2%
LA Sing Singing Group
$880.00
$880.00
$0.00
0.0%
CNEC Partners
$300.00
$300.00
$0.00
0.0%
Total
$135,972.60
$115,892.60
$82,046.10
100.0%
The total budget for concessional rentals in 2010/2011 is $90,000. Therefore, there is $7,953.90 in un-allocated funds in 4065 – Community rental subsidy. It was proposed to leave the surplus amount in the budget as a contingency amount to consider applications that may be submitted to Council throughout the year which could be approved by the General Manager under delegated authority in accordance with Council’s Policy or by Council itself.



Also, Council at its meeting on 19 December 2007 (FIN092-07) resolved to request applicants to provide details of their financial status when applying for a concession / subsidy and in this regard the Burmese Cultural Organisation have been asked to provide the appropriate information. At the time of publishing, this information had not yet been provided.



COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION - SD

THAT the application for concessional rental by the Burmese Cultural Organisation (BCO) for hire of Marana in Hurstville Entertainment Centre on 3 April 2011 to a total $5,790 be refused.

(Moved Councillor V Badalati / Seconded Councillor B Giegerl, OAM)



RESOLUTION - CCL

THAT the application for concessional rental by the Burmese Cultural Organisation (BCO) for hire of Marana in Hurstville Entertainment Centre on 3 April 2011 to a total $5,790 be refused.

(Moved Councillor S McMahon / Seconded Councillor D Perry)





APPENDIX