Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Solomon and Cllr Beacham attended in place.

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 11 below.

None

A member with a personal interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the consideration becomes apparent.

A member with a personal interest in a matter also has a prejudicial interest in that matter the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the member’ judgement of the public interest.  

None

To consider the minutes of the meeting held on 19 April 2011.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 19^th April were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting.

Members discussed their requirements for a report  on occupancy levels at children’s homes . It was proposed that this be a quarterly update and include information on: how the places at the homes have been filled, the timetable for  filling the places  at the home  and the running costs of unfilled places.  It would also be useful for the committee to understand how the council were different or similar to other boroughs in this subject or other children’s homes run by private organisation. In considering this potential report the committee were advised that it was likely to be an exempt report as the number of children that would signalled in the report could eventually through discussion make them identifiable. It was agreed  that the committee would consider this is in the closed part of the meeting with a review of discussions had after  two or three meetings to decide whether  this report could be considered in the open part of the meeting.

This report is an update of Children in Care National Indicators and other key performance information at the end of April 2011.

The committee received an update on the Children in care national indicators and other key performance information for the end of April 2011. This was a relatively concise report as the team were compiling the end of year performance report which would be available for the committee to consider at their next meeting in September. It was advised that there had been a spike in the number of children becoming looked after during February, March and April following a police authority exercise but the service had seen a reduction in figures for May.  The committee learned that there had been a concerted effort to review children that were the subject of a Child Protection Plan was to ensure that intervention was making a difference.

 The Committee noted that the service were confident that the number of children now ceasing to become the subject of a child protection plan was appropriate. The services were examining the current movements of children in care and considering: the children which were 18 and about to leave care, those in a pre adoptive procedure, the numbers of children with permanancey plans (which was a good number). The latter analysis had enabled the service to recognise that there was a need to make additional resources available to support this process. The service were  positive about the good number of young people,  that  through rehabilitation, could be deemed able to return to their family home. This would of course be following an assessment and section 20 agreement of the Deputy Director of Children and Families. The committee were interested in the next performance report containing some further information about the benefits of the services continued permanency work with children in care.

The Committee particularly expressed a need to continue with  understanding what the trends were behind the performance data , this would be important in understanding whether the borough was experiencing   different or similar challenges to other comparable boroughs.   For example looking at the young people leaving care at 18 , the number of unaccompanied minors ,considering the age ranges of children coming into care and leaving care, family groupings of children in care and sibling groups. The Chair requested that any further suggestions from committee members on the statistical information to include in the report could be emailed to her.

 Following questions about the rate of children in care in Haringey compared to the national average and other comparable boroughs and whether  there was reason to think that this number as too high, it was noted that Ofsted had reported in their recent inspection that the children placed in care  was correct.  More fuller comparisons with other comparable local authorities would be available in the next performance report to the committee as the full year data would be available.

 In responding to  questions about the work with the rehabilitation of older children in care to their family homes  where assessed as appropriate, it was noted that the service was working with the assistance of Independent Review  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90.

Committee to consider and agree the final draft of this strategy.

The committee considered the final version of the Corporate Parenting Strategy. The strategy had previously been distributed to Corporate Committee members for their earlier comments along with the Action Plan. The committee advised that the Action Plan would be the crucial document to take a forward the principles of the strategy and translate them into actions. The committee were informed that the Action Plan was planned for quarterly consideration by the committee starting from September 2011 onwards. There were a number of key actions identified in the Ofsted inspection which had milestones set for completion at the end of August. These would be appropriately reported to the. September committee.

RESOLVED

1. That the Corporate Parenting strategy be agreed.

2. That an update on the Action plan be considered at the September 22 meeting.

To consider for information purposes the Annual report of the North London Adoption and Fostering Consortium.

The committee were asked to consider the annual report of the North London Adoption and Fostering consortium This report communicated how the five boroughs of Barnet, Camden, Enfield, Haringey and Islington along with associate members Norwood  and the Post Adoption centre have been working together over the past year on: new adoption initiatives, developing work in fostering, joint publicity, information exchanges, adoption training developing the work of the consortium.  It was important to note  that  fostering had been added to the portfolio of the consortiums work last year.   Adoption   has always been a compatible area of shared area of work as it was regulated and  therefore councils will have to follow similar processes The five London boroughs had already been working informally  together on adoption for  around 10 years previously  and   now  had agreements  in place with among others  on how  adopters were shared. The requirements around training for fostering and adoption is  set in regulation and standards therefore it makes financial sense to the 5 boroughs to access this as part of a group . Publicity around fostering and adoption is another area where funding from the five boroughs is grouped together to provide maximum opportunity to meet the different needs of fostering activity. Recently  the consortium had organised a high profile adoption event where  15 potential adopters had been identified.

