Agenda and minutes
PDF 64 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions
Contact: Damian Markland or Andrew Spragg ,
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Minutes: Apologies were received from Liz Bowes, Marisa Heath, Mary Reynolds, Christopher Townsend and Cecile White. Simon Parr acted as a substitute for Mary Reynolds. |
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING: 19 September 2013
To agree the minutes as a true record of the meeting. Minutes: The minutes were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
Notes: · In line with the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, declarations may relate to the interest of the member, or the member’s spouse or civil partner, or a person with whom the member is living as husband or wife, or a person with whom the member is living as if they were civil partners and the member is aware they have the interest. · Members need only disclose interests not currently listed on the Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests. · Members must notify the Monitoring Officer of any interests disclosed at the meeting so they may be added to the Register. · Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest. Minutes: There were no declarations of interest. However, Robert Evans and Stella Lallement requested that it be noted in the minutes that they are both employed part-time as teachers in Surrey. |
|
|
QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS
To receive any questions or petitions.
Notes: 1. The deadline for Member’s questions is 12.00pm four working days before the meeting (22 November 2013). 2. The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (21 November 2013). 3. The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received. Minutes: There were no questions or petitions. |
|
|
RESPONSES FROM THE CABINET TO ISSUES REFERRED BY THE SELECT COMMITTEE
Recommendations were made to Cabinet regarding increasing the employability of young people in Surrey, following a meeting of the Children & Education Select Committee on 31 July 2013. A response was given at the Cabinet meeting on 24 September 2013. Minutes: The Committee was asked to note the response from Cabinet to the Select Committee’s recommendation concerning the employability of Young People in Surrey. There were no further comments. |
|
|
CHAIRMAN'S INTRODUCTION
Purpose of the report:
This report provides the Committee with an introduction to substantial items on this agenda, which all relate to the theme of Safeguarding. Minutes: The Chairman gave a brief outline of the meeting’s structure and theme as outlined in the agenda. It was highlighted that the Communities Select Committee had scrutinised the Domestic Abuse Strategy 2013-18 on 31 October 2013. |
|
|
SURREY SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN BOARD (SSCB) ANNUAL REPORT 2012-2013
Purpose of the report: Scrutiny of Services and Budgets
The purpose of this session will be to consider and review how all partners within Surrey worked together to fulfil their statutory duties for the period April 2012 to March 2013, whilst providing context for the following sessions. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: Alex Walters (Chair of the Surrey Safeguarding Children Board) Julian Gordon-Walker (Head of Safeguarding) Caroline Budden (Deputy Director for Children, Schools and Families)
Clare Curran (Cabinet Associate for Children, Schools and Families) Mary Angell (Cabinet Member for Children and Families) Linda Kemeny (Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning)
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Chair of the Surrey Safeguarding Children Board outlined the Safeguarding Annual Report. The Committee was informed that the Surrey Safeguarding Children Board was a statutory body comprised of the partners involved in children’s safeguarding, and that it was not responsible for the delivery of services. The Board was able to request, inform and make representations but held no powers to direct partners.
2. The Committee queried whether the funding for the Board was adequate for its purpose. It was commented that funding was contributed by all partners through a locally-defined arrangement, as there was no prescribed national model. The Committee was informed that there would be a requirement to consider a greater contribution from partners in the next financial year. However, it was also highlighted that this would be the first time it had been adjusted in three years.
3. The Committee asked whether any trends could be identified in the 20% increase in birth rates cited within the report. It was stated that this might require some investigation, and that the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment would be a suitable mechanism to make this analysis. It was commented that a wide range of factors dictated service demand, and that an increase in birth rates did not always naturally lead to an increase.
4. The Committee discussed the role of the Domestic Abuse Strategy in identifying areas of need in relation to training. It was commented that the strategy would enable partners to work closer together in tackling issues around domestic violence, and that this was a key priority for 2013/14.
5. The Committee expressed concern at the low attendance of GPs at Initial Child Protection Conferences (ICPCs). It was clarified that the figures reported in Item 8 were inaccurate, and that GPs provided reports to 20% of Child Protection Conferences (CPCs). However, it was recognised that this was an area of significant concern for all partners. It was outlined by officers that there was work being undertaken with the Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) to develop a strategy to improve attendance and reporting to CPCs and ICPCs. It was highlighted that the GP report format was being re-designed in order to improve the process. It was confirmed that the Health & Wellbeing Board would be receiving the Safeguarding Children Annual Report on 12 December 2013.
