Agenda item

In accordance with the guidance arising from The Adoption and Children’s act 2002 an annual report of the work undertaken by Independent Reviewing Officers (IROs) is to be presented to the Director of Children’s Services and will also be  provided to the Committee. Report to follow

 The  Committee were reminded of the statutory  role of the IRO(Independent Reviewing officer. Part of the role was quality assuring the care plan for the  young person/child that was looked after  and there was a prescriptive legal framework under which they operated . there was a need to have  effective challenge and scrutiny   about the care being received by the child or young person in care . legislation  reinforces the requirements for  a care plan to be reviewed within 10-20  days of completion. It was estimated that each Haringey IRO had  around 70  children/Young people in care to  oversee and  this was  number had greatly reduced form previous years meaning there was more opportunities for the IRO’s to participate in the strategic policy initiatives.

 There were a total of 7  full time IRO’s  who were  mostly permanent full time  staff with some agency staff members as well.  The agency IRO’s had a high expertise and were able to share good working practices that they had  gained from working in different boroughs.

There were a total of 1023 reviews completed , this included  visits and assessments made of looked after children that lived outside the borough.

They were currently performing at 95% of reviews completed within timescales.

The IRO report illustrated how children contribute to the reviews and an   explanation was given of how children , young and old,  are encouraged to participate  in the review  to ensure they genuinely express their feelings.  There  had been a positive response to the survey  and  the questionnaire published on viewpoint, the main issues had been the standard of accommodation for care leavers.

The Committee informed the IRO that they had invited Aspire to complete a survey with fellow young people in care and care leavers  from a stakeholder  perspective

The Committee were interested to find out what happens if a child/young person in care  is negative about their foster carers  and  were informed that the IRO will  speak with the social worker about managing the situation and will ensure that the  child/young person feels safe in their placement.  The issues raised will be followed up by the IRO and they will go through the actions arising from the previous meeting .This is in line with their role of being an advocate for the child. The Committee were assured that, depending on the  level of  the matter raised ,the IRO will not wait until the 6 month review to follow up on a actions with the Social Worker to check they have been completed.  In terms of the relationship with the Children in Care service, they welcomed the challenge of the  IRO  and there were  some occasions when an action could get missed  and the IRO was there as  acting as the advocate for the child/ young person to  pick these up. This together with  improved permanency planning, monthly meetings with health   meant there was   a lot of communication between the IRO and the children in care service. The Committee were  advised that where  IRO’s found there was not good follow up  of actions arising from meetings this would be taken forward with the  Social worker’s line manager.  IRO’s did take forward difficult conversations with social workers when the need arose. It was important to note that no issues had been raised by the IRO with CAFCASS .

Understanding was sought on the relationship between the IRO and the child/young person in care following on from the discussion at the  informal  meeting with Aspire.  The committee learnt that  the  IRO will make contact with the  child/ young person before the review meeting  and start to try to build up a rapport with them . The review of the plan was about empowering the child/young person in care to take the lead in the review meeting. Examples of how this had been achieved with younger children was provided and involved breaking down perceptions and ensuring the voice of the  young person/child in care was dominant in the proceedings.  The Committee noted that  the IRO are available for young people, in between reviews, to talk to and the IRO will  send out birthday cards as well to continue the rapport and relationship with the child/young person in care.

 In terms of the  family court proceedings, the guardians views  often carried more weight in proceedings  and  understanding was sought on the role of the IRO where there was a conflict between  the  local authority and the guardian about the care of a child/young person. It was noted  that  where there was concerns from the local authority about the ability of the guardian to carry out the  requirements of  the care plan . The IRO would  work with  both the guardian and local authority to help resolve issues.

In terms of preparing a young person to leave care,  there was in place pathway planning  from the age of 16 and it was crucial to make this plan as strong and coherent as possible to prepare the young person for independence  and the IRO would have a role in  ensuring there was a solid pathway.

The  IRO was asked by the Committee to put forward their perception of

their role in the council. The committee heard that  the IRO’s were able to make a difference to the working practices for staff involved in the care of looked after children and they felt that their views were valued  and respected.  They completed audits and found their  findings were taken seriously  by all levels of staff  in  Children’s services  as they were about improving practice  and in the ultimate interests of the child/ young person in care.  The IRO’s views would also be sought in the review  of the Fostering Service as crucial stakeholders.