Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB) meeting held on 13 November 2015 were approved as a correct record.

Matters Arising

·         The outcomes of the Emergency Duty Team’s review of the Appropriate Adult function would be brought to the LSCB’s next meeting.

·         GP engagement in Child Protection Conferences had been discussed by the LSCB Learning and Improvement Sub-group and this would be followed up. (Action: Alex Walters/Debbie Hartrick)

·         The Care Quality Commission’s inspection of Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (BHFT) had been completed.  A draft report was expected by the end of February however initial feedback indicated that no significant safeguarding concerns relating to children had been identified.  The  report would be taken to a future meeting of the Learning and Improvement Sub-group.  (Action: Nancy Barber/Eugene Jones)

·         A Peer Review report looking at the Care Leavers Service would be circulated to the LSCB with the minutes. (Action: Lorna Hunt)

·         A Berkshire East Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) exercise to map its funding of LSCBs against that of neighbouring CCG’s had found that on a per capita basis funding in Bracknell Forest was commensurate with neighbouring areas but the LSCB has to date received no formal communication on the matter.

·         The outcomes of recent national Probation Service inspections would be reported to the Learning and Improvement Sub-group in February. (Action: John Ennis)

·         A positive expression of interest had been received from a potential second lay member and work was underway to develop an appropriate recruitment process.

·         A briefing on the Health and Wellbeing Being Board’s work and transformation bid to improve the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) in the area would be brought to a future meeting. (Action: Janette Karklins)

·         A Sub-group of the Children and Young People’s Partnership and the Health and Wellbeing Board had developed a draft Emotional Health and Wellbeing Strategy.  This was currently out for consultation and a copy would be circulated to the LSCB for information and comment.  (Action: Christine McInnes)

·         Children’s Social Care representation at the Pan Berkshire Section 11 Sub-group had been raised with the Berkshire Directors of Children Social care by Janette Karklins local authorities but to date there had been no response.  This would be followed up. (Action: Alex Walters)

·         The Chair had raised concerns with the Slough LSCB Chair and it had been confirmed that Sandra Davies would, as part of her new role at Slough Borough Council, assume responsibility for chairing the pan Berkshire Policy and Procedures Sub-group

·         An update on the Communication and Community Engagement Sub-group was given by Peter Floyd and Jonathan Picken

·         The issue of developing links with the Family Justice Board had been raised by LSCB and Lorna Hunt had raised with the Family Justice Board Pan Berkshire Chair who would now produce briefings for the LSCBs. Alex Walters stated that she would ask other LSCB Chairs if they would agree to the Family Justice Board Chair attending the Pan-Berkshire Chairs meeting on an annual basis.

·         In relation to the LSCB Peer Review,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

The LSCB received the Performance Report for quarter two (July to September) of 2015-16.  It was noted that the performance data had been looked at in detail by the Learning and Improvement Sub-group at its meeting in December 2015 and the LSCB noted the substantive matters that had arisen as a result of the discussions and the resulting actions agreed.

It was reported that a number of transformation projects were under development by the Council and it was possible that parental mental ill health could be drawn into the early intervention and prevention transformation work stream.  (Action: Janette Karklins to update at next meeting)

The LSCB noted the report.

The LSCB received the six monthly report providing an update on the Child Protection Conferencing process in Bracknell Forest during the period April to September 2015. 

It was noted that during the period covered by the report 122 child protection conferences covering 236 children had taken place.  Of these 35 had been initial conferences and 87 review conferences.  54 children had become subject to a child protection plan and 82 had ceased to be subject to a child protection plan. Neglect continued to be the most prevalent reason for implementing a Child Protection Plan.   At the end of September 2015, 5 children had been subject to a Child Protection Plan for in excess of 24 months and it was agreed that the category that these plans fell into would be identified.

