Agenda and draft minutes

Please note this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method.  Although we ask members of the public recording, filming or reporting on the meeting not to include the public seating areas, members of the public attending the meeting should be aware that we cannot guarantee that they will not be filmed or recorded by others attending the meeting.  Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on.  By entering the meeting room and using the public seating area, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The Chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual, or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

The Chair referred to the filming of meetings and this information was noted.

Apologies had been received from Councillor Collett.  

The Chair will consider the admission of late items of urgent business. Late items will be considered under the agenda item they appear. New items will be dealt with at item 9 below.

There were none.

There were no declarations of interest.

RESOLVED:  That minutes of the meeting of the 13 July 2022 be approved as a correct record.

This report provides an analysis of the performance data and trends for an agreed set of measures relating to looked after children on behalf of the Corporate Parenting Advisory Committee.

Mr Richard Hutton, Senior Performance Officer, presented the item. There was a detailed discussion on the performance data and members asked several questions and points of clarifications.

The Committee heard that:

•     When a young person had been in care for a certain period of time after their 16th birthday, the young person would be entitled to leaving care services. This meant that the individual would have an allocated personal advisor and be given financial and moral support.  Efforts would be made to ensure that the individual would be settled into permanent accommodation, that the individual's aspirations would be supported including furnishing. Support would also be provided for emotional wellbeing and mental health needs.  Work would be done with the multi-agency set-up for any interconnected issues, such as the use of drugs.

•     Regular dental checks were provided, but there were some underlying issues.  This had been escalated to Public Health England. There was a small programme within London whereby if a young person was unable to get a dental appointment, then one could be provided. This included urgent dental appointments or routine checks which would have a waiting period of two to four weeks. It was important that dental appointments be encouraged.

•     In relation family acute stress points, when cases escalated from Early Help, this was largely due to the complexities of parental consent and barriers that impact parental engagement that could be provided by Early Help. When cases were tracked, there had not been any cases which had gone to court which had not satisfied the criteria. For families in acute stress, there was more work done at the earlier intervention processes, partly due to mental health issues. A child could not be taken into care simply on the bases that the family was suffering from financial hardship.

•     During the coronavirus crisis, social workers were one of the only resources that were available for young people and this had a long-term effect on service delivery across the system. Efforts were underway to redesign how the issue would be addressed. There was a challenge regarding the number of care leavers with undiagnosed mental health support needs. The stress was becoming visible amongst care leavers. Therefore, there was a lot of the pressure on social workers and the young adult service to advocate and to intervene. 

•     The target for pathway plans was being met (at 84%) and this was being tracked on a fortnightly basis.

•     In relation to children in care, the competing priorities were the same, although there had been some movement in the summer. A high number of young people had turned 16 recently and the Council was now planning at the age of 15 and a half years of age regarding their prospective future. Soon all young people would have a pathway plan where required.

•     Young people reaching the age of 25 having issues such as not being able to contact their personal advisor would be referred to Adult Services for a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

This report covers the second full year of operation of the regional Adopt London North (ALN) from April 2021 to March 2022. 

The report provides a summary of the work over the last year, examples of changes and improvements ALN are making and an insight int the challenges resulting from the current level of demand.

Ms Lydia Samuel, Adopt London North, presented the item. A discussion was held as Members sought further clarification and commented on various areas of interest. 

The Committee heard that:

•   One of the difficulties with CAMHS was that often some young people were seen as low risk when assessed in crisis because they had supportive parents and were seen as having a stable home environment.There had been individuals who had been released from hospital after suicide attempts. However, there was a project underway across London to try and get funding nationally to help improve pathways and have more clear areas of responsibility for adoption support and CAMHS responsibilities.

•   Through the adoption support fund, therapy could be provided for every family that needed it.  The type of therapy could be decided upon their need and this could include family therapy. A total of £5,000 worth of therapy could be accessed per year. There was difficulty when the issues bordered into clinical need and CAMHS involvement would then be required.

•   CAMHS could be invited to a future meeting.

•   The issue needed to be brought forward to the Health and Wellbeing Board.

•   Haringey always had a relatively high number of adoptions in comparison to the other North London boroughs. The boroughs may have differences in the sizes of their populations. Some of the experiences of Haringey related to the number of single parents where there was a combination of challenges such as substance use, mental health and experience of domestic abuse.

•   People who foster normally continued to foster, although some people went on to adopt.

•   People intending to go into adoption needed to meet a financial stability threshold and this was a particular challenge for those who lived in London. The participants  would normally need to have spare bedrooms and adequate space. It was likely that the cost of living crisiswould have a negative effect on those who came close to meeting the criteria for adoption.It was likely to have a less immediate effect on fostering, but fostering was likely to be affected. Efforts were being made to target financial assistance for those looking to go into adoption. 

•   Some local authorities had been able to allocate housing for foster carers. This was more difficult to do for those looking to adopt did not have a child identified to them and therefore was not yet approved for adoption. However, even if an individual was approved to adopt, they were told they could not increase their property size unless their home was overcrowded.

•   The adoption orders had been affected by the delays in the courts partly due to the coronavirus crisis. Proceedings were also generally taking longer. As children got older, it became harder to get them into adoptive placements.

•   Even when the court process was efficient, there was still pressure on timings. The service was now moving to more strategic operating model to ensure that any issues that aggravate delays would have  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

This report provides an update on the actions taken to address the delay in  sharing the health assessment reports for Children in Care.

Ms Lynn Carrington, Whittington Health NHS, presented the item. Members sought clarifications on the report and made queries on the data. 

The Committee heard that:

•     The full health report should be completed and uploaded within two weeks, but this was nothappening. In relation to nurses’ reports, there was long-term sickness within the nursing team and the team was struggling to complete reports. The new doctors had started in September 2022.

•     A further update would be provided when the situation stabilised and an update would also be provided regarding recruiting for the post of the designated doctor.

RESOLVED:

That the update be noted.

In relation to Corporate Parenting Champions, the training was ready to be implemented.  The first programme of training be completed after the half term and the second week in December 2022. These would be sessions that lasted an hour and a half. In the New Year, the same format would be implemented in January and the second week of February. After this, a launch would be organised for March 2023. 

The Chair felt that a full set of responses would be gathered from all members of the Committee.

Any expressions of interest should be please shared with Ms Beverley Hendricks, Assistant Director of Safeguarding and Social Care.