placed from home. We asked participants at our workshops: If you could pick one thing to start collecting, what would it be? (multiple occurrences in brackets) • Early Help data (requests, open plans by agency, closed plans etc). (3) • Contacts data (i.e. contacts from partners NFA). • Young people’s mental health and wellbeing. (2) • Overdue (but not completed) assessments. • Better partner data. • More on outcomes – answering the ‘so what’ question. (4) • Voice of child. • SEND Data. We also asked for any other thoughts respondents would like to be taken into consideration. • Timeliness of data. • Why so many different collections, can't we just have one that combines the lot, and then is shared across the various organisations (DfE, ASGLB, etc)? • With all the new projects going on, we need to be acutely aware that LA performance teams are already cut to the bone with resourcing. Whilst the system is widely recognised to be struggling to meet the needs of children, adding a plethora of KPIs isn't what will fix it. Chart 1 - Survey section comparison Comparing the first half of the questionnaire to the second half (outcomes). The bar chart shows the average score and the scatterplot shows individual scores. The scatterplot is jittered so the score density is visible. When we ask about how well data works generally, we get a much more positive response than when we ask how effective data is at reporting on particular outcomes. This suggests that our primary data focus is on managing workflow – which is of course important – but not on understanding the impact of services on children’s lives. When talking outcomes, it’s vanishingly unlikely for anyone to score a “10” for their effectiveness on data reporting. When it comes to data effectiveness generally, we see a wide 