The Conference and Review Team was undertaking an audit of those children subject to repeat Child Protection Plans. Which would complement the audit work currently being progressed by the LSCB.  Early results of this work indicate that parental disguised compliance was an underlying feature of these cases.  A full analysis of this work would be brought to a future meeting of the LSCB’s Learning and Improvement Sub-group. (Action: Heather Brown)

It was suggested that the Pan Berkshire Strategic Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE) could be an appropriate place for an initial discussion of how concerns about those children identified as being at risk of CSE were managed.  The question as to the use of Child Protection Plans would be central to a review that would consider relevant legislation, statutory guidance and emerging best practice.  (Action: Jonathan Picken/Karen Roberts)

It was noted that participation of children and parents at child protection conferences continued to be positive.  The Children’s Social Care function had launched an opt-out pilot scheme for advocacy for all children subject to Child Protection Plans and it was hoped that this would increase children’s participation rates further.

The LSCB acknowledged that multi-agency participation at conferences was improving  and the audit tool used by Child Protection Chairs was being reviewed to ensure that information was gathered more consistently.  The following points were raised in relation to agency participation at Child Protection Conferences:

·         Statistics for the Probation Service needed to be broken down so that attendance by both the Community Rehabilitation Company and the Probation Service was shown

·         It was not clear whether it was being recorded when an agency did not have to provide a report

·         The Clinical Commissioning Group requested that they be notified of instances when GPs produced a complex medical statement but did not go on to attend the Conference

·         It was agreed that the participation template would be circulated for comment to John Ennis, Debbie Hartrick and Eugene Jones.  (Action: Heather Brown)

It was agreed that consideration of how those attending child protection conferences and core groups could be trained and prepared for their role would be explored further by the Training Sub-group.  (Action: Emma Anderton)

It was suggested that the template completed by GPs was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

The LSCB received a report providing an update on the Domestic Abuse Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC) processes.  The report provided an overview of both the national and local context with regard to domestic abuse, a summary of key activities, identified development areas and a summary of key challenges faced by the process.  Arising from the LSCB’s questions and comments the following points were noted:

·         Funding pressures meant that the current funds were being used to fund part-time PICADA support which was not sustainable. It was noted that PACT ran a similar programme to PICADA and this might provide a suitable alternative resource.  (Action: Kellie Williams)

·         Difficulties had been experienced by practitioners trying to submit information through the MODUS computer system. It was agreed that this would be followed up.  (Action: Kellie Williams)

·         The number of referrals into the MARAC process was still significantly lower than that of comparable areas.  It had been suggested that this might be indicative of agencies not identifying repeat MARAC cases and the MARAC Task and Finish Group would be reviewing this area.

·         Following work in schools to raise awareness of the effects of domestic abuse on young people, 88 children had disclosed problems, 60 of which were considered to be of concern and reported to the school’s child protection officer.  Work with school staff had found that many lacked the confidence to deal with disclosures around domestic abuse because they felt unsure of the responses they ought to give the child making the disclosure. This issue required further exploration and would be raised with local designated leads.  (Action: Kelly Williams/Debbie Smith)

·         It was reported that the Youth Service ran sexual health and relationship workshops in secondary schools and the possibility of expanding this work into primary schools was being explored.  The Board supported this approach and acknowledged feedback from young people it had previously consulted on in respect of Child Sexual Exploitation who felt issues should be addressed at an earlier point in their education.  (Action: Karen Frost to update at the next meeting)

·         Children’s Centres were continuing to work to improve their identification of domestic abuse in the earliest stages.

·         Whilst School Safeguarding Leads were receiving reports of domestic abuse incidents they were not always clear about whether or not the children were present.   This issue required further exploration and would be raised with local designated leads. (Action: Kellie Williams/Debbie Smith)

·         PICADA and MARAC dealt with different cohorts so there would be no correlation between the two data sets.

·         The Cambridge University study of domestic abuse interventions was currently working with its fourth cohort.  A final report was expected at the end of the year. (Action: Kelly Williams to update at a future meeting)

·         The Domestic Abuse Executive was considered to be the most appropriate place to hold discussions about how services might be reconfigured to address resource constraints.  The LSCB was clear that services to support children affected by Domestic Abuse needed to be considered a priority for the commissioners.

