Items
No. |
Item |
17. |
Minutes PDF 153 KB
Minutes:
The minutes of the meeting held on 6 June 2015 were taken as
read, confirmed and signed.
|
18. |
Question Time.
Minutes:
The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been
received under Standing Order 35.
|
19. |
Questions asked by members under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5).
Minutes:
The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been
received under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5).
|
20. |
Urgent Items
Minutes:
There were no urgent items for consideration.
|
21. |
Declarations of interest
Minutes:
The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to declare
any interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting.
Mr. J. Perry
declared a personal interest in matters relating to schools, as he had a family
member who taught in Leicestershire.
Mr L. Spence CC
indicated that whilst this did not amount to an interest to be declared at this
meeting, he felt it relevant to report that he sometimes worked for an academy
within the County.
There were no
further declarations.
|
22. |
Declarations of the Party Whip in accordance with Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 16.
Minutes:
There were no declarations of the party whip.
|
23. |
Presentation of Petitions under Standing Order 36.
Minutes:
The Chief Executive reported that no petitions had been
received under Standing Order 36.
|
24. |
Quarter 1 Performance Report for 2015/16 PDF 150 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
The Committee
considered a joint report of the Director of Children and Family Services and
the Chief Executive concerning an update of Children and Family Services
performance at the end of quarter one of 2015/2016. A copy of the report,
marked ‘Agenda Item 8’ is filed with these minutes.
It was noted that
educational results contained within the report did not include those for Key
Stage 4 as these needed validating by the Department for Education before
analysis.
Arising from discussion,
the following points were raised:
- Concern was
expressed over the increase in the number of children with three or more
placements during the year, with the measure being below national
averages. It was acknowledged that how a placement was defined, and how
placements were recorded on Frameworki could
affect changes in performance in this area. It was noted that accurate
reporting was a recurring issue from Quarter 4, and that staff did not
record placement information uniformly across the Department. Further to
this, in 44% of cases analysed, the child or young person had experienced
a quick move in placement, often moving to another placement after a one
or two night stay. A short stay such as this was classed as a placement
for the child or young person and this was frequently the case for
children where placements had to be made as a matter of urgency. The
Committee was advised that there was an increase in kinship placements,
with this placement usually being the second for that child or young
person. Whilst the authority was required to make attempts to place
children with suitable family members where possible, this was not always
successful.
- In 20% of cases
analysed, the child or young person was moved due to challenging
behavioural issues. From January 2015 to the end of Quarter 1, it was
noted that the Department had seen a rise in the number of 12-15 year olds
in the care of the County Council owing to either extremely challenging
behaviour, or due to them having either experienced or being at risk of
child sexual abuse.
- The data
highlighted that performance with regard to second and subsequent child
protection plans had worsened since the last quarter. Consequently, a
concern was raised as to the robustness of Child Protection conferences
and the indication that some child protection plans were being stepped
down too early. It was explained that Child Protection conferences and the
outcomes and conclusions of conferences were a product of multi-agency
decision making. It was acknowledged that there was further work to be
done with all agencies in exploring the length of time it took to affect
lasting change in a child’s life, and whether this would have an impact on
the step down of child protection plans.
- The report
described that there was a significant theme concerning children becoming
subject of second child protection plans due to repeated occurrences of
domestic abuse between adults in the household. The Committee was informed
that a combined approach to commissioning and addressing instances of
domestic abuse in a child protection context had been established across
Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland.
- A concern was
expressed over the percentage of five year olds achieving good levels of
development. It was questioned whether performance was below national
levels due to the fact that some summer-born children were not successful
in their applications to defer entry, and that there was a low level of
applications generally for deferrals in Leicestershire. The Committee was
advised that performance had improved this year, however it was recognised
that it was not clear the impact that being a summer-born ... view the full minutes text for item 24.
|
25. |
Annual Report of the Independent Reviewing Officer PDF 208 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
The Committee
considered a report of the Director of Children and Family Services concerning
the Annual Report 2014/2015 of the Independent Reviewing Officers for Looked After Children. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 9’
is filed with these minutes.
Arising from
discussion, the following points were raised:
- The Committee
expressed concern over the issue of caseloads for Independent Reviewing
Officers (IRO), noting that caseloads were above the guidance within the IRO
Handbook, and whether the increased caseloads had affected the quality of
the service delivered by IROs. The Committee was assured that the issue of
caseloads and capacity was being addressed with a recruitment campaign
underway within the service. The impact of the high caseloads had meant
that whilst IROs were working to statutory requirements, it had been at
the minimum acceptable level rather than following the IRO handbook to its
fullest.
