Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Stennett, Debbie Haith and Libby Blake.

Cllr Egan attended the meeting for Cllr Stennett.

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.

 There were no  items of urgent business

 A member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:

(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, and

(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.

A member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Members’ Register of Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interest are defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

There were no declarations of interest put forward.

To consider the minutes of the meeting held on 19^th March 2012 and  the minutes of the  joint meeting with  Children’s Safeguarding Policy and Practice  Committee  held on 22 March 2012.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 19^th March 2012 were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting.

The committee were keen to see the follow up letter sent to schools in relation to the expenditure of the looked after children’s element of the Pupil Premium grant.  Committee Members, who were also school governors, commented that that had not yet seen any correspondence relating to expenditure on LAC and felt that this was a key issue to follow up on. Agreed that  a copy of the correspondence be emailed to Committee Members

Agreed that the contact number for Kate Cairns be supplied to Cllr Brabazon.

To note the terms of reference for this committee  agreed by Cabinet on the 12^th June 2012.

The committee were asked to note the terms of reference for this committee which were agreed by the Cabinet in June 2012.  The committee were able to recommend any required changes to the Cabinet for consideration.

 The report advised that the Cabinet were able to establish advisory committees and provided some background for the reasons behind the establishment of the Corporate Parenting Advisory Committee as well as providing an update on the recent governance review which had examined the role of the committee.

In view of the governance delivery group’s, previous intention to  decommission  the Corporate  Parenting  committee and given  the Scrutiny Panel for Children’s services  had developed a work programme  there was discussion about whether the  Corporate Parenting  Advisory Committee would be handing over  to the Scrutiny Children’s Panel or  continuing to work separately to the Scrutiny Panel.   The membership of the Children’s Scrutiny Panel contained members of both Corporate Parenting and Children’s Safeguarding Policy and Practice Committee indicating preparation towards this change in committee structure.

 The Chair clarified that the committee would not be working in “handover mode” as this was a Cabinet advisory committee and had distinct responsibilities from a Scrutiny Panel.  The work plan of the Scrutiny panel could be looked at to ensure that there was not a duplication of work.  In relation to the governance review recommendations, these did not indicate that the Corporate Parenting Advisory   committee would automatically be decommissioned after one year as there would be a review. The Corporate Parenting Committee was responsible for monitoring children and young people in care   and ensuring their life chances were maximised in terms of health, educational attainment and access to training and health and this would be considered as part of any review. The governance review recommendations were subject to change, as previously experienced, and therefore the committee should continue working as a Cabinet Advisory committee until further notice. To allow members of the committee to further discuss their concerns and suggestion for improved working of the committee, the chair agreed to have a separate informal discussion with them at the end of the meeting.

 The committee will  consider headline performance information relating to Looked After Childrenas at the end of May 2012.

Members of the committee considered the headline performance data for looked after children as at the end of May 2012. There was a further breakdown enclosed of the performance where the indicator showed a performance lower than the target which had been set.

Overall the committee were concerned about the format of the report as the figures in each row did not seem to add up and further explanation was required about the performance figure with some background information.

OP148 (Care leavers in education, employment or training). It was noted that the figures in the report were not up to date and it was agreed that more accurate information advising the number of care leavers in education, employment and training would be sent to committee members by email separately. It was also noted that the recently obtained aggregate quarterly figure for this indicator was just above target at 77.6%.

OP147 (Care Leavers in suitable accommodation) The committee were advised that these figures should be interpreted with care as the percentages were based on small numbers. For example at the end of April, two young people were counted as not being in touch. Currently one was still termed missing and the other had been found suitable accommodation. The committee were interested in returning to the subject of transition to understand the potential impact of the welfare reforms on care leavers and also requested a further update on the support provided to care leavers to tackle isolation. The report should include information about the support in transition. As an initial response, the committee noted that the council was one of the few authorities providing supported accommodation with a live in volunteer.

The committee agreed that a report come back to committee in September on Transition taking the above comments into account.

OP391 – (Timeliness of placements of looked after children for adoption following an agency decision that the child should be placed for adoption) The target was to complete three adoptions at the end of May and one had been completed. Although a small number this would still bring performance down. The performance in Adoption was due to be discussed at agenda item 9.

OP386 - (Children in care cases which were reviewed within required timescales) The committee were informed that there were technical problems with capturing this data and the service were working to get an accurate figure. This discrepancy had been realised from manually checking the figures. The service was working with IT to resolve how the data is collected from Framework I correctly as this was key management data.  The committee noted that if a case was not reviewed within the allocated days but considered 1 or 2 days later this would still show the target as not being met. The committee were reassured by the Head of Service for Safeguarding Quality Assurance& Practice Development that following the manual check on the figures she was confident that there was not a significant issue with the completion of these reviews.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 166.

Members of the committee will be asked to consider an  interim report on the direction of the Independent Reviewing Officers (IRO) service for Looked after Children in Haringey. The report contains initial findings on the work of the service for the period up to 31^st March 2012.   

