Agenda item

CORPORATE PARENTING ANNUAL REPORT

Purpose of report:

 

To provide an overview of the service provided to looked after children and care leavers. To include the support and challenge provided by the Corporate Parenting Board and a summary of the data in key areas as compared with national data for the year ending March 2020.

Minutes:

Witnesses:

 

Mary Lewis, Cabinet Member for Children, Young People and Families

 

Tina Benjamin, Director – Corporate Parenting 

 

 

Key points raised during the discussion:

 

1.    The Director – Corporate Parenting presented local and national key performance data, for the year ending March 2020, relating to children who had been looked after for 12 months or more. The Cabinet Member reminded the Committee that this was an Annual Report that needed to compare with other Local Authorities and more up to data was available and provided. For example, the Corporate Parenting Board (CPB) received and reviewed up-to-date performance data every six weeks, whilst the Chairman and Vice-Chairmen of the Select Committee received the performance compendium every month and met with officers four times a year to discuss service performance.

 

2.    The Cabinet Member stated that during the COVID-19 pandemic, Corporate Parenting was more outward facing to partners and endeavoured to improve joint working. The Cabinet Member thanked officers for their dedication over the past year and the Director added that she was proud of the way that staff had worked throughout the pandemic.

 

3.    The Director summarised the data on the rate of Children in Care. There was a small increase in the number of Children in Care in Surrey between 2019 and 2020, which reflected the national trend. The rate of Children in Care per 10,000 0-17-year olds in Surrey (37/10000) was considered low and did not change between 2019 and 2020. Due to Department for Education reporting timescales, the data presented included only the first two weeks of the pandemic; thus, the impact of COVID-19 was not evident therein. The Director expected significant changes to be highlighted in the 2021 annual report.

 

4.    The percentage of Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children (UASC) decreased (by 5.3%) between 2019 and 2020 which, again, reflected national decreases.

 

5.    As of 31 March 2020, the majority of Children in Care in Surrey were placed with Foster Carers (70% as of March 2020). From 2019-2020, those placed in Children’s Homes increased by 3% (to 21%) whilst those in Adoptive Placements decreased (from 31 children to 28). The Director stated the importance of having a care plan in place for all Children in Care. There had been a greater decrease in the number Children in Care placed in adoption in Surrey than nationally.

 

6.    Placing children in county or within 20 miles of their home was a priority for the Service that presented significant challenges. It was important that children stayed close to their friends and families and attended Surrey schools. It was important to report both of the measures - children placed within Surrey, and children placed within 20 miles - because a child placed, for example, two miles into Hampshire could still attend a Surrey school and remain in contact with their support network. The proportion of children placed within 20 miles of their home increased between 2019 and 2020 (51% to 53%). The proportion of children placed within Surrey increased (from 48% to 51%) between 2019 and 2020.

 

7.    Surrey typically performed well in terms of dental checks and Review Health Assessments for Children in Care. Dental checks were an issue during the pandemic due to practices closing or operating reduced services. However, between 2019 and 2020, there had been an increase (91%-92%) for Children Looked After for 12 or more months. The proportion of Review Health Assessments completed for Children in Care also increased between 2019 and 2020 (90% - 91%).

 

8.    A Member asked for a description of the actual and anticipated impacts of Covid-19 on the Corporate Parenting Service and children and young people. The Director responded that key issues would be related to children’s placements. Placement of a child and the relationship formed with their foster carers was intrinsic to development and outcomes. Recruitment of foster carers was challenging during the pandemic, nevertheless a net increase was still achieved and there was a robust recruitment plan in place. A number of foster carers were unable to care for additional children during the pandemic due to shielding, illness and other issues related to COVID-19, but children’s homes remained open and had accepted some new children. Government guidance stated that care leavers should not be moved on during the pandemic, thus there were some 18-year olds still residing in children’s homes. Overall, placements had been difficult so it was unlikely that there would be an improvement in performance data in the next annual report, particularly for children placed within 20 miles of their home. The next iteration of data would also reflect the difficulties with arranging dental care for Children in Care during the pandemic and the Cabinet Member had raised this as a national issue. The Service had performed well, nationally, as regards the attendance of Children in Care at school during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there were a number of Children in Care who had missed significant periods of school due to the clinical vulnerability of themselves or their foster carers.

 

9.    The Cabinet Member, who was Chairman of the Corporate Parenting Board, informed Members that the Board met with children and young people via Zoom prior to every Board meeting to ensure that the voices of young people were heard and considered within the discussion at meetings. The Cabinet Member thanked the Director – Corporate Parenting for advocating vaccination prioritisation for Foster Carers.

