Agenda and minutes

Please note that 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 Members present to agenda Item 1 as shown on the agenda in respect of filming at this meeting, and Members noted the information contained therein.

Apologies for absence were received from Mr Taye and Ms Denny.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business (late items will be considered under the agenda item where they appear. New items will be dealt with as noted below).

None.

Councillor Mallett stated that she was a governor of Broadwaters and Chair of its Community Services Committee.  Councillor Wright stated that he was Chair of Governors at Highgate Wood School.

To consider any requests received in accordance with Part 4, Section B, Paragraph 29 of the Council’s Constitution.

None.

To approve the minutes of the meeting of 1 February 2016. (TO FOLLOW)

AGREED:

That the minutes of the meeting of 1 February 2016 be approved.

To question the Cabinet Member for Children and Families on her portfolio and, in particular;

·         Progress with the proposed closure of Children’s Centres;

·         Finance issues;

·         Cross cutting priorities (i.e. issues, such as health and well-being, licensing and parks, that have an impact on children and young people); and

·         Priority 1 outcomes – what are the areas of greatest challenge/success.

The Cabinet Member reported on issues arising from her portfolio.  Amongst the issues raised were the following:

·         The number of Looked After Children (LAC) was currently 410, which was the lowest that it had been for some considerable time.  It had previously been over 600.  The number of permanent staff had been increased and adoptions speeded up. The reduced numbers reflected the fact that better systems were now in place.

·         All secondary schools, including special schools, were now rated as being either good or outstanding.  For primary schools, this figure had increased to 92%. 

·         She had made a number of visits to front line areas of work, including safeguarding, early help and fostering and adoption.  She had been particularly impressed by the quality of foster parents that she had met.

·         The most pressing challenge was the £1.7 million overspend.  The service expected to spend around £55 million this year, which was down from the £60.3 million that it had been last year.   Notwithstanding the overspend, this still represented a huge saving.  The budget for the service had been £80 million four years ago and good performance was still being achieved despite the large reduction in budget. 

·         More placements with “home grown” foster carers needed to be found.  All local authorities were finding this a challenge. 

·         It was necessary to reduce the number of social workers who were agency staff.  The middle management structure was now in place so progress was being made. 

·         There was a need to plan and develop the 30 hours of free childcare for three year olds that was to be made available to working parents and this was a significant challenge for the Council.

·         There were to be changes in the funding for schools, with the introduction of a new funding formula that was likely to move funding away from London to other parts of the country.  At the same time, the Pupil Premium was also being reduced due to changes in how it was calculated. 

In answer to a question, the Cabinet Member stated that a location for a Children’s Centre in the west of the borough had not yet been identified.  A commissioning plan was being drawn up and work taking place with providers.  In the meantime, Highgate Family Centre provided some services, as did Stonecroft and Northbank.  It was hoped that the commissioning arrangements for the Centre in the west of the borough would be put in place as soon as possible.

In the remaining Children’s Centres, staffing had now been restructured, with some being assimilated and others taking voluntary redundancy.  The services offered had changed to reflect the reduced resources and work had taken place with partners to address this.  The changes would be communicated to residents shortly but most parents were probably already aware of the changes.

She stated that the 30 hours of free childcare for three year olds could not be implemented overnight and was proving a challenge for all local authorities.  Progress had been made more difficult by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

To consider:

·         Current developments in adoption, fostering and special guardianship, including recruitment of in-house foster carers and other performance issues;

·         Planned reforms under the Education & Adoption Bill going through Parliament and their implications for Haringey, including regionalisation of adoption; and

·         How the voice of the child is taken into account.

Dominic Porter-Moore, the Head of Service, Children in Care and Placements, reported that the Munby judgement continued to impact on placement orders and adoption plans.  It was now very difficult to get a Placement Order.  Special Guardianship Orders were now being made increasingly on younger children than was originally envisaged. There were now more adopters than children requiring adoption.  Specific work was being undertaken by the Council to persuade adopters to consider older children and those who were harder to place.  Adoptions were also taking longer to go through Court as birth parents were increasingly being allowed to challenge orders.  One positive development was that the government had now provided additional funding for post adoption therapeutic support.

