Cabinet Member: Councillor Dilwyn Morgan
To receive a report on the above.
Minutes:
Submitted - the
report of the Children and Young People Cabinet Member regarding the above and
he took advantage of the opportunity to thank the Chairman and the Committee
for their interest in the Service and for its support.
The report
outlined the background, number of looked after children, comparison with other
Counties, Court cases and information regarding the Edge of Care Team. He noted
that the number of looked after children was increasing; however, he hastened
to add that this was a national pattern. It was noted that the Nuffield Charity
was currently carrying out a valuable review to look into care orders and
hopefully, feedback would be received from that review soon. Reference was made
to the comparison graphs within the reports and although progress can be seen
in the total number of looked after children this year, it was noted that there
were positive messages in the content of the report as well.
Members were given
an opportunity to scrutinise the contents of the report and they highlighted
the following points:
(a)
From looking at the graph on page 17 of the report,
concern was expressed that the figure of looked after children for Gwynedd
appeared high compared to other Counties and they asked what could be done to
reduce it. Is there a geographical pattern to figures within Gwynedd?
In response, it
was noted that gradually over time the figure had increased to 227 in March and
to 230 in January. It was difficult for the Service to anticipate how many
referrals are received and that decisions must be made in line with the
thresholds. The Edge of Care Team was established in an attempt to keep numbers
down and success had been seen in changing the pattern by returning children
home where it was safe to do so. It was also emphasised that comprehensive
information had not been received from other counties, but it appeared that an
increase had been seen in every authority in the last year and consideration
also had to be given to the nature of the population of the counties.
Consideration had
to be given to the fact that the Service acted to safeguard children and in the
most appropriate way. Whilst acknowledging that numbers appeared high, the
profile of looked after children was a factor to consider and whether the
Service acted to safeguard children in the most appropriate way. It was
acknowledged that an increase had been seen in the referrals received; however,
the density and complexity of cases had to be borne in mind and the Committee
was reassured that the Service responded promptly, in a timely way and took
steps to safeguard in all cases. It was added that the Service identifies risks
and responds to them by putting appropriate plans in place to safeguard
children.
In terms of
geographical pattern, it was noted that numbers vary across the County.
(b)
How successful were looked after children
educationally, and was the fact that they moved from location to location a
factor that contributed towards this?
It was noted, in
general, that educational results on GCSE level and A level were amongst the
best in Wales due to the support received. Whilst accepting at times that
children had to move from one place to another, it was ensured that this was
not a concern to the Service and that the measure was 3 placements or more in
terms of offering stability. Efforts
were made to keep children within a school catchment area but sometimes, it was
noted that this was not possible due to safety reasons and the children's
welfare had to be considered. It was confirmed that every effort was made to
keep them in their schools but at times this was difficult to avoid due to the
failure to have a practical placement. In addition, when considering the safety
of a child, consideration was given to the extended family / friends that
looked after them and sometimes this was a considerable distance from their
school but the child was kept within the family.
(c)
For how long was the
Edge of Care Team support provided?
It was noted that
a specific timetable had not been determined and an example was provided where
the Team had worked with the family for 18 months.
(ch) How many
children had been placed outside Wales?
It was noted that
children were placed in nearby counties such as Anglesey, Conwy and often,
these placements were closer to the child's home. The majority of the children
placed outside Wales were in specialist residential units due to the nature and
density of their needs and the need for specialist therapy.
(d)
In terms of the Edge
of Care Team's work, it was felt from the content of the report that it was
difficult for the Committee to scrutinise and measure the success of the
Service.
Whilst accepting
the observation, the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People noted that
the Service had attached a case study to the report as an example of the work
done by the Edge of Care Team but in future, it was suggested that it would be
beneficial for the Scrutiny Committee to receive specialist presentations on
the work of the Edge of Care Team.
Statistics were
elaborated upon, and up to last April, the Edge of Care Team had worked with
approximately 166 children with 66% showing progress, and of those, 63% of the
children continued to live at home. There were different aspects of success and
certainly, more information could be submitted in the future.
In addition, it
was noted that the Service gathered the views of families and children
regarding the support and that this contributed towards measuring the success
of any Team.
(dd) Considering
the figures in table 6 of the report, it appeared that Gwynedd had seen the
greatest increase, and Denbighshire had reduced. Therefore, were different
arrangements in place in Gwynedd compared with other authorities?
It was noted that
the above observation was difficult to answer, but in terms of Gwynedd, it was
seen that complexities were becoming more intense; however, the Head of Service
was completely confident that they were responding in a timely way.
Instructions and grants had been received from Government to develop Edge of
Care Teams and advantages had been seen from having an Edge of Care Team for
three years now, e.g. issues identified earlier. It was difficult to compare
with other counties unless a survey was carried out on their arrangements;
however, it was noted that every authority complied with national guidelines
for safeguarding children, along with court processes. The Head of Service gave assurance that she
was not overly-concerned about the figures as she knew that every child
received the necessary service.