 

10.  A Member asked what Board Members had learned about Corporate Parenting and its service users over the past year. The Cabinet Member responded that the Board learned that it was important to focus on individual children and individual experiences rather than seeing children as a homogenous cohort. The Board also learnt that more buy-in across the council and partnerships in Surrey was needed to ensure that the county was a welcoming place for all Children in Care and Care Leavers. It was also important to make continual representations to secure care leaver council tax exemptions and prioritise Children in Care with dental care after lockdown. The Cabinet Member stated the importance of acting as a voice for children and her endeavour to improve how the CPB challenged others to do better for Children in Care and Care Leavers.

 

11.  The Corporate Parenting Annual Report described changes to how services were delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic and Members asked whether any of the adapted ways of working would be beneficial for the Service to continue with after the pandemic. Legislation enacted following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic enabled flexibility to deliver services differently during lockdowns –  for example,  statutorily required  periodic visits to looked-after children could be undertaken virtually during lockdown. Children were RAG (Red/Amber/Green) rated and the Service prioritised face-to-face visits for children who were of highest concern. Some children enjoyed the virtual meetings and novel social media-based contact with social workers, which had increased contact. The Director believed that these virtual meetings should be continued post COVID-19; however, it would be important to identify for which children and types of meetings it would be appropriate to do so, and which circumstances required that meetings be carried out face-to-face. Thus, it was important to amend individual care plans to reflect what worked for each individual child within legal boundaries.

 

12.  The Cabinet Member explained that during the pandemic there was a greater impetus to introduce the No Wrong Door (NWD) policy because it was clear that more teenagers and families were struggling. The Service secured additional funding from the capital budget to provide three new children’s residentials care homes, two of which were to house NWD hubs.

 

13.  It was noted that the primary aim of the Surrey Corporate Parenting Operational Group (CPOG) was to implement the Corporate Parenting Strategy and a Member queried how well the Strategy was embedded in the Service’s partners. The Director responded that CPOG was a well-attended group that included representatives from the police, the Designated Doctor for LAC and Designated Nurse. Addressing issues for children placed out of county was done through their six-monthly statutory reviews with an Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO). If an aspect of a child’s care plan was not being addressed, it would be escalated by an IRO through the care plan. The Virtual School had oversight of all children’s education issues and the Surrey Virtual School Headteacher was responsible for contacting their counterpart in the other Local Authority if there was an issue with a child’s plan. A summary of escalations and alerts was received at each meeting of the Corporate Parenting Board, and Members would check that they were appropriately resolved within the correct timescales. 

 

14.  £30k remaining from Members’ Community Allocations was to be transferred to the Celebration Fund. The CPB had explored options to ensure that the funding was used to ‘enhance its support to children and young people’ and it was decided that the Board should advocate for introduction of a bike policy. Some of the money was to be used for a trial of offering bikes to children in care and care leavers, and Active Surrey donated £5k for this. Bikes were a priority for older young people, providing them with more independence and a means to travel to education or work, and an important life skill for younger children

 

15.  A Member noted the increased demand for services and asked how well prepared the Service was for further increases in demand. The Director stated that there were likely to be increased pressures the following year on the family safeguarding and assessment services due to increased referrals during the Covid-19 period. It would take time for this pressure to move from Assessment and Family Safeguarding into Looked After Teams. This anticipated shift would depend on how many children remained at home after they entered the safeguarding service and assessment service. This was a national pressure and the Director did not expect it to be resolved within the next six to nine months. The Cabinet Member stated that, in September 2021, the People, Performance and Development Committee agreed a social worker recruitment and retention package, with enhanced incentives for retention. Having a stable and permanent workforce would improve the quality of social work.

 

16.  In April 2020, the Council joined the regional adoption agency, Adoption South East, also comprising Brighton and Hove Council, East Sussex County Council, and West Sussex County Council. The shift from a local adoption agency to a regional one was undertaken to bring together best practice and experience from each of the local authorities, to make more adoptive placements available for children with placement orders, and to enable adopters, children and families to use the four Authorities’ combined service. Adoption rates were falling owing to low numbers of placement orders being made by the courts in accordance with the national drive to keep children with their families where possible. The Director agreed to provide data on adoption rates and how many placement orders were given in the year ending March 2021.

 

Actions

i.              The Director to provide data on adoption rates and the number of placement orders made in the 12-month period ending March 2021.

 

Recommendations

  1. The Select Committee notes the Corporate Parenting Annual Report.

 

  1. The Select Committee receive a report in 2022 which will include an update on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the development of both the work of the Corporate Parenting Board and the key performance data for looked after children as compared with statistical neighbours and nationally.

 

Supporting documents: