An opportunity to question Councillor Elin Weston, the Cabinet Member for Children and Families, and Councillor Eugene Ayisi, the Cabinet Member for Communities on developments within their portfolios.
Minutes:
Councillor Eugene Ayisi, the Cabinet Member for Communities, reported on current issues within his portfolio. In terms of youth services that were provided by the Council, he reported that current provision covered only a small number of young people within the borough. Schools and other organisations provided a certain amount in addition to this. A working group had been set up to consider youth provision, including a partnership with Onside to develop a Youth Zone for Haringey. The ambition was to cater for 1500 young people and provide opportunities for 7 days per week.
In answer to a question regarding the voice of the child, he stated that it was often too late by the time engagement took place with those who came into contact with the Youth Justice Service. Interventions needed to take place at an earlier stage, before young people got into trouble. Risk factors could include young people becoming disillusioned with school and exposure to domestic violence. Although youth services could assist, they were not a silver bullet.
Gill Gibson, Assistant Director for Early Help and Prevention, reported that there were plans to deliver a ‘Hackathon’ participation event on addressing obesity and it was intended to follow this with a further participation event on the theme of knife crime. The Youth Council, who had strong links with schools and community groups, were on the steering group arranging these and so would be involved.
In answer to a question, the Cabinet Member stated that there was an awareness of what provision for young people existed across the borough that was provided by the community and voluntary sector. The Bridge Renewal Trust had assisted with this process. Onside would be utilised to help develop additional capacity. He would be happy to share details of current provision.
In answer to a question regarding Black History Month, he stated that a Black and Minority Ethnic (BAME) staff network had been developed. He felt that staff were an excellent resource whose contribution could sometimes be overlooked. However, he felt that it was important that senior management within the Council were reflective of the borough’s diversity.
In response to a question regarding knife crime, he stated that it was important that young people had confidence in the Police to protect them. However, confidence in the Police in Haringey was low and had been low historically. Police were now being assigned to primary schools so that relationships could be built up with children from an earlier age. He felt that there needed to be a dual approach, with enforcement for those who committed offences and support for those who needed it. Whilst it was necessary sometimes to have a robust approach to enforcement, he felt that there needed to be balance.
Councillor Weston, the Cabinet Member for Children and Families, responded to questions from the Panel. In respect of the Harris Academy, she stated that it was difficult to know what was behind their very good OFSTED inspection results. Nationally, 57% of their academies were classified as outstanding. Of the three Harris Academies in Haringey, two were rated as outstanding and one rated as good. However, 99% of all schools in Haringey were rated as either good or outstanding.
There was no evidence of looked after children having difficulty in gaining admission to schools within the borough, including academies. Broadly speaking, there were no differences in the way that academies dealt with admissions. Looked after children were offered places within the time limit in virtually all cases. Looked after children also had access to the borough’s Virtual School, which was very highly rated. She agreed to find out how many looked after children attended academies within the borough and report back.
In respect of Education, Health and Social Care assessments, these were still comparatively new. There was a 20-week completion target, which was challenging. Haringey had used trained staff to coordinate plans and were seeking to commission additional days. There were currently vacant posts within the service but she was confident that that all of the assessments would be dealt with within the 20-week time limit once these were filled. 30% were currently completed within the time limit.
She was aware that changes to the SEN transport had caused difficulties for some families as there was no longer a door-to-door service. Some families had contacted her with concerns regarding this and work had taken place to find a solution. She was happy to consider the arrangements for other families if they contacted her. Gill Gibson, Assistant Director for Early Help and Prevention, reported that changes had been made to accommodate particular children if necessary. As agreed at the last Panel meeting, she would circulate a briefing on the changes shortly. The number of routes had been reduced from 151 to 108 in order to make savings. The service was nevertheless mindful of the needs of children.
The Chair reported that Panel Members had submitted a number of questions to the Cabinet Member regarding concerns that had been raised in respect of support offered to families with no recourse to public funds (NRPF) and it had been agreed that a fuller response would be made to these in due course.
Panel Members expressed concern at the evidence that they had received from community and voluntary sector organisations regarding the service provided by the no recourse to public funds (NRPF) team. The Cabinet Member stated that the concerns raised had been on board. Ms Alexander reported that some of the concerns had been shared by management and two audits had been commissioned in response to them in order to obtain a clearer picture of practice. The most recent one had shown practice to be compliant but had also made some recommendations for improvement.
The Cabinet Member reported that families who were NRPF came under a number of different categories. Such assistance that could be required focussed on the needs of children. Training was provided for relevant staff on a regular basis and this included specific sessions on issues such as human rights.
In respect of the amount of subsistence that was provided, Sarah Alexander, Assistant Director for Safeguarding and Social Care, reported that the amount payable was £65.75 per family but this did not include housing. There was no set amount and what was currently paid was lower than the £73.90 that advice suggested was appropriate. She was not aware as to why this level had been set. Whilst it would be possible to review the amount payable, any increase would have a significant impact on the budget and there was no provision for this.
The Cabinet Member reported that a member of staff had been commissioned from the Home Office to undertake immigration tests, support social work staff and analyse data. Consideration was currently being given to whether this support should be re-commissioned. In terms of safeguarding, Ms Alexander reported that victims from NRPF families received the same service as any other child.
In answer to a question regarding whether austerity had led to more children being taken into care, the Cabinet Member reported that it was not possible to be certain whether this was the case in Haringey. The number of looked after children had fallen since its peak but there had been an increase recently. It was possible that this was due to there being more unaccompanied asylum seekers.
In respect of the free childcare offer for 3 and 4 year olds, she reported that it had been estimated that there were 1710 children in Haringey that were entitled to the offer The projected number of places was 1419 and considered sufficient to meet demand. However, there had been problems with the HMRC system that was intended to support provision. Webpages to promote take up had been updated and parent champions were being recruited to encourage take up. There had been a negative impact on some childcare settings and a review of progress was planned. The borough was funded according to the level of take up.
The Panel thanked the Cabinet Members for their kind assistance.
AGREED:
That the Cabinet Member for Children and Families be requested to circulate details to the Panel on the number of looked after children attending academies in the borough.