The committee  were pleased to noted that Haringey had the highest number  adoption orders compared to neighbouring boroughs and  they were also working on increasing the special guardianship orders. The committee noted that the placement of a child/young person  with family members in a fostering arrangement or through a special guardianship order was dependent upon the monitoring requirements for the child.

The overarching issue of  how much each consortium borough pays for  fostercare was part of  a separate piece of work by the North London Strategic Alliance.

RESOLVED

That the report be noted.

Information on the role and responsibilities of Independent Reviewing Officers (IRO) to accompany and inform a  discussion on the stability of placements.

The committee had  at a previous meeting received a brief introduction about the roles and duties of an independent review officer  and now invited two  officers to attend a meeting to discuss their work with the children’s services  and talk about the difference their role was to the work of the children’s service. The independent review officers were asked to reflect on a typical couple of weeks work in the children’s services.  The committee learned that the independent review officers assisted with the chairing of Child Protection Reviews  and ensured that the meeting was child centred . This meant  engaging with the child before and after the meeting . They aimed to keep the meetings as small as possible in the interests of the child and ensured that requirements such as translators or sign workers   were on hand to attend the meetings.  The  IRO’s also had responsibility for examining health  and education requirements of the child as part of the review. When asked about their  communication with children under 5,   they advised that they would observe the child’s behaviour in their placement  and report views to the meeting. The Independent Review Officers worked in consultation with the Social Workers to choose the appropriate people to be around the child at the meeting.  Although  they worked quite closely with Social Workers and were employed  by the council  , their role was to be a critical friend and provide quality assurance. If they had  serious concerns about, for example,  if  timescales were not being met for dealing with issues concerning a child they had the free role  to escalate matters through the management structure as their duty was  to act on behalf of the child  at all times. This duty was recognised by social workers when getting feedback from the IRO. In their free role they were able to pick up on general issues in social work activity  and process . They had recently brought to the attention of senior management the issue of post 18 provision and also raised  similar issues as  the committee  on the need to look at the trends in the service and have  strategy for  dealing with them. It was noted that recently a group had been set  up to look at how general issues  identified  need to be addressed by  senior management.

 The independent review officers  explained to the Committee that they were going through a difficult transition period as 2 experienced officers had retired and  one other officer was moving to a position in another borough.  From the 1^st of June the IRO service would become part of the Safeguarding Quality Assurance and Practice Development service which has the responsibility to establish a new and robust quality assurance framework covering both child protection and looked after children.  This would further involve amalgamating the roles of the IRO and Child Protection Advisors.  There was anxiety  expressed by the independent review officers on taking on the extra responsibilities that this would entail  as  it would mean  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93.

Briefing note on  Adoption Agencies and the adoption process.

The committee considered  a briefing  on the adoption agencies as a prelude  to the end of year report on adoption and permanence panel.  The briefing  advised that the all local authorities had a duty to provide an adoption service  but were not  obliged to provide all the facilities of an adoption service itself, and could make use of the services provided by voluntary adoption agencies and adoption support agencies. The services provided by the adoption agency would include:

• Deciding whether a child should be placed for adoption
• Preparing , assessing and approving prospective adopters
• Matching and proposing a placement
• Adoption Support Services
• Post Adoption services

The committee noted that the clear care planning with permanency was the key element to finding adoptive families for looked after children. In the interest of the child’s welfare , timing was crucial and delays following the agreement that the  child should be adopted were not acceptable. The key responsibilities of the local authority were set out ,  as adoption is a highly regulated process  as it involves sensitivities with the children , adopters and parents. There was also information on membership of the adoption panel, its responsibilities and reporting lines . As previously noted, the Haringey Adoption service belongs to the North London Adoption Consortium and the council would work together with the consortium partners  by sharing information on prospective adopters  and arranging training for applicants, adoptive families and staff.

In response to the question on the  benefits  of exchanging adopters within the consortium , the  committee  were advised  that there was no profit or loss to the council with the  exchange of adopters as the boroughs recruited similar numbers of adopters. This partnership allowed the  local authorities to have a greater opportunity to match children with the most appropriate adopters.

In response to the use of the  adoption process for older children, it was noted  that   this may not be the best  option as  there will be issues with how the  older child  bonding with a new environment .

