Agenda item

The 3^rd Monitoring Visit took place in mid-June 2017, and had identified some improvements in the provision made by Slough Children’s Services Trust (SCST). The cases examined by the Ofsted team had not identified any children who could be classified as ‘at risk’, whilst the appointment of a Senior Leadership Team who were all permanent staff had created a more stable environment.

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

There had also been evidence that the ‘Signs of Safety’ methodology was delivering benefits. However, it was recognised that the hub model of social work delivery and the related weekly conversations required more managerial oversight. Whilst SCST’s actions were improving, the recording of this information still needed to improve. In addition, SCST was investigating its use of Public Law Outline and whether this should be increased. The working relationship between SBC and SCST was also noted as a positive.

The Panel raised the following points in discussion:

·  Since the letter had been published, SCST had focused on its use of Public Law Outline and making managerial oversight more robust. As part of this, a manager had recently been appointed and was conducting masterclasses (with a particular focus on planning to ensure children were placed in permanent care settings). The culture of management was also changing to ensure closer working with families where appropriate.

·  The Director of Children’s Services from Essex County Council would be visiting SCST in October 2017 to investigate the use of Public Law Outline and offer challenge on SCST’s approach. The individual concerned had been selected as they were seen as a national leader in the area.

·  External training was being provided by two trainers on private fostering as well as other areas.

·  At present, some conversations were not being recorded in sufficient depth. However, audits had noted that record keeping was improving; SCST’s first file check had highlighted that 50% of case files were inadequate, a figure that now stood at 18.8% (with 3 files rated as ‘outstanding’). To continue this trend, SCST were encouraging social workers to describe the more abstract elements of children’s experiences.

·  Members would be discussing the 4^th Monitoring Visit on 7^th December 2017. This would be with a view to having improvements which could be proved with evidence, rather than assurances from management.

·  The main challenge remaining from staff inherited by SCST was confidence. This manifested itself from an unwillingness to challenge the views of others involved in the process. Training would be central to improving this; however, the number of issues relating to capability had reduced significantly.

·  The team was also expanding the disciplines covered by its staff (e.g. speech / language therapy).

·  Early Intervention Hubs involved family support workers as well as social workers. These had been a significant focus for improvement efforts, and were aimed at children who were close to being taken into care. Events such as family group conferences were organised to intercept cases before they deteriorated and offer appropriate support.

·  Re-referral rates were not currently an issue. However, the reasons for the  ending of child protection plans needed to be clearly documented.

·  Upon taking over the service, SCST had placed 100 children on protection plans in the first 6 months as the numbers of plans had fallen significantly prior to the Trust going live. However, the number of plans had risen as SCST appraised new cases. SCST was confident that it could justify why any individual in its care was on a plan. Given that Ofsted had not identified any children not on a plan as ‘at risk’, this suggested that decision making was of a good standard.

·  In cases where modern slavery may be an issue, SCST was obliged to investigate the matter. This was a labour intensive responsibility.

Resolved:  That an item on the 4^th Monitoring Visit be added to the agenda for 7^th December 2017.