Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB) meeting held on 18 September 2015 were approved as a correct record.

Matters Arising

·         The report on the review of the Safer Lives Multi-agency Risk Assessment Conference process would be brought to the LSCB’s January meeting. (Action: Kellie Williams)

·         The LSCB Business Manager had discussed the concerns about the Appropriate Adult function with the Emergency Duty Team (EDT).  The EDT had completed an analysis of the service and the results would be brought to the LSCB’s January meeting. (Action: Jonathan Picken)

·         It was stressed that the concerns that had been raised over the Appropriate Adult function were historic and did not relate to cover in Bracknell Forest.  It was suggested that minutes of the EDT Pan-Berkshire meetings be included in future LSCB agendas (Action: Jonathan Picken to follow up with EDT)

·         It was agreed that work with GPs in relation to their engagement in Child Protection Conferences would be followed up and the Board appraised of progress before the next meeting. (Action: Sarah Bellars to follow up with Debbie Hartrick and Katie Caird)

·         It was agreed that Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust’s (BHFT) work to explore how one professional might represent multiple branches of the Trust at Child Protection Conferences would be followed up and clarified before the next meeting of the LSCB.  (Action: Eugene Jones to confirm timescales for work with Nancy Barber)

·         Changes to the Community Rehabilitation Company’s working processes could result in changes to their representation at the LSCB.  This would be clarified and an update requested for the next meeting. (Action: Helen Morris)

·         Initial feedback on the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) recent inspection of Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust had been positive.  The final report was still awaited.

·         As part of the CQC inspection of BHFT in December, the Berkshire East Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) would be hosting a meeting on 1 December 2015 to enable partners to provide feedback on the Trust; details of the meeting would be circulated.  It was agreed that the LSCB would send a representative to the meeting and it was requested that any issues that partners wished to raise with the Inspectors be emailed direct to Sarah Bellars’ PA.  (Action: Sarah Bellars/All)

·         The outcomes of a recent peer review of the Care Leavers Service were broadly positive.  Most of the issues identified by the Review had been known to the service and were already being addressed.  The review report would be brought to the LSCB’s January meeting.  (Action: Karen Roberts)

·         Safer Recruitment and managing workforce allegations would be discussed at the April LSCB Forum meeting. (Action: Paul Young/Jonathan Picken)

·         The LSCB Chair and Business Manager would be meeting with representatives of the Drug and Alcohol Action Team to discuss improved data reporting to the LSCB following this meeting.

·         The Safeguarding in Education report would be brought to the LSCB’s January meeting. (Action: Christine McInnes)

·         The Berkshire East CCG would be discussing LSCB funding at its next Board meeting and details of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

·         BFHT’s redevelopment of the Berkshire Adolescent Unit had now been completed.  The unit had been expanded to nine beds and provided a seven day a week service in an enhanced environment to the young people requiring support.  Whilst the Unit could take young people from outside Berkshire the service was primarily for Berkshire residents who would take priority.

·         The three recent inspections of the National Probation Service in Bracknell had not identified any concerns relating to child safeguarding. Hampshire Probation Service would be carrying out a peer review in December/January and partner agencies could be invited to contribute to this.  The outcomes of the inspections would be shared with the LSCB as soon as they were available. (Action: John Ennis)

Child C’s father had been acquitted at a retrial as a result of the jury being unable to reach a verdict on the charges he faced.  The Board was informed that the CPS would not seek a retrial.

As a result, the Serious Case Review Report would now be updated to reflect the outcomes of the criminal proceedings and Child C’s parents would be invited to comment on the report. The LSCB Chair would be drafting a statement setting out the learning from the Serious Case Review and the progress made to embed this learning into the LSCB’s practice.  This statement would then be circulated to the LSCB for comment and published alongside the Serious Case Review report.  It was stressed that partners might want to prepare their similar statements in respect of any learning specific to their agency.  Depending on the outcome of the above processes it was anticipated that the report would be published early in 2016.

The Board was reminded that Child C’s adoption had been made final over the summer and Child C’s half brother was living with his father and had on-going contact with his mother.

Peter Floyd presented a report setting out a number of discussion points, based on his own experience and that of other Lay Members in the region, in relation to the remit and future direction of the work of the LSCB Lay Member.

It was agreed that the most important functions of the Lay Member was to offer an independent perspective and to pick up concerns on the ground and to explore whether LSCB activities were making a difference in the community.  It was also felt that the Lay Member helped evidence the quality of safeguarding on the ground.