The LSCB  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

The LSCB received a report providing an update on the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) process for the period January 2015 to December 2015.

During the period covered by the report 103 offenders had been discussed by the Group; 70 had been classified as Category 1 offenders, 31 as category 2 offenders and 2 had been classified as being Category 3.  Of the 103 cases, 84 were being managed at Level 1 and 17 at Level 2.  There were no cases being managed at Level 3.  Eight offender managed at Level 2 had been recalled back to custody after being released on Licence and five were recalled for further offences. 15 offenders were actively involved with Children’s Social Care, 8 of these cases were being managed at Level 2.  Over the course of the year, 5 young offenders on Youth Offending Service Orders had been managed at Level 2 with three subsequently being reduced to Level 1.

It was reported that attendance at the monthly meetings continued to be good and there was active participation from all agencies involved.

It was noted that there might be some learning from a recent multi-agency review of a MAPPA case in West Mercia which could be shared.  (Action: John Ennis to forward details to the LSCB L&I Sub-group)

Free training sessions were available for staff in agencies that had a duty to co-operate in the MAPPA process.  The Chair encouraged partners to ensure relevant staff attended the next training session which was scheduled to take place on Tuesday 8 March 2016 at 10am at Bracknell Probation Office. 

The LSCB noted the update.

The LSCB received a report detailing the work carried out by the Council’s Safeguarding and Inclusion Team to support safeguarding in the Borough’s schools.

The non-statutory Team supported both maintained and independent schools and provided advice on a range of matters including Section 11 arrangements, school culture, school policies, procedures and record keeping.  The team also offered schools education focused universal training and bespoke training for both staff and governors.  The Team Manager facilitates Child Protection Designated Lead meetings for schools across the educational spectrum.  Visits were also made out of school hours to independent schools with boarding facilities to meet with pupils and boarding house staff.

During 2015, the Team has worked closely with schools to develop the use of the ‘Team around the Child’ and ‘Team around the Family’ meetings to help provide additional support when a school felt that they have become ‘stuck’ with a child and so that robust intervention responses could be provided at an early stage.

Key challenges identified by the Learning and Improvement Team included:

·         The service was joint funded by schools and the local authority and as a non-statutory service there was a risk that the service could become a victim of budget cuts.

·         Guidance required schools to appoint a senior member of staff as their Designated Child Protection Leads however some schools appeared to be delegating this responsibility to members of less senior staff who may not have the appropriate decision making powers.  The Chair expressed concern about this and was assured that the situation was being monitored.

·         There was limited capacity to provide all the training requested in-house and the possibility of identifying alternative training providers was being explored.  The LSCB encouraged such work to be undertaken in consultation with its Training and Professional Development Sub-group and for the importance of interagency training to be considered.

·         School pastoral staff were increasingly dealing with children presenting complex behaviours and there was a growing need to develop more opportunities for these staff to participate in more reflective supervision sessions.  It was noted that the LSCB had commissioned a piece of work exploring safeguarding supervision and there may be some learning that could be used be schools to develop this area coming out of this work.

·         The LSCB noted that there was a potentially vulnerable group of children educated at home (EHE) and requested a more detailed report outlining the issues in Bracknell Forest be presented to a future LSCB meeting.  (Action: Christine McInnes)

The LSCB noted the report.

The LSCB received a report providing an update on the work of the Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE) Strategic Sub-group between July and December 2015.

The Group and its partners had achieved a number of positive pieces of work during the period covered by the report including:

·         Two successful social media campaigns focusing on the ‘nine signs of CSE’ and ‘nine signs of internet safety’;

·         Joint work with Involve to raise awareness of CSE amongst the 3^rd sector, elected members and designated child protection leads in the Borough’s schools

·         The Council had agreed that mandatory CSE training would be introduced for licensed private hire and hackney carriage drivers

SEMRAC, formerly the CSE Operational group, continued to provide robust multi-agency risk assessment and action planning for specific children and during the period covered by the report the number of children discussed by the Group had risen from 14 in July to 20 in December.  A rise that was attributed to professionals having greater awareness of CSE risks and their gaining confidence in using the risk assessment tool to make referrals.

The Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Process is carrying out a review of CSE in Bracknell Forest and the CSE Strategic Group has been invited to participate in this review which it was hoped would produce some useful recommendations to take the Group’s work forward.

Notwithstanding these positive achievements the future work of the Sub-group was considered to be fragile due to resource constraints.  The support provided by Bracknell Forest council in relation to communications may not be available in the future and raised concerns about capacity for disseminating information and social media campaigns.  It was agreed that this would be clarified and the Board formally informed of such a decision.  (Action: Janette Karklins)

It was a requirement for the Sub-group to audit and profile CSE across the Borough.  This had initially been completed in 2014 and the data used to inform the profile was now considered historical.  It would therefore conduct a new audit to develop a current profile of CSE in the Borough however there were no dedicated resources available to complete this piece of work and it was acknowledged that the ongoing work to involve children/young people and their parents/carers would add to the knowledge already gleaned..

It was agreed that concerns over the resourcing available to co-ordinate strategic work and specifically to conduct the CSE audit and undertake campaigns to raise wider awareness of CSE would be escalated outside the meeting.  (Action: Alex Walters/Jonathan Picken)

The LSCB noted the report.

Emma Anderton presented a report providing an overview of the LSCB Safeguarding Training provided by the Learning and Development Team at Bracknell Forest Council.  The report also contained a series of proposals outlining the future development of the training provision.

It was reported that during 2015-16, 208 delegates had attended the universal multi-agency Introduction to Safeguarding course, 212 delegates had attended multi-agency targeted training courses and 11 delegates had attended specialist level training courses.

Multi-agency safeguarding training in Bracknell Forest was currently overseen by the East Berkshire Training Strategic Sub-group however the Sub-group was experiencing a number of challenges which was making it difficult to develop a cohesive approach across the east Berkshire region.  A review had proposed a number of potential options to assure both the LSCB and individual agencies that appropriate universal safeguarding training was being provided.  Arising from the subsequent discussion the following points were noted:

·         Withdrawing from the East Berkshire Sub-group and setting up a Bracknell Forest Learning and Development Group would enable the LSCB to add value locally and reduce some of the pressures on the training provision

·         It was acknowledged that the creation of an additional group would place pressure on agencies that were not co-terminus with Bracknell Forest and consideration had been given to alternative ways that partners could be involved in meetings for example holding meetings virtually.

·         If Bracknell Forest courses were not filled then spare places would be offered to practitioners in other areas

·         It had been acknowledged that venue cost absorbed a significant amount of the training budget and the possibility of using alternative cheaper venues was being explored.

·         Even with the proposed price increases the cost of multi-agency safeguarding training still represented very good value for money when compared to that offered elsewhere.

·         Charges would still be levied if delegates either cancelled or failed to attend training.

·         There would be no subsidies available for voluntary and community groups however a mechanism would be put in place to consider reduced prices in exceptional circumstances.  Involve was also able to deliver adult and child safeguarding training.

·         It was agreed that Emma Anderton would join the Learning and Improvement Sub-group

·         The sector breakdown showed partner agency attendance only at multi-agency training sessions and did not therefore reflect the actual training provided.  To assist accurate reporting commentaries on the safeguarding training provided by health providers and the police would be provided to Alison Burnell for inclusion in the LSCB Performance Reports. (Action: Debbie Hartrick/Dave Gilbert/Alison Burnell)

The LSCB agreed the following recommendations:

              i.        Bracknell LSCB to withdraw from the East Berkshire Training arrangements and run a stand alone Bracknell Forest Learning and Development Group

             ii.        The proposed increases to training charges for delegates set out in appendix D of the report be approved

            iii.        A half day targeted multi-agency targeted refresher course is introduced

           iv.        A reduced number of safeguarding courses are advertised on the LSCB website.  Additional courses are to be commissioned throughout the year depending on demand

            v.        Course resources are  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The LSCB received and noted a report setting out the provisional LSCB Budget for 2016/17.

