Agenda item

The Team Around You (TAY) project had reported to the Panel in January 2015, and was presenting the outcomes of the completed pilot. Care leavers had been the focus, with improved educational or employment opportunities the desired outcome; this had emerged from the Ofsted inspection mentioned earlier in the meeting.

TAY had held 51 meetings by 1^st October 2015, addressing issues regarding 19 Young People. Of these cases, 8 had seen their programmes completed, but 7 had seen little progress. The focus was on getting care leavers and vulnerable young teenagers to complete their plans, with TAY having strengthened engagement and involvement in council departments in achieving outcomes for care leavers. As a result, it had been recommended that TAY should be adopted within care arrangements.

The most frequent issues encountered had been supported accommodation and access to therapy. In this regard, access to Children’s and Adolescents‘ Mental Health Services had been difficult, whilst other barriers which had often been faced included child sexual exploitation, domestic abuse and anti-social behaviour.

The full scope of the initial project design had not been included in the eventual programme. Instead, the concentration had been on the participation of SBC departments in solving problems and ensuring that the care plans for children had progressed. Any future review should include therapeutic and mental health provision and supported housing needs.

The Panel raised the following matters in discussion:

·  Engagement with SBC departments and sharing responsibility was crucial in securing better outcomes. The team of facilitators from outside Children’s Services had been an innovation of TAY and led to a new approach to problem solving. This had also allowed departments to challenge each other effectively and adopt new ways of working. Engagement with SBC would be a vital new issue for the Children’s Services Trust to resolve, and protocols were being developed on this matter.

·  Mental and emotional health had been an issue in almost all of the 19 cases handled by TAY. The availability of specialist provision had been limited; private care was always considered if relevant, but costs also had to be taken into account.

·  The TAY pilot would be reported to the Children’s Services Trust, and supported as a means of supporting care leavers.

·  Issues such as ‘honour’ based violence and female genital mutilation had not been included in the definition of child sexual exploitation.

·  Whilst the pilot had been short, the stability it had created in successful cases had improved basic issues such as transport to school and the permanence of placements. By resolving such relatively simple matters, deeper matters could start to be addressed.

·  Housing for children in care had not been included in TAY. However, all young people had contact with the Housing Team. Whilst specialist cases may lie outside of SBC’s present capabilities, Housing and Commissioners were working to assist in these instances.

·  The health care needs of those who were part of the TAY pilot had not been broken down and analysed given the time constraints and the work such research would require.

Resolved – That the report be noted.