The Deputy Director (Children’s Social Care) will present a report   (Document “L”) in relation to the award of £3.2 million further to Bradford’s successful bid to the Department for Education Re-thinking Social Care Innovation Fund and links with the existing ‘Journey to Excellence’ Programme, a key aim of which is to reduce the number of Looked After Children in the Bradford district.

The funding covers a two year period and is expected to facilitate the Authority in reinventing its care provision for adolescent Looked After Children. The programme is planned to begin on 1 April 2017.

Members are asked to consider whether they require an update to be submitted to the Panel once the programme has been fully established.

Recommended –

That the award of £3.2 million from the Department for Education’s Re-thinking Social Care Innovation Fund be noted.

(Jim Hopkinson – 01274 432904)

The Deputy Director (Children’s Social Care) presented a report     (Document “L”) in relation to the award of £3.2 million for the district, further to a successful bid to the Department for Education’s ‘Re-thinking Social Care Innovation Fund’.  The report explained that the resultant programme of work would link with the existing ‘Journey to Excellence’ Programme, a key aim of which was to reduce the number of Looked After Children (LAC) in the Bradford district.

The funding would cover a two year period and was expected to facilitate the Authority in reinventing its care provision for adolescent LAC. The programme was planned to begin on 1 April 2017.

In presenting the report the following points were highlighted:

·         The focus of the programme was to establish how innovative ways of working might provide a better experience for children in care, reduce the length of time spent in care and prevent children entering care, with a particular focus on adolescents.

·         A name was needed for the programme and any suggestions were welcomed. The decision on the name would be made in consultation with the Children in Care Council the following week.

·         The outcomes for young people who entered care later in life were not as positive as for those who had done so when they were very young.

·         The work would include an evidence based programme to support foster carers to work with adolescents.  This was based on an established model called the Mockingbird Project which provided specialist training and the provision of peer support for participants.  This would be undertaken on a voluntary basis and additional payments would be available.  A more therapeutic regime would also be introduced within the residential homes for those adolescents with complex needs or who may have experienced trauma or distress.  Three homes had been nominated and consideration was being given to use of the PACE (Playfulness Acceptance Curiosity Empathy) model, which was already in use in some homes, and DDP (Dyadic Developmental Practice)

·         A large proportion of the funding was to be focussed on the development of a programme to address the issues associated with adolescents who were deemed to be on the ‘edge of care’ as entering care at this age could cause difficulties for the young person, have a number of negative impacts and was intensive in terms of resources. The aim was to assist in those cases where a family may have more complex needs or be less resilient to the conflict that most adolescents had with their parents.  This work sought to replicate the success of a project that had operated in North Yorkshire – ‘No Wrong Door’ which had involved input from clinical psychologists, speech and language therapists and the Police. Using this approach, if a young person did enter a residential home this was termed as being for respite or assessment and full parental involvement would be retained.

·         An Evaluation Partner would be appointed by the Department for Education in order to undertake a cost benefit analysis of what was achieved with the funding.  In North Yorkshire a similar process had established that this project had been very effective.

·         A Programme Board had been set up and secondments were being discussed with the Care Trust and the Police.  Adverts would be published shortly to appoint the necessary new staff.

In response to Members/Co-opted Members questions he said that:

·         North Yorkshire had received funding from the Innovation Fund in 2014.  Nationally the LAC population had increased by 5% whereas in North Yorkshire it had decreased by 16%; there had also been a significant reduction in terms of the length of time spent in care.

·         If a young person was successfully prevented from entering care they would be allocated a key worker who would maintain contact with the family for a period of two years.

·         Staff would have to have a range of skills to try and engage with families who might be at a difficult point and may not wish to do so. The North Yorkshire project had adopted a fairly assertive tone. Respite and assistance would be offered but the authority would not take over responsibility for the care of the young person.  It was accepted that this approach would not work in every case.

·         The official start date was 1 April but it would take some time for the programme to be fully operational.

Resolved –

(1)       That the award of £3.2 million from the Department for Education’s Re-thinking Social Care Innovation Fund be welcomed.

(2)       That the Deputy Director (Children’s Social Care) submit a progress report to the Panel in six months time.

ACTION:       Deputy Director (Children’s Social Care)