It was stressed that the budget had been prepared on the assumption that agency contributions would remain at the same level as 2015/16.  It was requested that those agencies which were still planning their budgets for 2016/17 provide details of their contributions to the LSCB as soon as possible.

The LSCB received the LSCB Challenge Log.  It was noted that the Challenge Log contained all challenges made by the LSCB and its Sub-groups during 2015/16.  The Chair emphasised the need for the LSCB to actively monitor and update the Challenge Log when appropriate.

It was agreed that future Challenge Logs would include an additional column detailing who would own the identified actions.  Any outstanding actions would be carried forward into the new 2016/17 Challenge Log. 

The LSCB noted the LSCB Challenge Log.

The LSCB received the forward planner for future meetings.  It was agreed that the annual reports from BHFT and Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust would be added as a regular report.  Eugene Jones agreed to confirm the most appropriate times for these reports to be received by the LSCB.  (Action: Eugene Jones)

      i.        Health update for approval

     ii.        Multi-agency brochure for information

The LSCB received the revised Health Specific Bruising Protocol and the revised Multi-agency Protocol for Bruising in Non-mobile Children leaflet.

The Health specific protocol had been reviewed by designated and named doctors and nurses and a number of minor changes had been made.  The revised version had been widely consulted on and would be adopted at the end of January 2016.  Clarification would be sought on the terminology to ensure consistency.

The LSCB received a briefing note setting out details of the Government’s fundamental review of LSCBs.

The LSCB was informed that as part of the Review a consultation had been set up by the DfE so that agencies could contribute their thoughts on the effectiveness of LSCBs.  A response would be sent on behalf of the LSCB and partners were encouraged to  submit individual responses before the consultation ended on 25 February 2016.

The LSCB received a report setting out proposed changes to the processes for undertaking visits to children subject to Child Protection Plans.  It was suggested that a small task and finish group be established to explore the proposals in more detail.  It was agreed that the LSCB would support a review of the process.

·         Community Safety Partnership

·         Corporate Parenting Advisory Panel

·         Health and Wellbeing Board

The LSCB noted the minutes of recent meetings of associated strategic partnership groups.

The LSCB considered a report setting out the Chair’s Statement that would be published alongside the Child C Serious Case Review Overview Report. 

The Overview Report had now been updated to reflect the outcomes of the criminal proceedings and the LSCB was informed that the Overview Report, Chair’s Statement and progress updates would now be sent to the Department for Education, Ofsted and the National Serious Case Review Panel.  The Overview Report and the Chair’s Statement would then be published on the LSCB’s website on the 15^th February 2016. 

Advice in regard to media enquiries had been previously prepared and circulated in the event of any press interest.  It was agreed that the agency action updates would not be published alongside the Overview Report but would be made available on request.

The LSCB noted an update on the development of an LSCB Communications and Community Engagement Sub-group.  A meeting would take place on 22 February to plan the scope and framework for the Group’s work and a small amount of sponsorship had been raised to help fund promotional work.

The LSCB thanked Peter Floyd for his work to develop this area of the LSCB’s remit.

·         The Concealed Pregnancy Protocol had been reviewed and circulated for comment.  The Pan-Berkshire Policy and Procedures Sub-group had approved the revised protocol and this would be adopted at the end of January 2016.

·         Guidance for the new Joint Targeted Area Inspections had been just been published by Ofsted.  The four week long inspection would commence in February and six were expected to be completed by the autumn. A recent CSN briefing providing a summary of the inspection process would be circulated for information.  (Action: Janette Karklins)

·         A new Bracknell Forest representative was required for the pan-Berkshire Policies and Procedures Sub-group.  It was requested that details of appropriate volunteers be sent to Jonathan Picken

·         A national campaign against sex abuse and violence would be running during the first week of February.  A workshop would be run in Bracknell forest on the 4 February.

·         The DfE was running a national campaign focusing on raising awareness of child abuse and neglect.  It was agreed that the matter would be considered by the LSCB at their March meeting.