To consider the Council’s Corporate Parenting Strategy.

The Committee gave consideration to the report as set out on pages 17-24 of the agenda.

 

The report was taken as read.

 

The Director for Children and Young People and Head of Service for Corporate Parenting provided a brief overview of the report and invited questions from the Committee:

 

Re priority area 1:

“We want our corporate parents, and other key leaders to understand and act on their responsibilities – Lead Member for Children and Young People”.

 

The Committee pointed out that the setting up of a new Corporate Parenting Board was encouraging, but suggested that most members (and probably the public) were not aware of the current strategy, board membership and meetings - some being cancelled recently - and that the strategy was still not clear or understood by member stakeholders.

 

An update on the progress being made to improve communications was requested. The Committee also asked what evidence there was to show that awareness of members, leaders and partners helping to deliver the strategy was increasing, and was there any data on whether the public had confidence in the new corporate parenting strategy?

 

 

The Director for Children and Young People explained that the revised strategy hadn’t been published yet, so there was no feedback, but it would go to the Corporate Parenting Board in January. Key leads in respect of the original strategy remained the same: corporate leadership team, cabinet and members. Members and stakeholders had been briefed with an early draft of strategy to ensure there was awareness of the revisions

 

Regarding communications a number of different channels were being used, including: children and young people in care or care experienced individuals, parents and carers, members and the Council’s workforce. The LGA had provided useful comments and was right in pointing out that the old strategy needed a significant refresh.

 

 

 

 

Re priority area 2:

“We want to reach our potential in education. We want our education and training to ‘recover’ after the disruption of Covid 19 – Virtual school head teacher”

 

The Committee noted that it was clear from paragraphs 22-27 of the report that substantial improvements in educational outcomes for children in care were needed to achieve the Council’s ‘objectives’ in meeting this priority. However, there were no specific aims identified as targets and the only evidence was of a deterioration in recent years, with no indication of any significant improvements. The Committee asked what specific actions were being taken to turn around educational outcomes for children in the Council’s care?

 

The Committee also enquired as to whether the virtual School Head had any suggestions regarding possible expansions of the service to cater for the 59% who were not in education, employment or training (NEET)?

 

The Director for Children and Young People noted that this kind of questioning was what the corporate parenting board would be looking at and that going forward there would need to be  consideration regarding the joint relationship between the corporate parenting board and scrutiny when analysing virtual schools activity. It was also clarified that NEET figures referred to 16+ children.

 

 

 

Re priority area 6

“We want our voice to matter – Lead Member for Children and Young People (supported by foster carer representative and Participation and Mentoring Officer)”

 

The Committee asked what new initiatives were being undertaken, what timescale they were expected to be delivered/operational in and how they would be measured? The Committee also asked how these initiatives would generate confidence in children and their parents that their voices really did matter? It was felt the actions being taken as described in paragraphs 33-35 were vague and unspecific and the lead member was asked for specifics about details, timescales and improving this area substantially at pace.

 

It was explained that currently there was a participation officer and two step workers, but there was no engagement and participation team. A participation and engagement strategy was being drawn up and would be focusing on what was needed to enable and determine how the voice of children would be heard. Work on the strategy was moving at pace and it was hoped a dedicated engagement team would be in place by the beginning of April 2023. There are already a couple of engagement groups in place to listen to what local youths would like to see in the area and one outcome of this is a new package being offered by Halo, which was very exciting in terms of providing physical activities.

 

Re Voice of the child

The Committee expressed its disappointment that the report stated that it was still not evident that the voice of children and young people was reflected in services. It was also a cause of upset to learn that one outstanding example of where young people could be heard ‘No wrong door’ had had its funding removed/it no longer exists. The lead member was asked why?

The directorate was asked about how it intended to listen to the voices of children and whether it was aware of the Lundy Model for instance, and the principles that underpin it (Space, Voice, Audience, Influence)?

The Committee suggested considering the work of Richard Rosein supporting children to work on their life stories.

 

The Director for Children and Young People explained that the funding for ‘No wrong door’ was not stopped by his directorate and that he did not know why it had been stopped. The Director told the Committee that the directorate had just appointed to the role of permanent champion. This champion would be looking at children who come into care and their journey through care. They would also be looking at life story work.

