Agenda item

The report presented to the Panel consisted of 3 elements:

·  The Business Plan

·  The foundations being put in place for improved performance

·  Areas for further action to bolster safeguarding

The last report received by the Panel had followed the Ofsted report, which outlined several key criticisms of the Safeguarding Board (SLSCB). The new Chair (Nick Georgiou) had taken post in September 2016, and was charged with operating the Business Plan. This had 6 themes, based on the shortcomings highlighted by Ofsted, and the Chair was happy to report that it contained several positive quotes taken from the November 2016 Ofsted monitoring visit. All themes had seen progress, which was presented to the Panel in Appendix A.

In order to ensure future improvements, SLSCB’s meeting on 16^th March 2017 would focus on the Business Plan. Other efforts made to build solid foundations for the future included appointing the new Chair; given his role as Chair of the Adult Safeguarding Board, he a) had a knowledge of the local area and b) could ensure co-ordination between the bodies. The reporting line between SBC and the SLSCB Chair would also be re-established, with the Interim Chief Executive, Director of Children’s Services and the responsible Commissioner all involved in co-ordinating the transfer of responsibility from SCST. The Chair was a member of the Joint Improvement Board. Finally, the refresh of SLSCB sub-groups had also aligned their work with the Board’s priorities, and each sub-group had terms of reference, a work programme and a Chair from the membership of SLSCB.

(At this point, Cllr Chahal joined the meeting).

The Chair of SLSCB was also a member of the Safer Slough Partnership. All these developments had assisted with the coherence of safeguarding in Slough and partnership working. However, the SLSCB and its adult counterpart were not planning to merge in the foreseeable future; the focus would remain on improving the current bodies.

Future concerns remained over some issues. Funding was drawn from SCST, SBC, Thames Valley Police and the Probation Service; however, the figures involved were limited. Relevant staff would also require more specific learning and development on the policy area; at present, SLSCB was reliant on good will from its partners, but this may not be sustainable. Furthermore, SLSCB’s profile needed to be raised. Lay membership still required recruitment, whilst the Board would need to be ready for Ofsted inspection at any time over the next 18 months.

The Panel raised the following points in discussion:

·  The sub-groups had a very high level of engagement from members, and the membership was also appropriate. There are concerns about the progress with the Education subgroup, and following discussion with the DCS input to the group will be increased.

·  The Chair’s performance management will be undertaken by SBC as responsibility is transferred back to SBC. The minutes of the 1^st such meeting had been kept; however, conversations with the Secretary of State and SBC Commissioner on the matter were not recorded.

Resolved:   That the Panel receive an update on this once the transfer of responsibility for SLSCB to SBC had been completed.