Agenda item

The Panel received a report which provided an overview of safeguarding and social care activity and performance for 2023/24. The report was introduced by Richard Hutton, Senior Performance Officer and Dionne Thomas, AD Safeguarding and Children’s Social Care as set out in the agenda pack at pages 1-24. The Director of Children’s services was also present for this item. The following arose during the discussion:

a.    The Panel queried the seeming assertion in the report that higher levels of adoption should be seen as a positive trend, and queried why. In response, officers advised that there were more cases of children who were currently in placements coming through the system that would result in higher adoption figures. The numbers could fluctuate significantly, but ultimately the best outcome was for children to remain with their families where possible. Where adoption was considered the best outcome, this had to be done in a timely way. Officers advised that the service undertook benchmarking around adoptions and this was monitored closely.

b.    The Panel welcomed the report and highlighted that there were a number of positive outcomes contained within it.

c.    The Panel queried the types of residential accommodation and the costs involved. In response, officers advised that costs for residential units were always the highest and that there were a range of costs within residential settings. The lowest costs was in-house foster care or children being placed with their family. This was true across the country. Officers set out that the Council had to procure placements that met the needs of the child, and were bespoke. The Council sought to pay the lowest price for residential payments that it could. It was commented that if a child had particularly high needs, a bespoke package would be commissioned and it was expected that the provider would work with the child to reduce need over time. The DCS advised that the service worked with health colleagues to share costs where appropriate and that the service benchmarked costs across London and Haringey was not paying the highest. It was acknowledged that the costs of residential payments were inflated due to the providers inflating those costs and that there was significant research to back this up.

d.    The Panel questioned the reasons for a drop in UASC and whether this was just a result of less children presenting for asylum. In response, officers advised that they didn’t know why the numbers had dropped, but that the authority was ready to make referrals and offer placements in the way it should. There was a drop in the number of children being referred to Haringey from the National Transfer Scheme and there had been a drop in children presenting from particular countries. In response to a follow up, officers advised that there was a general drop across some areas of London and it was speculated that this might be partially accounted for an increase in people arriving by small boats, at the expensive of other routes.

e.    In response to a question about the underlying factors that were involved in the dip in completing assessments, officers advised that they knew the quality of assessments was good and that the service had been regularly audited to that effect. The DCS advised that they had a very strong Early Help service that helped with assessment work. The service worked with Early Help officers in frontline assessment teams at an early stage and it was suggested that this might mitigate the need for assessments further down the line.

f.     The Panel sought assurances around how parents of children with learning difficulties were being supported. In response, officers advised that there was a dedicated parenting support team within Children’s Services and that there were seven parenting programmes in place to support parents, including Cygnet which worked with parents of SEND children. Other programmes included, sleeping behaviour and managing routine.

g.    The Chair queried the prevalence of domestic violence as a factor in assessment, in response officers advised that domestic violence was one of the most prevalent categories and that this was true across different local authorities. Officers advised that they had a range of interventions, programmes and different methods of assessment, which enabled the service to think about the most appropriate mechanism to support a particular family, who may be affected by domestic violence.

h.    The Panel highlighted the percentage of care leavers in higher education (11%) and queried whether more could be done to increase this figure. In response, officers advised that they would always be looking to do more, but that 11% was good in relation to benchmarking with other boroughs. The London average was 8% and the national average was 6%. There was a strong aspiration that everybody should thrive and the service continually looked at how it could support care leavers. It was suggested that this did not always mean higher education and that there were also a range of apprenticeship and training options available. 

RESOLVED

That the service improvement and challenges contained within the report were noted, along with the actions taken during 2023/24 in response to local demand and the financial pressures experienced by the service in relation to placements