ad to put all their other CMS work on hold to deliver this, there was concern about capacity especially for those that are ramping up changes to improve service delivery (e.g. because of a poor Ofsted inspection outcome). • What is this going to cost us, especially if we are to resource changes now and then again when the supplier solutions come out? Who will fund it? • What element of the Families First roll out is meant to be for CMS changes and implementation especially given the cost of data migration? P a g e 4 | 5 • Who is funding the costs to suppliers, LAs or DfE? If LAs how is this meant to be co-ordinated by supplier? • The cost for some suppliers will be a lot more than others, some must make much more fundamental product changes. • Not all suppliers control the statutory reporting data fields in their database structures, LAs can change these causing a risk to them if their supplier doesn’t support them in meeting future reporting requirements. • Very little known so far about how multi agency CP teams (MACPT) will work and what their CMS needs are there seems to have been more focus on Family Help side. • The ability for multi-agency professionals co-located to all be able to access the system from their own agency laptops is not possible and will pose a challenge on the delivery of multi-agency child protection teams. • Some LAs use portals as a way of getting external professionals using the CMS but a) this is additional cost b) not all suppliers have this and c) it is not really the same as having a multi-agency team logged into the same system to work together so it is not necessarily the right solution for MACPTs. • Timescales need to be realistic; the Family Hubs programme was far too ambitious and unrealistic. Challenges on Supplier Timescales • We f