It was noted that the Coram Adoption charity had undertaken an adoption diagnostic on Haringey in August 2015, which had identified a mixed picture.  It highlighted some significant recent improvements in the number of children adopted but also identified areas for development. Avoidable delay was not found to be a prominent feature. However, work to respond to the findings had been overtaken by the regionalisation agenda.

Mr Porter-Moore reported that the Council’s contract with NRS to improve the fostering process had not been as successful as anticipated. It had been negotiated in 2013/14 and had been found to be poorly constructed, with no effective oversight or clear targets.   They had focussed attention primarily on the adoption of babies and young children.  Disappointing outcomes had been delivered, which were very similar to those that had previously been achieved by the in-house team.  Various options were being considered in response to this, including renewing the contract, re-tendering or setting up an in-house team.

He stated that the government was keen to promote the development of regional adoption agencies, who would undertake recruitment, matching and support functions.  It was as yet not fully clear what the impact on Haringey would be but there was a risk of redundancies.  However, fostering would no longer be inhibited by borough boundaries and it might also assist in increasing the range of therapeutic options available by freeing up resources.  It was nevertheless possible that the anticipated improvements might not materialise.  Information sharing protocols were already well established with other local authorities and adopters. 

In terms of how the voice of the child was heard, software had now been developed to allow children to pass on their views via a Smartphone or a laptop.  In addition, views were also received from Aspire, the Complaints and Representation Service and Guardians.

In answer to a question, Mr Porter-Moore stated that relationships between social workers and children had been improved by there being a larger base of permanent social workers.  In the past, there had more frequently been changes of social worker which could prevent a good relationship being developed.  Most foster carers were from black and ethnic minority communities and there had been success in finding ones from a wide range of communities.  Work to develop stronger relationships with Moslem communities was being  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

To consider the draft final report of the Panel’s project on Youth Transition and, in particular, its findings, conclusions and recommendations.

The Panel commented that the current issues in respect of Tottenham UTC had strengthened the need for the Council to take a lead in respect of the development of post 16 options.  The Director of Children’s Services commented that the Council was trying to provide leadership by looking at how it could broker relationships.  In particular, consideration was being given to developing collaboration  between the College of North East London, Haringey Sixth Form Centre and Highgate School.  In terms of the UTC, the model was flawed but was not one designed by the local authority.  If children were happy at their school, they were unlikely to want to change at the age of 14.  However, the UTC building could provide an opportunity to develop provision in Tottenham. 

He stated that it was important that the area was promoted in a positive way.  Mentors could play an important role in developing ambitions and expectations which, for some young people from Tottenham, could be low  The Post 16 offer had to be good and encourage ambition.  In terms of vocational options, these needed to fulfil the needs of employers.  There was also work to be done to ensure that more young people left school with GCSE English and Maths. 

AGREED:

1.    That a specific target be set for narrowing the gap in the percentage of young people entering the top or Russell Group universities between the borough’s two parliamentary constituencies;

2.    That a further report be submitted to the Children and Young People’s Scrutiny Panel on progress with the development of post 16 provision within the borough in autumn 2016;

3.    That the Panel expresses its support to the proposals:

a.    to commission a detailed survey on the perceptions of young people on the options open to them; and

b.    to arrange a Haringey wide careers event, subject to this being suitably publicised and located in an accessible venue in order to ensure a good level of attendance.

4.    That work be undertaken to develop a means of monitoring the attainment of young people that is based on residence in the borough rather than attendance at in-borough post 16 provision;

5.    That further work be undertaken to develop effective monitoring of progress in respect of the take up and success rate of apprenticeships and that performance in respect of these be given a higher priority as a key Corporate Plan performance indicator;

6.    That a suitably ambitious target for the increase in the number of apprenticeships for 16-18 year olds by 2018 be set, with consideration given to this being to reach the same number of take-ups that was achieved in 2010-11.

7.    That the Council take a lead role in developing a strategic borough wide plan for young people to develop and pursue their career aspirations that focuses on improving the range of options and addresses the areas where demand for labour is high and training provision is limited locally.

8.    That measures be taken to provide greater challenge to schools  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

To consider the future work plan of the Panel.

AGREED:

That the work plan for the Panel be noted.