(e)
Was it possible that the increase showed success
and/or failures? Were examples of good practice shared between
authorities?
The Head of
Service noted that she did not consider the figures a failure as she provided
assurance that the Service responded to children's needs and did not disregard
what constituted a risk. In terms of sharing good practice, she provided
assurance that this happened regularly at meetings held between the Heads of
Children Services across the north. In
addition, national work was taking place through the Ministerial Advisory Group
and the Head of Service served as the representative of North Wales Heads of
Service on this group. It was considering four work streams and one of those
was the reasons why an increase had been seen in numbers. Also, it was noted
that currently, six authorities had been selected by Care Inspectorate Wales to
be a part of an inspection process.
This would result in a report for each county and one composite national
report that would make recommendations on the way forward. Therefore, assurance
was provided that developmental work was progressing regionally, sub-regionally
and nationally.
(f)
In terms of the
length of time that children were the subject of a Care Order, it was explained
that this varied, however, the placements would be scrutinised every two
months. A piece of work would be completed with the Edge of Care Team and the
Service would scrutinise within the teams' work processes.
(ff) How much
support did a child receive in Court cases and what were the arrangements in
terms of confidentiality?
It was explained
that every child was open to a Social Worker and thorough work was done with
the child. In addition, it was noted that a child had a guardian, namely an
independent person who worked for the Court on behalf of the child. The guardian would remain with the child until
the decision regarding the order would be made. In terms of children over 8
years of age, they were offered an advocacy service from independent advocates
who worked for a national organisation.
In terms of
confidentiality, assurance was given that arrangements were very robust. As a
Head of Service, she stated that she knew every one of the looked after
children. In addition, arrangements were in place where Senior Managers
supervised, placement scrutiny panels were held and a different cohort of
children were considered at every meeting. The Head of Service acted on the
authority's behalf as Agency Decision Maker and made final decisions on
adoption matters, medical treatment, holidays, fostering, etc.
(g)
At grass roots level, how much good service did the
child receive? Did the figures include children with disabilities? What were the children's ages?
It was confirmed
that no disabled child was in a residential placement; five were in a fostering
placement due to safeguarding factors. It was added that the profile in terms
of young people had changed due to the support in the provision that supported
families at home and there was an opportunity for families to receive respite
in Hafan y Sêr.
In terms of the
children's ages, it was noted that the figures included children up to 18 years
old, and then arrangements were in place for individuals aged between 18 and 25
years. Of the 220, it was noted that there was a pattern with the majority of
the children at a very young age under 5, and the rest were relatively
dispersed across the age-range, however, she promised to send the figure
profile to Councillor Elin Walker Jones in line with her wish.
(h)
What steps are taken to ensure the safety of the
children who are at risk, and what is the reason for the high cost of a
residential placement outside Gwynedd?
It was explained,
in some circumstances, that the looked after children with their parents were
the riskier cases, however, assurance was given that the cases were regularly
scrutinised. She added that the responsibilities were exactly the same with an
access to a Social Worker, and statutory reviews were also carried out.
It was explained
that the specialist residential placements for young people with profound needs
were expensive and that such a provision was not available in north Wales. However, it was noted that regional work was
progressing to see whether it was possible to obtain such a provision. It was
noted that the costs were high due to staffing and the placements could
essentially name their price as there was so much demand for a specific
provision.
(i)
What arrangements were available for foster /
adoptive parents to support them, in particular with young people suffering
from emotional problems?
It was explained
that the adoption system was a regional service and thorough work was carried
out in terms of assessments, identifying a plan for the child.
It was explained
that the following was done:
·
Providing training
·
Purchasing specialist programmes from other
organisations
·
Workforce training
·
Strengthening skills
(j)
How many open cases do Social Workers have
allocated to them at any given time?
How was staff morale?
It was noted that
Social Workers had no more than 22 cases at any given time which was
comparatively low compared with some nearby counties.
The Cabinet Member
for Children and Young People explained that the staff's morale was incredibly
high considering that they were under pressure and had to deal with providing
complex reports. To prove this, he noted that staff turnover was virtually nil
with everyone staying to work in Gwynedd. From his experience of going around
the teams with the Head of Service, he had seen exceptionally committed teams.
(k)
What support was provided to families when
shortcomings were identified?
It was explained
that efforts were made to collaborate with the parents who were waiting for a
service, but at times it was difficult to have urgent referrals due to
pressures in the CAMHS service.
(l)
For information, it was noted that a measure,
namely 28 days, had to be followed in relation to a mental health
assessment.
(m)
Members were reminded of their responsibility as
corporate parents and they were encouraged to attend the training.
Resolved: To accept, note and give thanks for the
report and positive responses as noted above.
Supporting documents: