Agenda item

Performance Update

Minutes:

The Panel received a report which provided an analysis of the performance data and trends for an agreed set of measures relating to looked after children. It was noted that the report covered the 4th quarter of the year 2023/24 with updates for April & May 2024 where appropriate. The report was introduced by Beverley Hendricks, AD for Safeguarding and Social Care as set out in the agenda pack at pages 83-90. The following arose during the discussion of this report:

  1. In relation to the table at paragraph 4.5 of the report (comparing the primary need of CLA starters), the Panel requested that future reports provide some comparative data showing trend/movement of travel, so that Members can see how it compares to previous years. (Action: Beverley/Richard).
  2. In relation to a question about care plans, officers advised that 77% of children had an up to date care plan against a target of 85%. Officers advised that there were a number of reasons why performance on this indicator was below target. One of the reasons was around a lack of availability to have the care plan updated in the required timeframe. Officers also advised that the implementation of the new Liquid Logic system had a negative impact on the timeliness of being able to upload care plans. It was noted that these problems had been resolved and improvements were expected in the next report. 
  3. In response to a question about sickness and vacancy rates, officers advised that they had taken a decision to have very low vacancy rates in the team and that meant that if there were staffing shortages, then agency staff would be used fill gaps.
  4. In relation to pathway plans, officers advised that performance was affected by the same issues detailed above for care plans. If performance was low, this would have a knock on effect on agency staffing figures.
  5. The Director advised that she would include some more narrative in the next report to explain some of the factors involved with the performance around care plans. (Action: Ann Graham).
  6. The Director commented that in essence, she took the view that it was more important to prioritise the quality of care plans over having all of them done on time to a lower standard.
  7. In response to a questions about under-performance against the target for Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children (UASC) and the extent to which this related to delays in processing by the Home Office, officers advised that this related to children at 18 becoming care leavers. Previously, it was possible to apply pressure to the Home Office for timely processing of these applications along with cases involving people with No Recourse to Public Funds. However, since Covid the Home Office had been less willing to engage. The AD Safeguarding and Social Care advised that she was looking to meet with officials from the Home Office to discuss the matter.
  8. Officers also advised the Panel that delays to the UASC indicator also related to the National Transfer scheme. Haringey like some other authorities was meeting its quota and was willing to take additional cases from other authorities that were struggling, however this still did not result in Haringey meeting its central government set target. Officers commented that there was clearly a problem with the system if Haringey took all the cases it was asked to, and was even taking additional cases, but still couldn’t meet the target. The Director reiterated that the service was very keen for all the young people that should come here, do so. The issue was historical and complicated. Previously the targets were 0.07% of the number of children in care. London as a region was doing better than most, the government sought to transport children across the country. This resulted in the target becoming 0.01%. The DCS advised that as and when the picture settled down, Haringey may meet the 0.01% in time.

 

RESOLVED

 

Noted

 

Supporting documents: