Home > Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: This meeting will be held remotely. View directions

Contact: Michelle Ossei-Gerning
020 8726 6000 x84246  Email: michelle.gerning@croydon.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

51/20

Disclosures of interest

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct and the statutory provisions of the Localism Act, Members and co-opted Members of the Council are reminded that it is a requirement to register disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) and gifts and hospitality to the value of which exceeds £50 or multiple gifts and/or instances of hospitality with a cumulative value of £50 or more when received from a single donor within a rolling twelve month period. In addition, Members and co-opted Members are reminded that unless their disclosable pecuniary interest is registered on the register of interests or is the subject of a pending notification to the Monitoring Officer, they are required to disclose those disclosable pecuniary interests at the meeting. This should be done by completing the Disclosure of Interest form and handing it to the Democratic Services representative at the start of the meeting. The Chair will then invite Members to make their disclosure orally at the commencement of Agenda item 3. Completed disclosure forms will be provided to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion on the Register of Members’ Interests.

 

 

Minutes:

There were none.

 

52/20

Urgent Business (if any)

To receive notice of any business not on the agenda which in the opinion of the Chair, by reason of special circumstances, be considered as a matter of urgency.

 

Minutes:

There was none.

53/20

Update on actions agreed at previous meeting(s)

Minutes:

There were no actions from the last meeting.

 

54/20

Children in Care Performance Scorecard pdf icon PDF 479 KB

The Children in Care Performance Scorecard for October 2020 is attached.

Minutes:

Officers spoke to the performance scorecard and in summary highlighted that in care proceedings less children were entering care in comparison to the previous year. Though the number of looked after children was still high with 78/10000 child population comparison to the national average which is 65/10000 child population, the service had been working with children returning safely home with support.

 

The red indicators on the scorecard highlighted the care planning and participation which was deemed lower and one that required improvement. Since November 2020, there had been changes in staffing and in performance.

 

Panel Members discussed the scorecard.

 

Councillor Shafi Khan arrived at the meeting at 5:27pm

 

In response to a question raised by the Panel Co-optee foster carers’ representative, regarding the process and expectation of looked after children returning home, officers informed that there was a statutory responsibility to review if any child in care could safely return home. During statutory children looked after reviews for each looked after child, the services involved were present and the child circumstances considered. What was essential was to consider if the parents had made sufficient changes since the child was initially removed to consider safe rehabilitation. The foster carer representative had a follow up question seeking clarification on the involvement of foster carer’s advocacy for the looked after children they looked after, as foster carers had not been involved with or understood the process and was often informed of change of circumstance when a child was returning home. Officers responded that social workers had a statutory responsibility to review the care plan and foster carers were part of a child review so they should be aware of plans and their views heard.

 

The officers talked about circumstances in which parents may request an immediate return home; if accommodation was provided under a section 20 (voluntary sending children into care) and a parent requested for their child to return home, the service cannot prevent the request unless there was an immediate risk.

A section 20 under the Children Act 1989 was a voluntary agreement by the parent. This meant the Local Authority would need to undertake an assessment and provide support after a child returned home if a parent would not agree to a planned return.

 

The foster care representative further enquired about whether section 20 was a danger to children in care aged 15 years as court proceedings did not often go ahead. Officers responded that Croydon Children’s Service had been trying to make positive use of section 20 and ensure works in partnership with families, rather than having orders. It was rare when section 20 did not work as intended. 

 

The Panel Co-optee care leaver representative commented on section 20 and 15 year olds, indicating that consideration needed to be given to young people on section 20 who were returning home, against their wishes but at their parents’ request, may suffer. She further informed that it was very important for services to not get complacent on an agreement  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54/20

55/20

Children's Social Care Placement Sufficiency pdf icon PDF 416 KB

This report sets out work undertaken to improve the quality and sufficiency of placements for Children Looked after and Care Leavers since February 2020 and outlines future next steps.

[To Follow]

Minutes:

Officers spoke to the report and in summary, highlighted that the borough had a sufficiency plan around looked after children after accommodation and the plan is from 2019 to 2021.

 

The service was in process to develop an accommodation strategy that provided sustainable high quality and value for money accommodation provision. It was noted that there was still a number of key decisions to be made in light of the market situation, current commissioning arrangements and practice improvement in addition to the current section 114. Some accommodation placements challenges faced included emergency placements where accommodation was provided on the basis of best available rather than better matching process to meet the needs of the young people; some residential placements have been placed further than twenty miles away, our of the borough and even further away from their birth family.

 

Officers effectively were promoting Staying Put as the best option for young people, and also to find financial sustainable accommodation options for the council and commission used but would also be appropriate for care leavers and young people when they reached that appropriate age and working along neighbouring services – leaving care, adults services and housing.

 

Officers shared ongoing work with leaving care, housing and finance to ensure demand for future commissioning and this was in line with the wider supported housing strategy. This work was being led by the Adult Social Care. Tenancy and financial management training both internal offering within the Council, and potential external charities were other options. Work was also being held with the housing team around issues for care leavers in the private rented sector. There was also work with the transition service to support the care leavers who had extra needs or fits into the vulnerable adult’s category.

 

The Panel Co-optee care leaver representative was congratulated by all Members of the Panel and officers for her work in “All About Me” project.

 

Panel Members commented on the report.

 

One Panel Member raised a point that the report noted radical change of models alongside the South London Commissioning Programme, and was concerned that there was no acknowledgement of the radical change of delivery to the wider administration Member group, which had financial implications and how it would provide greater opportunity for children. There was a request to learn more and what the risks entailed. The Chair made note that the placement sufficiency report was to be heard at this Panel to address sufficiency around Children’s Social Care, for example Staying Put, and thus there were no new models. Officers clarified in response to Member’s concern that the radical changes focused on the action in improving quality and sufficiency.