6. The Committee discussed the potential gaps in supporting young people at risk. It was outlined that the early help agenda was intended to support families through universal services, and to reduce the risk of them meeting a threshold whereby there would be safeguarding concerns. It was highlighted that Early Help assessments were a means by ... view the full minutes text for item 27/13 |
|
|
SURREY COUNTY COUNCIL'S SAFEGUARDING ROLE
The purpose of this session is to consider the County Council’s Safeguarding role. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: Julian Gordon-Walker (Head of Safeguarding) Caroline Budden (Deputy Director for Children, Schools and Families)
Clare Curran (Cabinet Associate for Children, Schools and Families) Mary Angell (Cabinet Member for Children and Families) Linda Kemeny (Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning)
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee was given a brief outline of the statutory role of the Cabinet Member for Children and Families, and the function of the Safeguarding Unit in scrutinising Child Protection Plans. Officers commented that the involvement of fathers in the Child Protection process had shown improvement, according to an Ofsted thematic inspection undertaken in June 2013.
2. The Committee queried what arrangements were put in place to ensure that young people’s views were adequately represented in the Child Protection process. It was outlined that the Safeguarding Unit had involved the Children Care Council. A review had recently been conducted on how Children’s Services gathered the views of children and it was recognised by social workers that there was a need to present these at Child Protection Conferences (CPCs). It was also highlighted by officers that young people would be encouraged to attend CPCs where this was considered appropriate.
3. The Committee queried what links Children’s Services made with the Voluntary, Community and Faith Sector (VCFS) in respect to safeguarding. It was commented by officers that much of the partnership work was defined within the Early Help strategy, and that the Safeguarding Children Board had highlighted the importance of the VCFS in ensuring children were safeguarded against harm.
4. The Committee discussed the implications of the Family Justice Review, and questioned whether the expertise and capacity existed within Children’s Services to meet the increased emphasis on presenting evidence to court. It was commented by Members that there was a perceived reliance on expert witnesses in such instances. Officers expressed the view that the need was to encourage social workers to have a greater confidence in the evidence they were required to provide, as well as a consideration of how it was being presented in court. It was recognised that training new staff presented an opportunity to build up wider knowledge and expertise. The Committee was informed that the Family Justice Review marked a culture shift in how assessments were to be conducted, with an earlier emphasis on what factors impacted on a child’s wellbeing.
5. The Committee asked what measures the Safeguarding Unit had undertaken to address the poor attendance of GPs at CPCs. Officers confirmed that they were meeting with the Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) to identify actions to improve attendance. It was highlighted that Initial Child Protection Conferences (ICPCs) were subject to statutory timescales that sometimes meant it was not possible for GPs to attend, but that reports should still be sought in such instances. The Committee queried whether CPCs could be held at GP surgeries to enable GPs to attend. It was clarified that this could be explored by officers, but that they were not always considered ... view the full minutes text for item 28/13 |
|
|
SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN IN SCHOOLS
Purpose of the report: Scrutiny of Services and Budgets
This report will explain the processes and procedures used to safeguard children in Surrey schools. Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses:
Liz Griffiths (Senior Consultant, Babcock 4S) Ian McGraw (Education Safeguarding Advisor, Surrey County Council) Caroline Budden (Deputy Director for Children, Schools and Families)
Clare Curran (Cabinet Associate for Children, Schools and Families) Mary Angell (Cabinet Member for Children and Families) Linda Kemeny (Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning)
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee was provided with a brief outline of the role Babcock 4S played in delivering safeguarding training and quality assurance measures to schools within Surrey. Officers confirmed that Surrey County Council conducted regular monitoring visits where there were specific safeguarding concerns. The local authority also provided advice to all schools, it was highlighted that this included any free schools or academies within the county.
2. The Committee questioned whether experienced staff were required to regularly update their safeguarding training. It was confirmed that all Child Protection Liaison Officers (CPLOs) were required to repeat their Child Protection training every three years, with a further recommendation from Babcock 4S that this should be refreshed every year. It was explained that it was the responsibility of individual school leadership teams to decide whether to set the refresh on an annual basis. The Committee was informed that the CPLOs regularly met to share key topics and would cascade this information to school staff where appropriate.
3. The Committee had a discussion around the national media stories that had recently increased awareness of the risks around safeguarding within institutional environments. Officers commented that there needed to be recognition that it would be impossible to eradicate institutional abuse entirely. However, it was recognised that it was possible to significantly mitigate the risks through creating an environment where professionals and stakeholders were confident in coming forward if they had safeguarding concerns.