The committee discussed the valuable and  dedicated work of the adoption panel. The meetings would often last a full day  with the reading of the reports also a full day task. The committee  commented on the potential need to look further at the work of the panel and whether there was a need to assign a second  councillor to this panel to share the workload. . In response it was noted that there  was due to be an inspection of   the adoption service , following which there would be recommendations form this for the Committee to consider.

It was important for the committee to note that there was equally  a  high volume of work associated with  arranging and agreeing  long term foster  carers. If the child/young person settled well in the  long term placement there would be  potential to then offering  to the  foster carer the option of the special guardianship order.

 RESOLVED

That the report be noted

In recognition of  the dedication and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

That the press and public be excluded from the meeting for consideration of items 15- 19 as they contain exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended by Section 12A of the Local Government Act 1985): paras 1 & 2: namely information relating to any individual, and information likely to reveal the identity of an individual.  

The press and public were excluded from the meeting for consideration of the following item as it contained exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended by Section 12A of the Local Government Act 1985): paras 1 & 2: namely information relating to any individual, and information likely to reveal the identity of an individual.

The committee to consider key information from the end of year report considered by the Adoption and Permanence Panel .

The committee received an end of year report  from the Adoption and Permanence panel  which contained statistics for the work achieved  by the panel in 2010/11 .It was noted that Haringey performed better than neighbouring boroughs on the number of children placed  for adoption. However  the borough had more children in care than other neighbouring boroughs.   The committee noted that the adoption service will seek to place siblings together unless there were good reasons for the siblings to be separated. There will  be recommendations from the service to the panel on how the siblings should be placed  as they will be treating the children as individuals with needs  and on some occasions it may not be in the best interest of the children to place  them with all or some of their siblings.

The committee asked  how confident the  children and families service were in meeting the updated  target   of placing a child with a prospective adopter within 6 months of the agency decision.   The committee learned that this would be a difficult task but the service would respond to this by strating the parallel planning which takes place when a child is identified for  potential adoption earlier.

RESOLVED

That the report be noted

To receive details of Regulation 33 inspections made to Haringey’s residential homes.

The committee noted the aim of the Commissioning and Placements service to make a concerted effort to improve of regulation 33 inspections with the primary aim of achieving an outstanding standard of service for looked after children in Haringey Park, and Coppetts Road Children’s Homes.

The chair asked committee members to comment on the format of the report following recent changes to it. It was noted that whilst the report format was good as it allowed understanding of the issues identified on each visit there was a need f or the report to differentiate between the recommendations and the management action that has been taken to address the issues identified. Further comments were made about having the actions listed in a tabular format so that, where actions had already been taken, they could be ticked off the list.  It was agreed that the report needed to list the persons taking part in the visits.  It was clarified that recently no young person participated in the visits.  The committee noted that there had been some young people identified and trained to take part in the visits but they had not come forward when the visits to the home had been arranged. The Head of commissioning and placements agreed to revisit this pool of young people to find out if any further support was needed to enable their participation.

Concern was expressed at the time that it had taken to organise restraint training for workers at the children’s home. The committee advised that most permanent staff would have received restraint training before starting work at a children’s home. However, it was accepted that this training required updating on a regular basis. The Head of Commissioning and Placements explained that it was not possible to access a shared training contract with schools as   part of the training should include learning skills in de-escalation and behaviour management. There were recently two providers identified to access the training from and there would be available soon training dates for the workers to select and attend.

 Further concern was communicated about the number of children not attending school at one of the Children Homes and the responsibility of the home workers to ensure that children that accessed learning through the SAM codes had regular access to this learning website. In particular one young person had showed educational potential which should be supported with access to the SAM code.  Clarification was sought on the roles of the IRO in monitoring this, and the responsibility of the children’s home to get the young people to access learning. In response it was noted that the IRO can only act in this situation if they have been made aware of it. The committee noted that workers in the home should have the responsibility and skills for encouraging children at the home to go to school and should be aware of the significance of the SAM code and keeping this in an accessible location. it was important for the committee  to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 97.

Issues discussed in the previous item.

To provide a verbal update as necessary on safeguarding issues pertinent to the remit of the Committee.

Agreed that this item be removed  form the agenda as children safeguarding issues were ingrained in the committee’s  approach to items on the agenda.

Date of next meetings:

22 September 2011

11 October 2011 – Joint meeting with the Safeguarding Policy and Practice Committee

27 October 2011

13 December 2011

31 January 2012

05 March 2012  - Joint meeting with Safeguarding Policy and Practice      Committee

19 March 2012

Item for the next meeting:

Performance Report