It was felt that the loss of the Raising Awareness Sub-group had impacted on general awareness of the LSCB’s work and that the Lay Members could play a vital role in helping to promote key safeguarding issues as well as the LSCB’s aims and purpose.  It was agreed that a steering group would be set up to explore how such messages might be co-ordinated and promoted.  It was noted that Philip Cook had a number of ideas about how the LSCB’s interaction with the community might be improved and these would be followed up.  (Action: Peter Floyd/Philip Cook/Jonathan Picken)

It was agreed that the vacancy for a second lay member needed to be filled however careful thought needed to be given to the recruitment process.  It was requested that any thoughts on this process be forwarded to Peter Floyd and these would inform the LSCB’s recruitment activity in the New Year. (Action: All)

Debbie Greatrex, Common Assessment Framework and Early Intervention Co-ordinator, presented the Common Assessment Framework (CAF) Annual Report 2014/15.  The report included an overview of progress made during 2014/15, a breakdown of CAF data a summary of CAF outcomes, a summary of cross border issues, an evaluation of CAF training and priority actions for 2015/16.

In 2014/15, 355 CAFs had been completed. This was a slight increase compared against 2013/14 when 345 CAFs had been completed).  The majority of CAFs were still being completed by primary schools however the number of CAFS being completed by health practitioners, including health visitors and the Community Mental Health Team, and secondary schools was increasing significantly.

In 2014/15 behaviour was cited as being the primary reason for a CAF assessment to be completed for boys.  Parental capacity was cited as the primary reason for a CAF to be completed for girls (this was second most common reason for boys).  Analysis of CAFs had found that environmental factors including housing and financial issues were impacting on the needs of families and the number of assessments citing housing as being a primary concern had doubled when compared to the previous year.

Although they were not recorded separately, 113 Family CAFs had been presented to the Early Intervention Hub in 2014/15 a number which equated to 32% of the 2014/15 referrals made to the Hub.  This was considered to be a positive indicator that practitioners were increasingly considering families in a more holistic way and that the Think Family approach was becoming well embedded in professional practice.

A triage meeting had been introduced to examine single agency service referrals before a decision was taken on whether they needed to be escalated to the Early Intervention Hub.  This has helped develop a more consistent approach to CAFs and streamlined processes.   For example paediatric only or medical requests for home tuition are now being referred directly to the Margaret Wells Furby Resource Centre and College Hall.

There had been an increase in CAF reviews undertaken (266 in 2014/15) and increasing recognition of the need to review process.  This was being supported by additional staffing resource in early help and needed to focus on providing evidence of gaps or delays in service provision.

Development priorities for 2015/16 included:

·         Devising a schedule of visits to school and other agencies to monitor and support reviews.

·         Further develop recording systems to improve reporting and record keeping

·         To undertake evaluations in respect of additional workshops devised to support the role of the Lead Professional to help support the step down and review processes.

·         Work with Bracknell Forest Homes to consider families where there are significant housing issues but who are not receiving a service from Children’s Social Care and where completion of a CAF to look at Tier 2 support was advisable.

The LSCB thanked Debbie Greatrex for her comprehensive update.

Debbie Greatrex presented the Early Intervention Hub Annual Report 2014/15.  The Early Intervention Hub’s development had been a key outcome of an internal review of the CAF and had been set up to provide a streamlined process for managing the outcomes of CAF assessments and provide a mechanism for multi-agency working to support children and young people.  The Annual Report covered the second full year of the Hub’s operation and included an overview of progress made during 2014/15, a breakdown of data relating to the Early Intervention Hub and the Step Up Step Down process, summary of outcomes and priority actions for 2015/16.

Engagement of practitioners at the Hub has been high.  The ongoing attendance of the community paediatrician had been secured and the attendance of health visitors has increased over the course of the year.  The Youth Service was now represented at the Hub and this has broadened the scope of resources that were considered for older children.

During the period covered by the report 352 children and young people were discussed at the Hub.  The main reason for a referral being made to the Hub was parental capacity. Out of the 352 cases considered by the Hub the child had experienced an element of domestic abuse in 72 cases and 38 cases related to a child or young person with a diagnosis of Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) or Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).

Arising from the LSCB’s questions and comments the following points were noted:

·         The disparity between the number of cases stepped down in quarter 4 (64 cases) and quarter 3 (12 cases) and the fact that more cases had been stepped down in quarter 4 down than in the whole of 2013/14 was attributed to the number of single assessments that had been carried out and the number of families with high numbers of children.  This would be explored in further detail and the LSCB appraised of the learning. (Action: Debbie Greatrex/Misread Panetta)

·         The Board was informed that Children’s Social care was not yet clear what the interface between the Hub and the Multi-agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH) would look like, but it was considered likely that Debbie Greatrex would be involved in the MASH to enable information sharing to take place. 

