The City Solicitor will report the names of alternate Members who are attending the meeting in place of appointed Members. 

 (Asad Shah – 01274 432280)

(Members Code of Conduct - Part 4A of the Constitution)

To receive disclosures of interests from members and co-opted members on matters to be considered at the meeting. The disclosure must include the nature of the interest.

An interest must also be disclosed in the meeting when it becomes apparent to the member during the meeting.

Notes:

(1)       Members may remain in the meeting and take part fully in discussion and voting unless the interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an interest which the Member feels would call into question their compliance with the wider principles set out in the Code of Conduct.  Disclosable pecuniary interests relate to the Member concerned or their spouse/partner.

(2)       Members in arrears of Council Tax by more than two months must not vote in decisions on, or which might affect, budget calculations, and must disclose at the meeting that this restriction applies to them.  A failure to comply with these requirements is a criminal offence under section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. 

(3)       Members are also welcome to disclose interests which are not disclosable pecuniary interests but which they consider should be made in the interest of clarity.

(4)       Officers must disclose interests in accordance with Council Standing Order 44.

                                                                        (Asad Shah – 01274 432280)

No disclosures of interest in matters under consideration were received.

Recommended –

That the minutes of the meeting held on 4 November 2019 be signed as a correct record (previously circulated).

(Asad Shah – 01274 432280)

Recommended –

That the minutes of the meeting held on 4 November 2019 be signed as a correct record (previously circulated).

(Access to Information Procedure Rules – Part 3B of the Constitution)

Reports and background papers for agenda items may be inspected by contacting the person shown after each agenda item.  Certain reports and background papers may be restricted. 

Any request to remove the restriction on a report or background paper should be made to the relevant Strategic Director or Assistant Director whose name is shown on the front page of the report. 

If that request is refused, there is a right of appeal to this meeting. 

Please contact the officer shown below in advance of the meeting if you wish to appeal. 

(Asad Shah - 01274 432280)

There were no appeals submitted by the public to review decisions to restrict

documents.

The report of the Strategic Director Children’s Services (Document “R”) provides current information and future plans in respect of permanence planning for our children in care.  Permanence will be the primary focus of our next Ofsted Monitoring Visit on 25^th and 26^th February 2020. It was a key area for improvement identified in our Ofsted Inspection in 2018 due to the delays caused for achieving good outcomes for children.

The report will provide data on our current children in care cohort and information in respect of new processes that are being implemented to ensure that permanence is achieved without unnecessary delays.

Recommended -

That members acknowledge the information contained within Document “R” and the importance of achieving permanence for our children without any unnecessary delay.

(Richard Fawcett – 01274 436041)

The report of the Strategic Director Children’s Services (Document “R”) provided current information and future plans in respect of permanence planning for children in care.  Permanence was the primary focus of Ofsted’s Monitoring Visit on 25 and 26 February 2020. It was a key area for improvement identified in the Ofsted Inspection in 2018 due to the delays caused for achieving good outcomes for children.

The Head of Service, Social Work South was present and introduced the report to the Panel. He stated that the report provided data on the current children in care cohort and information in respect of new processes that were being implemented to ensure that permanence was achieved without unnecessary delays.

Following introduction, the following question and answer session ensued:

·         Why had delays been caused for achieving good outcomes for children?

o   There were a long history of delays and inconsistencies due to a high turnover of staff;

·         Was their in guidelines in which Social Workers and administration staff could follow in order to avoid delays?

o   Guidance on implementation strategies had remained the same and that it was the responsibility of line managers to ensure that staff were adhering to guidelines;

·         By the end of January 2020 there were 256 children subject to Care Orders. Was this considered as a high number in comparison to other local Councils?

o   The 256 that had been identified was an average sized number in relation to this authority and in comparison to other cities, whilst taking into account the demographics of the city;

·         Did the authority try to ensure that children in care were kept together with their siblings?

o   Yes;

·         When did this authority commence with using the new tracking tool to track permanence at child-level in each locality, with each Head of Service taking responsibility and being accountable for their own area?

o   This began a short while ago but data could be provided at a later date; and,

·         Did the authority have sufficient GP’s to assist the authority with children in care?

o   The assistance of GP’s was never enough due to the fact that complex needs of children were continuously becoming difficult and therefore this factor being a constant challenge.

Resolved –

(1)       That the information contained in Document “R” and the             importance of achieving permanence for children in care without         any unnecessary delay be acknowledged.

(2)       That an update report be provided to the Corporate Parenting    Panel in 6 months that details the progress on the implementation   of permanence planning for the Bradford District’s children in    care and that the report includes a breakdown of demographical           information of the children.

ACTION: Strategic Director, Children’s Services

The report of the Joint Mental Health Commissioner NHS (Document “S”) provides an update on progress to improve mental health support for children and young people. 

Recommended -

That the Panel note the action plan, highlight areas for consideration and attention and  support the System Review currently underway.

