The report of the Strategic Director of Children’s Services (Document “N”)presents the most recent information on the workload of Children’s Social Work Teams and updates Members on key pressures on the service. The workload analysis is based on activity up to 30^th September 2017.

There has been a slight rise to the overall workloads of social workers, and pressures upon the service since the last report was presented. The report demonstrates that Social Work Services for Children & Young People in the District remain strong, robust and well managed.

Recommended -

That the Committee consider further reports in the 2017-18 work programme to ensure the continuation of safe workloads and practice into the future given the current financial climate.

(Di Drury – 01274 437077)

The report of the Strategic Director of Children’s Services (Document “N”)presented the most recent information on the workload of Children’s Social Work Teams and updated Members on key pressures on the service. The workload analysis was based on activity up to 30^th September 2017.

There had been a slight rise to the overall workloads of social workers, and pressures upon the service since the last report was presented. The report demonstrated that Social Work Services for Children & Young People in the District remained strong, robust and well managed.

Members were advised that the average workload per social worker was slightly above the national and regional figure.  A caseload weighting system had been introduced which was explained to members and which had been implemented across the social work teams.

Members referred to the increase in caseloads since September 2016.

Officers acknowledged that there had been an increase which in part had been as a result of the way in which caseloads were recorded.  Social workers who did not carry a caseload such as those on maternity leave or sick were not included in the figures.  Officers were confident that there were no unallocated cases and that the service was not at a critical point where work could not be allocated.  Staff were working to ensure that vacancies were covered.  The number of agency staff was low at 9 but they were needed to cover vacancies.

A co-opted member expressed concern at the rise in caseloads and that managing this relied on the good will of social workers which could have a cumulative effect on their health and wellbeing.

It was noted that the weighting system more effectively identified different workloads between teams.  Officers were confident that the cases could be dealt with but that every additional case put additional pressure on workloads.  There was however concern regarding the balance between experienced and less experienced social workers and the issue of retaining experienced social workers.  It was stressed that workforce stability was the key to delivering services in Bradford.

A question was asked about what was being done to alleviate staff turnover and it was reported that exit interviews and surveys had revealed a number of reasons for leaving such as car parking, caseloads, relative rates of pay compared to neighbouring authorities and “hot desking”, however strong support from managers and strong supervision were also identified.

A social worker attended the meeting and spoke about his experience of working for Bradford and two other local authorities.  He noted that although the workloads in Bradford were high, the teams and workloads were well managed.  He noted that caseloads were increasing but that management structures were in place to deal with this.

A member asked at what point “breaking point” would have been reached.  In response it was stressed that managers had to constantly monitor work coming through and that the key indicator would be if the work was not able to be allocated at the “front door”.  It was noted that requests to employ agency social workers had not been turned down as the authority’s priority was to keep Bradford children safe.  It was stressed that the service was not at crisis point now or in the near future but that caseloads had to be kept under review and managed.

A member question was asked about the effect that the Early Help proposals will have on workloads it was noted that if implemented correctly it would reduce the number of cases coming through to social workers.  However a reduction in Early Help could put at risk, the ability of the authority to close cases.  It was noted that the Families First funding was outside the scope of Early Help and that Families First strongly effects referral rates.

In response to a question from a co-opted member reference was made to the quality of the authority’s workforce development offer including the ESYA (Assessed and Supported Year in Employment) programme and partnerships with Bradford University.  It was acknowledged that there was a need to reflect on giving more experienced staff some protected time for their own development.

A question was asked about “hot desking” and it was noted that it was not an ideal work environment for social workers but that it did help to have them all in one place.  It was hoped that it may be possible to provide zones for social work teams which would provide a more supportive environment for social workers.

Resolved –

That while the Committee acknowledges the strengths of management structures, dedication of social workers and the current safe workloads, it recognises the on going pressures and asks for an update at the meeting on 14 March 2018.

ACTION: Strategic Director Children’s Services