·         It was noted that data relating to the length of time that had elapsed between a case being discussed at the Hub and support arrangements being put in place was not routinely collected.  However, where it was known that a service had a waiting list then the Hub worked with the Family Intervention Team to put interim support arrangements in place where this was necessary.  It was suggested that this might be an area that should be considered as part of a future service audit that the LSCB might wish to monitor

·         Whilst the Hub has worked on Step Down cases with substance misuse issues it has not received any CAF referrals directly from the New Hope Centre.   The importance of all staff being  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The LSCB considered a report seeking approval to formally bring the work of the LSCB Early Help Sub-group to an end.

The Early Help Sub-group had been implemented to establish early help systems and embed these into every day practice.  The group also supported the LSCB to maintain an oversight of the effectiveness of early help and supported the development of key areas of work including the Really Useful Guide to Neglect, the CAF and the Early Intervention Hub.

It was noted that early help was now embedded in core systems and practice, the CAF was being used effectively and the Early Intervention Hub was effectively supporting more complex cases. The Council’s Head of Service: Safeguarding had established an interface meeting between Tier 2 and Tier 3 services and this would help with the Step Down process.  It was agreed that updates from the Interface Group would be brought to future LSCB meetings. (Action: Lorna Hunt)

It was acknowledged that the regular reports on the CAF and Early Intervention Hub and the regular audit activity and performance data would be valuable tools to help the LSCB monitor the effectiveness of early help going forward.

The LSCB agreed that the Early Help Sub-group would be disbanded and the oversight proposed would be further developed to ensure that all areas were adequately integrated or linked. (Action: Karen Frost)

The LSCB received a report providing an update on the work of the Pan-Berkshire Section 11 Panel. 

It was noted that the Panel wanted to have Children’s Social Care representatives (ideally the Principal Social Worker or Independent Reviewing Officer) from each of the six Berkshire authorities on the Group and it was agreed that this would be raised at the next Assistant Directors’ meeting and with the Chief Executive of each local authority.  (Action: Lorna Hunt/Alex Walters)

The LSCB noted the positive progress being made by the Group.

The LSCB considered a report providing an update on the work of the Pan-Berkshire Policies and Procedures Sub-group.

It was reported that Tri-X had now merged with Reconstruct to establish a new company called Signis which would be taking forward work to redevelop the online policies and procedures webpages in order to give a more structured streamlined approach.  Once this was complete the redeveloped web pages would include a home page which would give access to individual web pages for each Berkshire Authority containing core policies and practice guidance.  Whilst it was intended that the site was for Pan Berkshire specific policies there would be the opportunity, at a later date, for each area to publish local documents.  It was intended that the core content of the new system would be ready to submit to Signis by 10 December 2015.  It was stressed that at this juncture the documents would not yet have been rewritten and that the Sub-group was not responsible for writing the policies/procedures.  It was therefore essential that the Sub-group was clear about where the policies came from and their purpose.

It was noted that Sandra Davies would be taking up a position at Slough Borough Council and this would leave a gap in Bracknell Forest’s representation on the Group and on the current leadership of the Group.  Although Slough was the lead authority for the Sub-group it was still not clear who was responsible for taking the Sub-group’s work forward.  It was agreed that the Chair would write to Slough LSCB’s Chair seeking assurance on the Sub-group’s work going forward.  (Action: Alex Walters)

·         Proposed process of appraisal

The LSCB received a report prepared by the LSCB’s Independent Chair for the Lead Member for Children, Young People and Learning, the Leader, the Chief Executive and Director of Children, Young People and Learning at Bracknell Forest Council. 

The six-monthly report provided a review of the overall effectiveness of the LSCB in fulfilling its statutory functions and detailed any areas of single or multi-agency practice which the LSCB had challenged.

As part of the ongoing arrangements to monitor the effectiveness of the LSCB an appraisal process would be implemented for the LSCB Independent Chair and the views of partners would be sought as part of this process.  An electronic version of the appraisal questionnaire would be circulated to the LSCB, the LSCB Forum and the LSCB Learning and Improvement Sub-group with a request to submit feedback by 4th December 2016.  The information would then be collated and fed into the Chair’s appraisal process and reported back to the LSCB.

The LSCB had also requested that a Peer Challenge was undertaken of Bracknell Forest LSCB in quarter 1 of 2016/17 under the regional sector led support and challenge arrangements.

The LSCB noted the report. 

