Agenda item

Multi-agency developments around the Children's Social Care Reforms

The Panel will consider a verbal update on multi-agency developments around the Children’s Social Care reforms.

 

Contact:        Vicky Metheringham, Service Director

 

Minutes:

The Panel considered a report on Multi-agency developments around the Children’s Social Care Reforms, presented by Robert Fordyce, Head of Service and Practice Development.

 

Robert Fordyce highlighted the following:

 

  • The Department for Education had asked children's social care departments to get engaged in one of the biggest reforms of children's social care in a generation.
  • The government’s aim was for every child to be given the best chances

in life, by focusing on earlier intervention in children's lives, and preventing children getting to the stage where they could no longer live with their families.

  • The three main areas for change were: family help, support to children on child protection plans, and involving families more effectively through family group decision-making meetings.
  • The ultimate aim was for children and families to be supported to stay together and get the help they need.
  • The Children's Well-being and Schools Bill required families to be offered a family-led decision-making meeting before care proceedings were issued.
  • Assessment templates were being changed to one assessment and one plan for children, to ensure that families did not have to complete complicated reassessments on new forms when their level of service provision changed.
  • Pathfinder local authorities had been trying out these changes and Kirklees had been linked in with them to learn what had worked well and what challenges they had faced.
  • Oversight of progression of the reforms was being provided by the safeguarding partnership executive group which fed into the chair's delivery group, and a Family First Partnership program board that had been set up.
  • A working group had been set up to ensure that the renewed one assessment plan was easily understood by families, using clear language.
  • Quarterly updates were being sent to the DfE on progress made and a quarterly newsletter was being sent to partners.
  • Engagement events had been held with staff, and the Our Voice Team had been working with high school children.
  • Challenges included:
  • There would be changes to some job titles and job roles. In other authorities this had led to staff leaving, so to avoid disruption, Kirklees needed to ensure that valued and experienced staff remained in post.
  • Effective working with Multi-agency teams.
  • Meaningful and effective engagement with children and families, building on what was already known.
  • Once reforms had been implemented, reviews would need to take place to make sure they were working.
  • Ensuring partners had a shared approach to risk management and a shared understanding of effective intervention.
  • Reforms should be implemented by April 2027, with a plan completed by the end of the financial year, although the Children's Well-being and Schools Bill was going through parliament more slowly than had been expected.
  • Next steps included talking to HR partners and the unions to ensure that staff were well briefed on any changes, and engaging with staff and partners to ensure that the reforms were right for children and families in Kirklees, and would make a positive difference.
  • The reforms would be used as an opportunity to make changes to the things that could be improved, while building on current strengths.

 

In answer to questions, the Panel were advised that:

  • Partners in education, health and police had safeguarding as part of a wide variety of other responsibilities, but Kirklees was fortunate to have wide representation on its subgroups and buy-in at senior leadership level.
  • Tom Brailsford and his peers in health and police attended all the engagement events and were well aware of the changes.
  • The subgroups had the right level of expertise to help guide the reforms.
  • Police and health colleagues had met counterparts in the pilot areas to find out how well the reforms worked from a police/health perspective.
  • Barriers to communication included the difficulty of schools and the authority having different systems to record safeguarding concerns. Education representation was needed in those teams who could navigate both systems.
  • Where a child had a social worker, and a designated safeguarding lead in education had concerns but could not immediately speak to the social worker because they were unavailable, improvements could be made so that those urgent conversations could take place more effectively.
  • Libraries and other council spaces were being considered as spaces alternative to schools where family group decision-making meetings could take place.
  • The local population needs assessment would build up a big picture on a ward by ward level to get the right services and support in the right places, using data that agencies already had.

 

RESOLVED –

That the report be noted and Robert Fordyce be thanked for his contributions.