Agenda item

The 2024/25 report outlined the performance of Haringey’s Children’s Social Care Services, benchmarking progress against a revised group of statistical neighbours with similar demographic profiles, as determined by the Department for Education. These included Barnet, Brent, Ealing, Enfield, Hounslow, Lambeth, Lewisham, Redbridge, Southwark, and Waltham Forest.

Children’s Social Care supported children and young people who were in need, at risk, in care, or care experienced. These individuals often presented complex or acute needs requiring statutory intervention under the Children Acts of 1989 and 2004, the Children and Families Act 2014, and associated guidance such as “Working Together to Safeguard Children” (2023).

Governance and oversight were maintained through several forums:

• Safeguarding Accountability Meetings, chaired quarterly by the Council Leader, scrutinised performance and safety concerns.
• Corporate Parenting Advisory Committee focused on children in care and care leavers.
• Haringey’s Safeguarding Children’s Partnership (HSCP), involving the Local Authority, Police, and ICB, met regularly to review safeguarding arrangements. The HSCP Executive Board convened six times annually and was chaired by the Director of Children’s Services.

HSCP sub-groups monitored areas such as performance, workforce development, training, and exploitation. The annual report set priorities around mental health, early intervention, older children needing protection, and contextual safeguarding.

National Reporting Context

Haringey submitted data to the Department for Education for the Child in Need Census and the 903 Children in Care Return. These covered referrals, assessments, protection activity, care placements, legal status, and outcomes for care leavers. Additional reports were submitted to the North Central London Regional Adoption Board and an annual workforce survey detailed recruitment, retention, and caseloads. Data to Insight (D2I) supported benchmarking through the Local Authority Interactive Tool (CHAT).

Future Challenges and Priorities

Key operational priorities included:

• Implementing the Families First Partnership programme to enhance early support.
• Preparing for the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill and reforms from the national policy “Keeping Children Safe, Helping Families Thrive” (Nov 2024).
• Responding to rising demand and complex challenges such as mental health, exploitation, domestic abuse, housing instability, and substance misuse.
• Managing financial pressures from care placements.
• Strengthening recruitment and retention of social workers, including internal development strategies.
• Advancing permanence planning and improving data systems for performance tracking.
• Establishing local Overnight Short Breaks provision for children with profound disabilities.
• Continuing professional development through Haringey Children’s Academy.
• Leading innovative Stop and Search initiatives in partnership with the MET police.

-       Members had sought insight into the reasons behind the strong performance of young people, including those in the Council’s care. It was noted that several factors contributed to this success. Since taking on the role as Head of the Virtual School, Gala had significantly raised the profile of children with a social worker, which included looked-after children. There had been a clear strategic focus on inclusion and on meeting the individual needs of children. Many of these children were identified as having special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), and the quality of the SEND provision had continued to strengthen over time. These combined efforts were believed to have played a key role in the improved outcomes.

-       It was stated there had been a decline of the children coming into this service and wanted reason for the reduction in the numbers.There had been a noticeable decline in the number of children entering the service. Initially, the service managed around 400 children, with fluctuations of about 20. The first significant reduction occurred when unaccompanied asylum-seeking children stopped arriving via the Channel Tunnel, instead using alternative routes. This shift led to a drop of approximately 30–35 children within a year, and the numbers remained at that lower level.

-       While this decline initially eased budget pressures and allowed for better caseload management and increased system capacity, efforts to restore previous numbers of asylum-seeking children were unsuccessful. Another contributing factor to the reduction was the growing stability within the service. Consistent leadership and staffing helped improve the quality of practice, enabling the team to build stronger relationships with families and make more confident decisions about managing risk. This stability allowed the service to support more children outside of statutory systems. Staff were able to review all cases within the original cohort of 400, ensuring that children received appropriate support without remaining unnecessarily within the formal care system.

-       Members had asked for clarification regarding a safeguarding chart under section 8, specifically about contact sources. They noted that police referrals to the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH) had decreased slightly, while health referrals had increased. They queried whether this represented a typical fluctuation or indicated a more unusual trend. It was explained that The team had reviewed the matter locally and found no specific systemic changes that explained the fluctuation. Regular discussions took place with colleagues from both police and health services across various forums. Although the shift in referral sources had been noted collectively, it was not attributed to any development. Police and health professionals had consistently been the primary sources of contact throughout the year, and it was common for them to alternate in terms of which service generated the most referrals.

RESOLVED:

Recommendations:

3.1. That Members noted the performance data as set out in appendix i.

3.2. Committee was asked to note the report and, in particular: The service improvement and challenges contained within the report as well as the actions taken during 2023/24 in response to local demand and the financial pressures experienced by the service in relation to placements and the areas identified as priorities for 2024/25 following analysis and review of the year’s performance

Reasons for decision

4.1. This report is for information only

Alternative options considered

N/A