Issue - meetings

The report will provide an analysis of performance information in relation to Looked After Children. The report will also update the Committee on health checks undertaken for looked after children.

RECEIVED the report on Performance for the Year to January 2015, included in the agenda pack (pages 7 to 29). 

NOTED in response to discussion:

·         the improvement in the number of Looked After Children (LAC) with up to date dental checks;

·         figures on the Council’s position on permanency plans would be provided at the next meeting;

Action: Neelam Bhardwaja

·         some concentrated work was being done to reduce the number of children going missing from care, this included police intelligence on  missing children which the Council could match with its records;

·         there had been an improvement in the number of Personal Education Plans (PEP) being completed since publication of the report but the team was still not at an acceptable level and social workers were being challenged about this.  Reasons for non completion of PEPs within timescales included staff turnover and lack of information and narrative threads on the information system.  Going forward the Mosaic information recording system would be used to automatically flag up when new PEP meetings should be booked;

·         the Committee acknowledged that some children were too busy to engage in the process of PEP meetings or felt that they were repetitive or did not want to be seen with social workers in school.  It was noted, however, that PEPs were a legal requirement;

·         in response to questioning it was reported that approximately 70% of the 21 foster carers recently recruited were based in Haringey.  More details on their locations would be provided at the next meeting.  It was acknowledged that having carers in other boroughs was beneficial and that Haringey used carers in South London with experience in special needs;

Action: Jon Abbey

·         NRS conducted the Council’s foster carer advertising campaigns and had been delivering good carers for young children but the focus was now on finding carers for teenagers as adolescents were more difficult to place;

·         NRS carers were cheaper that IFA carers by £300-400 per week.  Some IFA carers had taken the decision to become permanent Haringey carers and were going through the assessment process;

·         NRS was paid by results and received £6,000 for each foster carer they delivered to the Council and included all the marketing and assessment costs. The Council was able to screen candidates at an early stage, before they were accepted;

·         recent advertising using banners on display around the Borough particularly on school railings had been cost effective, with a good number of prospective carers coming forward in the west of the Borough.  There would be a long assessment process and officers would report back to the Committee on the number of successful carers recruited through the advertising banners.

Action: Jon Abbey

AGREED to note the report.