The committee received an interim report from the Independent Reviewing Officers service for looked after children.  The report contained initial findings on the work of the service for the period up to March 31^st 2012. A full report was expected to be produced in September 2012.

The legal context within which the IRO (Independent Review Officers) operated was set out.  Recent regulations had strengthened the role of the IRO and further enabled their independence to challenge and scrutinise children’s cases to ensure that the child’s interests were protected throughout the care planning process.

Currently there were seven IRO posts of which three positions were covered by agency staff and these were in the process of being permanently recruited to.  In response to a question about the relationship between IRO's and social workers, it was noted that social workers valued the independence of the IRO   as they understood that their advice and direction was in keeping with the best interests of the child/young person.

The IRO’s  had completed a number of audits throughout the year and were able to use the information collated to understand if there were any emerging themes about the care of looked after children and  where improvements could be made.  One of their successful recommendations was the Children’s service agreeing to pay a foster care allowance when the LAC was still in education at 18.  Also the service supported LAC seeking to obtain indefinite leave to remain in the country.  The committee noted that the Children’s service did not pay for naturalisation as this was a choice and it was more important for the young person to be helped to obtain indefinite leave to remain in the country.  Members of the committee were interested in gaining a more detailed understanding of the process that the service adhered to in assisting LAC gain indefinite leave.  Examining this process may help gain an understanding of where local councillors can help in dealings with the Home Office, on a political level, with more difficult cases.

The IRO’s facilitated Family Group conferences,   a process led by the family members to plan and make decisions for vulnerable child/children who were at risk. This year, the IRO’s were aiming to increase the profile of these meetings because they would help identify alternatives to foster placements and adoption outside the family.

 In response to a question, the advocacy role of the IRO was explained as well as how their interaction with children/ young people on understanding their wishes and views at LAC reviews. 

 In terms of the timeliness of assessments, decision making and action, clarification was sought on whether forward planning had improved.   It was noted that there had been service wide training   on the effectiveness of early planning and the permanency policy to ensure there was an understanding of how each service area contributed and had a role in permanency planning for children in care.

The Chair and Committee thanked the IRO service for this useful and insightful report.

Information and update report on the work of the Adoption Service.

The committee received the annual report of the  Adoption service  which contained information  about: how it functioned,  was guided , regulated , the recruitment of adopters,  preparation of applicants, assessments  for adoption, adoption panel working, current figures relating to children waiting to be adopted ,staffing and key issues going forward   for the service.

 The committee had already been made aware of the government’s action plan for adoption which included speeding up the process for adoption. To enable this there would be an introduction of performance thresholds and a performance scorecard to track and profile progress.  The committee considered the current score card and were concerned about the direction of the performance figures for the Adoption service and whether reductions in the journey time to adoption could be achieved. They noted that a DFE diagnostic team had visited the council to complete an assessment of the current performance and its likely progress to understand whether the council’s service would need to be put into special measures. Following intensive interviews and an initial draft report it was felt that the assessment had gone well.

As the council had a higher number of LAC they would consequently have a higher number of children to place for adoption.  This coupled with the national   problem in recruiting adopters and the mix of children with differing needs would be acknowledged by the DFE in their diagnostic assessment. Neighbouring boroughs were also facing similar issues and would receive a visit from the DFE diagnostic team.

The committee learned that since January 2012 the Adoption Team had been fully staffed as prior to this there had been staff on maternity and sick leave. There was now an increased emphasis on seeking special guardianships with two members of staff working on this.   There would be a high level of management monitoring to ensure that the targeted number of adoptions occurred on a quarterly basis.  There was an adoption working party examining recruitment methodology, and considering an enhanced role for the voluntary sector.  The key focus was timeliness and ensuring that   this was given as equal importance as the quality of the placement.  This would be aided by the service having improved data available to better manage performance.  The Head of Service for Children in Care was also examining past adoption cases to further understand the factors involved in long running cases to inform improving the timeliness of adoptions. 

Further to considering the current Adoption Scorecard the Committee were assured that Adoption was a key priority for the Director of the Children’s Services. It was agreed that there be an update to committee about the outcome of the diagnostic team visit as part of the Adoption Action plan report.

That the press and public be excluded from the meeting for consideration of item 11 as it contains 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):Paras1&2:namely information relating to any individual, and information likely to reveal the identity of an individual.

This report will be tabled to ensure that the most up to date information can be provided to the committee about the placement of young people previously living at the home.

The committee noted that all the young people previously residing at the council children’s homes had been suitably accommodated according to their situation in required placements. Children’s Services were in the process of handing over the buildings to   Property Services.

Date of next meeting 04 September 2012 6.30pm.

The next meeting would take place on the 04^th September 2012.

A member of the committee had received a complaint from a local children’s centre who were claiming that they were unable to work efficiently with families with risks as they did not have access to Framework I system.  This was disputed as the children centres connection with the safeguarding and support service had been strengthened.  The children’s centres further worked closely with the MASH (Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub) and were able to then further direct any issues to Children’s Services.