- The Committee
questioned how IROs were able to ensure effective independence and what
suggestions the government had offered to enable this. It was argued that
establishing an effective escalation process that was fully independent of
the local authority would strengthen the independence of the IRO service,
and of the challenge role that IROs were able to offer. The Committee was
assured that the escalation process in place at the County Council ensured
a clear line of sight between the Director and the IRO service and this
was felt to be an adequate safeguard to the independence of the service.
Birmingham City Council commissioned a fully independent IRO service and
other authorities in the UK had aligned the IRO service with that of the
Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS) which
operated independently of the local authority, however there was at
present no intention to roll out these methods.
- It was noted that
following an IRO challenge on a particular case, if it was found that
there had been a delay in statutory timescales or failure to follow
processes, the matter would be escalated appropriately, usually with team
managers and service managers discussing the case with the allocated
worker. Should the issue not be resolved at this level, it would be raised
at a challenge meeting.
RESOLVED:
That the Annual Report of the Independent
Reviewing Officer and the Annual Work Programmes for 2015-16 be noted.
|
26. |
Leicestershire and Rutland Safeguarding Children Board Annual Report 2014/2015 PDF 315 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
The Committee
considered the Annual Report 2014/2015 of the Independent Chair of the
Leicestershire and Rutland Safeguarding Children Board. A copy of the report,
marked ‘Agenda Item 10’ is filed with these minutes.
Arising from
discussion, the following points were raised:
- The Committee
welcomed the Annual Report and the information contained therein, however
a view was expressed that the Safeguarding Board should ensure that
alongside measuring compliance, staff fully understood how to implement
improvements and affect change. The Independent Chair advised that the new
quality assurance and performance management framework went beyond
analysing quantitative data and assessed qualitative data as well. Views
of frontline practitioners and service users were sought to see if needs
were being appropriately responded to and staff views were sought when
designing procedures. The Independent Chair explained that the Board
consistently sought to test if staff understood procedures, how they were
implemented, and if they facilitated best working practices.
- It was
acknowledged that in a time of financial constraint, innovative methods of
monitoring and implementing change were required. The Signs of Safety
model adopted by Leicestershire County Council’s Children and Family
Services was considered to be innovative in that it stressed different
ways of working to ensure the best outcomes for children and young people.
Innovation allowed authorities to maintain stability, particularly within
the workforce and it was noted that there was significant commitment to
Signs of Safety from staff within the department.
- The Annual Report
outlined the membership and attendance of partner organisations across
2014/15. The Committee was advised that there were statutory members of
the Board though substitutes were permissible as it was representation
from the organisation, not the individual that was sought. Attendance from
NHS England had not improved, and it was noted that the Independent Chair
was in discussions concerning attendance from statutory members with the
East Midlands Chairs’ Network, and would report back to the Committee the
conclusion of discussions upon completion.
- Following the
release of BBC figures showing that more than 5,500 alleged sex crimes in
UK schools were reported to the police in the last three years, the
Committee stressed the importance of agencies disseminating information to
other agencies appropriately, and the important role the LSCB could play
in ensuring this. Though it was believed that this was not an issue in
Leicestershire and Rutland, the Independent Chair advised that the LRSCB
had a piece of work to undertake to work with all schools to identify
those that were not reporting any allegations, and conduct a deep dive to
understand if issues were being missed.
- It was noted that
police attendance at Board meetings was only 50% throughout 2014/15, but
attendance in the current year had been 100%. Similarly, attendance from
the police at case conferences had improved this year, though the Board
continued to challenge in an effort to secure full attendance.
RESOLVED:
(a) That the contents of the report and the information provided be
noted;
(b) That comments made be submitted to the Local Safeguarding Children
Board for consideration;
(c) That the Independent Chair report back to the Committee the outcome
of discussions with the East Midlands Chairs’ Network concerning attendance of
statutory partners of Local Safeguarding Children Boards.
|
27. |
Dates of future meetings
Future meetings of the Committee are scheduled to take place
at 2.00pm on the following dates:-
2 November 2015
18 January 2016
4 April 2016
14 June 2016
5 September 2016
7 November 2016
Minutes:
RESOLVED:
It was noted that
future meetings of the Committee were scheduled to take place at 2.00pm on the
following dates:
2 November 2015
18 January 2016
4 April 2016
13 June 2016
5 September 2016
7 November 2016
|