 

Recording Actions demonstrating progress on data(page 9 point 9)

The Committee pointed out that the LGA had recommended that minutes be kept of the corporate parenting board meetings and that they should include a key performance indicator dashboard to indicate progress towards targets. It was asked if a dashboard had been created and whether the board had clerking support? The Committee requested a copy of the minutes and dashboard from the August corporate parenting board meeting.

 

The Director for Children and Young People stated that the corporate parenting board did have clerking support and that it would be happy to share the minutes and the dashboard of the August meeting. The board was currently looking at how to publish the minutes on the Council website.

 

ACTION: Directorate to share the Corporate Parenting Board Minutes and the dashboard of the August meeting on the Council’s website.

 

 

Housing/stable family and home life (page 20, paragraph 17)

The Committee noted that number of children with 3 or more placement moves had fallen to 2% in the past 6 months, but was it was not clear from what and what had driven the fall.

The directorate was asked how it reassured itself that the children in the remaining 98% were not unhappy and wished to move? Also, what actions were available to stabilise the situation when a child in care was unhappy with their foster family?

The Committee enquired as to whether the housing worker post was solely for care experienced leavers? What would be the scope of this post and would it include support for young people to manage their finances and to cope with their rental responsibilities?

 

The Director for Children and Young People explained that a psychologist was being brought into the fostering support team to help carers understand and deal with problematic behaviour. The directorate was currently carrying out a piece of work with foster carers on learning and development opportunities and a support network for them, as there had been gaps in this area in recent years.

 

The Director told the Committee that if a child was unhappy, then services would listen to the child and mediate. If things still weren’t working, then alternatives would have to be considered and a psychologist would try and understand and resolve the issues of the family and the child.

 

The housing worker post was only for care experienced young people and they would work alongside housing providers. They would not work around finance, but would support the PAs. A ‘living on your own’ course, including financial advice and coping with being on your own was planned for the New Year.

 

The directorate saw incentivising housing associations as a potentially sensible approach and was working with the department of levelling up in relation to how they might cooperate creatively with providers in the county. The Council was already working with two providers where 16-25 housing was available.

 

The committee noted that if the amount spent on emergency and temporary accommodation was invested properly into quality accommodation, then this wouldn’t incur any extra cost. It was felt investors have capital and would invest it if there was a clear strategy from the council

 

The Director confirmed there was close relationship between strategic housing and children services.

 

 

 

Mental Health Support (page 21, paragraph 30)

The Committee noted that other authorities fund a range of interventions for young people with mental health difficulties (art/music/drama/movement therapy) and asked if Herefordshire Council provided any of these and why would the role of psychologist be a better provision? Would it be it one or the other?

 

The Director for Children and Young People responded that Herefordshire Council did provide discreet services for individuals, but only as part of individual care plans - where there was funding for a range of interventions and support as described.

 

The committee enquired about what was being done to tackle substance abuse and why there was no mention of Turning Point?

 

It was explained that the service does work very closely with Turning Point and many people were referred to Turning Point and this joined up with social workers and officers. Partnership working was seen as absolutely critical and information could be provided to demonstrate partners including Turning Point were all working together.

 

 

Physical Health (page 21, paragraph 31)

The Committee requested more detail in relation to the ‘new processes’ in place to improve timeliness of initial health assessments

 

The Director for Children and Young People stated this was the work of the corporate parenting board. Health would now attend every corporate parenting board and there were also monthly meetings with the looked after health team.

 

 

Key priority area 5

“We want to enjoy a range of play, sport, leisure and cultural opportunities - person responsible: Director of Resource”

 

The Committee observed that there had been a number of opportunities for young people over the holidays, but did not have an update as to the wider offer for children from the chair of the group. Who was the director of resource quoted as being responsible and how could they be contacted. Was the Council consulting with all its education facilities and parent bodies to try and understand the expertise and goodwill which we could be tapped into?

 

The Director for Children and Young People confirmed the Council was consulting with other bodies, but not enough. Talk community and world cafes were being used for reaching out.

 

 

Re Task and finish group (page 23)

It was pointed out by the Committee that the report states under ‘risk management’ that there was a Task and Finish group set up to review all children subject to higher cost provision etc.  Had this been set up and who was reporting back to scrutiny for instance?

It was explained that there was a weekly meeting with Rachel Gillott to discuss plans for children in high cost accommodation and the most appropriate places for those children. It was not a task and finish group, but a weekly meeting - a “high cost meeting”

 

 

Approved:

 

The Committee unanimously approved the report with the conclusions drawn.