The LSCB received the draft LSCB Business Plan.  Following feedback from the LSCB, minor amendments had been made to the Business Plan and work had taken place to rate the progress being made to deliver the LSCB’s action plan.  Caution had been used when developing the draft ratings to ensure that the LSCB’s current position was accurately reflected.  An evidence base to support to rating was being developed and this would be used during the peer challenge process.

It was agreed that the Business Plan would be circulated electronically and it was requested that any comments be sent directly to Jonathan Picken by 14 December 2015.  (Action: Jonathan Picken/All)

The LSCB considered a report setting out the proposed LSCB budget for 2016-17.  It was noted that the Board’s resources were limited and the LSCB currently struggled to fully deliver its non-statutory quality assurance function.   In addition, it was stressed that there were no contingency funds available to cover any unexpected costs that might arise for example Serious Case Reviews or Partnership Reviews.

It was reported that work was taking place to identify potential ways in which the LSCB’s work might be delivered more efficiently for example through the identification of any common work areas with the Adult Safeguarding Board and whether it might be possible to generate income through the LSCB’s training programme.  A more comprehensive report would be brought to the LSCB’s January meeting.  (Action: Jonathan Picken)

Emma Anderton attended the meeting to discuss a proposal to change the way in which multi-agency safeguarding training courses were delivered and their funding sustained.  As previously advised, this work was being progressed jointly with the 3 East Berkshire LSCBs.  Historically the LSCB had not charged practitioners to attend Universal Safeguarding Training and it was now proposed that charges by introduced as there was insufficient funding available and the Local Authority was no longer able to continue supplementing the deficit in the training budget as it had done in previous years.  Implementing a charge of £45 per delegate attending Universal Safeguarding Training (1/2 day course) would raise £2314 of income whilst charging delegates £75 to attend the targeted Multi-Agency Safeguarding Training (full day course) would raise £2350.  Additional funds raised would enable the LSCB to supplement its budget and fund training courses that did not cover their costs. 

It was acknowledged that introducing charges for training might deter smaller organisations from sending staff.  “Involve” currently provided free safeguarding training courses and a policy would be developed to ensure that those organisations that were genuinely unable to meet the costs would still be able to access appropriate training.

It was acknowledged that these proposed charges represented good value for money.  It was agreed that it would be helpful to have more information on health training arrangements.  (Action: Emma Anderton/Jonathan Picken)

The LSCB received and noted the updated LSCB Challenge Logs for 2014/15 and 2015/16.  It was stressed that the Challenge Log was a live document that helped evidence the impact that the Board was making and would be continually updated and become a standing agenda item at future LSCB meetings.

It was agreed that the titles of the Challenge Logs would be updated to make it clear which years were being considered.  The updated Logs would be circulated electronically and it was requested that any comments or feedback be sent to Alison Burnell and Jonathan Picken.  (Action: All)

·         Bracknell Forest Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership

·         Bracknell Forest Community Safety Partnership

·         Bracknell Forest Corporate Parenting Advisory Panel

The LSCB noted the minutes of recent meetings of the Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership, the Community Safety Partnership and the Corporate Parenting Advisory Panel.

The LSCB Annual Report 2014/15 would be published week commencing 16 November 2015 and would be circulated electronically.

·         The next Learning and Improvement Workshop for all practitioners would take place on the morning of 27 January 2016.  Feedback from previous workshops had been positive. To encourage a better balance to discussions it was requested that partners encourage frontline managers/supervisors to attend so that there was as wide a range of agencies represented as possible. (Action: All)

·         Additional local guidance on Child Sexual Exploitation was under development.  It was agreed that this would be brought to the LSCB for endorsement when it was finalised. (Action: Sonia Johnson)

·         The Nine Signs of Internet Safety e-safety campaign aimed at raising awareness of internet safety issues amongst parents had been launched.  The tweets were being realised through the Council’s Twitter account and it was requested that partners retweet the campaign through their own networks

·         Children’s Social Care would be subject to a LGA safeguarding diagnostic in January which involve the LSCB and would be reported to a future meeting.

·         The Council’s Head of Communications and Marketing had contacted partner agencies to map any activities that were taking place to raise awareness of safeguarding matters.  Partners were requested to review their activities in regard to raising awareness of safeguarding and in particular the key priorities they had collectively agreed.

The LSCB noted that Sandra Davies would be leaving Bracknell Forest to take up a post at Slough and that this would be her last LSCB meeting.  The Board thanked Sandra for the significant work that she had done to support the LSCB over the years and for the difference that she had made to its work and wished her well for the future.