                                                            (Sasha Bhat – 01274 737537)

The report of the Joint Mental Health Commissioner NHS (Document “S”) provided an update on progress to improve mental health support for children and young people.

The Head of Commissioning for Mental Wellbeing, Council and NHS was present and introduced the report to the Panel. She outlined that in October 2019 the Mental Health Partnership Board (MWPB) agreed that a sub group to focus on children and young people’s mental health would be formed to enable the system to focus on issues within children and young people’s mental health, a proposal which was supported by the Health and Wellbeing Board.  The Health and Wellbeing Board also commissioned the Centre for Mental Health to conduct a full System Review of Children and Young People’s Mental Health. The sub-group were tasked to maintain oversight of the review and ensure timescales were met to report back to the Health and Wellbeing Board in May.

It was also stated that the Assistant Director in Children’s Service at the Council, the Interim General Manager at Bradford District Care Foundation Trust and herself agreed to lead work with partners to scope the role of the new group and to work though urgent issues that have arisen within the delivery of mental health services for children and young people. The aim of the sub-group was to also to build on the good work done with Future in Mind and broaden out to be the governance for all things related to children’s mental health, reporting into the Mental Wellbeing Partnership Board.

A question and answer session ensued:

·         How were referral procedures initiated?

o   This action was initiated by school nurses or a GP;

·         Were there any other ways of dealing with referrals at the point of commencement?

o   The authority was at present setting up a central point of access, co-ordinated by resources or a single person;

·         The report highlighted that at the beginning of the week, the average wait time from referral to assessment was 259 days. The target set for the team had been to reduce this to 21 days. At the end of the week, the team were able to bring this down to 38 days and some further work is underway to continue to reduce this. What was the reason behind such a significant drop?

o   At the point of receiving a referral, at present there was no real standard operating procedure (SOP) to oversee the wait time. However any further new referrals would be actioned under a SOP;

·         Were all new referrals accepted?

o   According to a strict need basis;

·         What was the purpose behind the pathway diagram proposed by the system? And,

o   This was a one page pathway diagram that was accessible to service users as well as professionals.  Sitting behind this would be a description of services and included the proposal for a newly configured service around assessment and triage;

·         Were children prioritised according to their vulnerable needs?

o   The authority followed the NHS guidance;

The Chair concluded the discussion  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

The report of the Strategic Director Children’s Services (Document “T”) contains current information on children in care who receive a service via the 16+ Service.

This report highlights the current structure providing services for children cared for by the Local Authority who are reaching or aged 16 years above and entitled to a leaving care service, under the Children Act 1989 and as amended by the Children (Leaving Care) Act 2000.

Under Section 23 of the Leaving Care Act local authorities have duties to allocate a personal advisor for young people aged from 15 and ¾, who must be provided with a pathway plan.

Recommended -

That Members acknowledge the information contained in Document “T”.

                                                                         (Kirsty Askew – 01274 435685)

The report of the Strategic Director, Children’s Services (Document “T”) contained current information on children in care who receive a service via the 16+ Service.

This report highlighted the current were reaching or aged 16 years above and entitled to a leaving care service, under the Children Act 1989 and as amended by the Children (Leaving Care) Act 2000.

Under Section 23 of the Leaving Care Act local authorities had a duty to allocate a personal advisor for young people aged from 15¾ years old, who must be provided with a pathway plan.

The Interim Head of Service 16+ was present and gave a synopsis of the report.

Following introduction, a question and answer session ensued:

·         How were the needs of older children met who remained with the Children in Care Service (CIC)?

o   This would entail daily visits and occasionally a Social Worker would not stop visiting an older child until such time that the Social Worker was confident about the older child;

·         How did the traffic light system work?

o   The system was based on a child’s needs with green being an immediate transfer, following an introductory period. Amber allowing for a more complex transfer process with specific tasks requiring completion.  Children categorised as red that were not yet transferred due to care proceedings or the complex nature of the child’s needs and the specific social work role required;

·         In relation to Section 23 of the Leaving Care Act local authorities had a duty to allocate a personal advisor for young people aged from 15 and ¾, who had to be provided with a pathway plan. What if no pathway plan was available? and,

o   It was also about ensuring that a young person was ready on a specific date to move on and when young people confirmed that they were ready.

Resolved –

(1)       That the information contained in “Document T” be noted.

(2)       That an update report be provided to the Corporate Parenting    Panel in 12 months that details information on the number of   children in care who receive a service via the 16+ Service. That   the report further provides a breakdown of information of children        according to the traffic light system of green, amber and red   status complexities.

ACTION: Strategic Director, Children’s Services

The Panel’s Work Plan for 2019/20 is submitted for Member’s
consideration (Document “U”).

Resolved –

That the Panel’s Work Plan for 2019/20, Document “U”, be approved.

LEAD: ?Assistant Director, Performance, Commissioning and Partnerships