4. The Committee discussed whether there were sufficient measures in place to prevent potential allegations being mismanaged within the school environment, particularly within non-maintained Surrey schools. The importance of clear governance and accountability was highlighted in relation to safeguarding. The view was expressed that the role of school governors was vital in relation to ensuring safeguarding remained a priority in individual schools.
5. The Committee challenged the value of safeguarding training delivered as e-learning packages. It was confirmed by officers that neither Babcock 4s nor Surrey County Council would recommend e-learning as the primary way of delivering safeguarding training.
6. The view was expressed by witnesses that the biggest challenge facing Surrey schools was ensuring that young people were supported adequately before they met the threshold for a child protection intervention by Children’s Services. Officers commented that the Early Help strategy was intended to put sufficient preventative measures in place to ensure that the needs of vulnerable children were being met. It was highlighted that Children’s Services was working to develop the relationship with Surrey schools, this included giving trainee social workers the opportunity to spend time in schools. It was commented that the size of Surrey presented a barrier to developing a holistic approach ... view the full minutes text for item 29/13 |
|
|
SURREY CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUPS - SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN
Purpose of the report: Scrutiny of Services
The purpose of this session will be to consider safeguarding arrangements within Surrey’s Health Service.
Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: Amanda Boodhoo, Designated Safeguarding Nurse Dr Tara Jones, Surrey Named GP Caroline Budden, Deputy Director for Children, Schools and Families
Clare Curran, Cabinet Associate for Children, Schools and Families Michael Gosling, Cabinet Member for Public Health and Health & Wellbeing Board
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee queried what work was being undertaken by the Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) to address the low attendance of GPs at Child Protection Conferences. Witnesses informed the Committee that they were working closely with Surrey officers to identify actions to improve attendance. It was highlighted that Initial Child Protection Conferences were particularly problematic as they were bound by statutory timescales. However, a specific pro-forma had been devised to ensure that health reports were being considered at conferences even when a GP was unable to attend. The Committee was informed that the requirement to provide adequate reports was being embedded in the safeguarding training.
2. The Committee was informed that the National College of GPs had made a recommendation that every practice had a named GP to lead on children’s safeguarding. It was also commented that level 3 safeguarding children training was being extended to all GPs in Surrey in line with recommendations from the National College.
3. The Cabinet Member outlined that the Health & Wellbeing strategy had set out to ensure better integration between health and social care services in Surrey, in order to ensure the best outcome for children and families. It was highlighted that safeguarding was a key priority for the Health & Wellbeing Board and it worked to ensure that the CCGs also reflected this. The Committee was informed that the Cabinet Member for Children & Families also sat on the Health & Wellbeing Board.
Recommendations:
a) The Committee notes that currently GPs attend only 2% of Initial Child Protection Conferences (ICPCs) and provide reports in 20% of the cases, and requests that Guildford & Waverley CCG's Director of Quality and Safeguarding and Clinical Lead for Children consider, without delay, measures to ensure GPs increased attendance and reporting to ICPCs.
Action by: Guildford & Waverley CCG's Director of Quality and Safeguarding/ Clinical Lead for Children
b) That the Committee re-examine the matter in 6 months time to assess progress.
Action by: Democratic Services
Actions/further information to be provided:
None.
Committee Next Steps:
None.
|
|
|
RECOMMENDATION TRACKER AND FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME
The Committee is asked to monitor progress on the implementation of recommendations from previous meetings, and to review its Forward Work Programme. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: None.
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee noted its Recommendation Tracker and Forward Work Programme. There were no further comments.
Recommendations:
None.
Actions/further information to be provided:
None.
Committee Next Steps:
The Committee will continue to review its Recommendation Tracker and Forward Work Programme at every meeting.
|
|
Purpose of the report: To recommend that the Children & Education Select Committee commissions a Member Reference Group to consider the Skills for the Future strand of the Public Service Transformation Programme, particularly proposals around future provision of Information, Advice and Guidance. Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: None.
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee agreed to set up the Member Reference Group as outlined in the report. The following Members volunteered to join the Member Reference Group: Denis Fuller and Zully Grant-Duff
Resolved:
· That the Committee establish a Member Reference Group of up to 4 Members to input into the development of the Skills for the Future strand of the Public Service Transformation Programme.
Actions/further information to be provided:
None.
Committee Next Steps:
None.
|
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Committee will be held at 10.30am on 27 January 2014. Minutes: The Committee noted its next meeting would be held on 27 January 2014 at 10am. |