 

The foster carer representative commented in relation to Staying Put that it would seem that foster carers were often consulted, though this was not the case and that there was a gap between Staying Put and the Shared Lives provision. Officers acknowledged the continued issue that required further attention between Staying Put and Shared Lives. The criteria  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55/20

56/20

Update on the South London Commissioning Programme pdf icon PDF 266 KB

The report provides an update on the work of the programme in tackling issues for children in care on behalf of seven South London boroughs with particular reference to the London Borough of Croydon.

[To Follow]

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Officers spoke to the report sharing with the Panel that the South London Commissioning Programme was established in 2013. The role of the programme was to help coordinate special educational need and disability (SEND). In 2017, Croydon became the lead borough to allow a multi-borough framework for independent residency. The Approved Provider Panel Agreement (APPA) framework showed an opportunity to work collaborate. With seven boroughs involved, there had also been cost challenges. Further, officers shared that they were currently in the middle of an evaluation.

 

The All About Me Project showed key benefits and trends as the hosted borough. This project was created with 250 young people, a profile for young people to have a voice in the referral process. From interests and hobbies and so forth, the young people were aged between 6 and 18 years old. Other local authorities like Sutton and Bexley had also used the All About Me for social work practice. The project had received Ofsted recognition approval from the department of education. There was other engagement in other areas such as fostering, retention, recruitment, video storytelling, equality and diversity and inclusion.

 

Panel Members requested for further insight on the budgeting of the organisation on the commission for the South London Commissioning Programme and services meeting particular groups; also further details to cultural and individual heritage. Officers responded highlighting that the All About Me project provided individual heritage and culture. With regards to rates, it was noted that more was asked for less. Officers hoped that the tender providers would pay the tendon living wage, if based in London, as a minimum.

 

The Chair praised and thanked the team for carrying out such an extraordinary programme and project that had successfully been recognised and valued in other boroughs.

 

The Panel RESOLVED to:

1.1       To note the progress of the South London Commissioning Programme and the strategic priorities of the programme for 2021-24.

57/20

Independent Reviewing Officer Annual Report pdf icon PDF 485 KB

The Independent Reviewing Officer Annual Report is attached.

[To Follow]

Minutes:

Officers spoke to Independence Review Officer (IRO) Annual report and in summary, highlighted that the service had received feedback from a Ofsted Monitoring visit in October 2019 and a peer review by the improvement partners in Camden whom identified a need to improve the ‘Footprint’ of the IRO service in challenging and monitoring care planning. To update, the footprint had increased dramatically where the midway reviews had almost doubled from 300 to 700 and case notes that reflected direct contact with children and parents or colleagues outside CLA reviews were normally 600 a month and embedded in a number of different practice forums which offers the opportunities to express children’s views and professional views.

 

Children and parents had been more involved with the service as young children were increasingly being contacted by IROs before and after meetings. Following the pandemic and national lockdown restrictions, the service had to result to using different platforms to communicate with their young person which the service did remarkable quickly and the children continued to have their reviews uninterrupted in the same frequency as before the pandemic.

 

Participation was recognised as an area that needed to improve.

 

Panel Members commented on the report.

 

The Panel Co-optee foster carer representative made a comment addressing that during the pandemic and national lockdown, the older looked after children were happier to use the Microsoft Teams for virtual meetings and communication with their key workers from home. Foster carers also found that reviews were better run online than in person. Officers recognised the use of virtual meetings and was proud that the logistics moving to fifty meetings a week to facilitate all organisation was proceeding well in comparison to other local authorities.

 

Panel Members commented on the care plans and the drift and delay, and noted that the IRO had a duty to prevent and challenge conforming drift and delay. Officers responded with regards to the quality of plans that the IRO would prepare reviews to discuss plans, this was known as the mid-year review, and this was highlighted face-to-face. IRO would access decisions, change in placement, stepping down, coming in care, and they attended panel meetings where these measures were discussed and challenged.

 

Panel Members credited the good report presented to the Panel, which was child centred and commended on the good service. The thorough report was further accredited by the Chair.

 

The Panel RESOLVED to note the report.

58/20

How has the Panel helped Children in Care today?

For the panel to consider how its work at the meeting will improve services for children in care.

Minutes:

Comments from the Panel included:

 

§  Work taken with the commissioning around placement and work developed across the borough regarding developing sufficiency at home and wider discussion of children homes, which has been really good.

§  Improvement in accommodation.

§  Work led by the Care Leavers Representative – the All About Me project, as it got to a place where there was national recognition for good work. Her contribution and work has also given young people a voice.

§  Positive progress in the IRO, their real improvement and quality of service.

§  The encouragement that care leavers aspire to excel

§  Foster carers do not have enough information around section 20 (of the Children’s Act 1989) and will need to have greater recognition to the contribution they make to the lives of young people in Croydon.

§  The commitment in work and aspiration officers had put in providing good results.

§  The Panel challenging officers with questions.

§  Welcoming and acknowledging voices from young people, foster carers.

59/20

Work Programme pdf icon PDF 202 KB

To consider and approve the Panel’s work programme for the municipal year 2020/21.

Minutes:

The work programme was agreed as per report.

 

60/20

Exclusion of the Press and Public

The following motion is to be moved and seconded where it is proposed to exclude the press and public from the remainder of a meeting:

 

“That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information falling within those paragraphs indicated in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended.”

 

Minutes:

This was not required.