MIDDLESBROUGH COUNCIL

EXECUTIVE REPORT

Safeguarding Young People – Arrangements for Annual Reporting in line with Government Guidance

Executive Member for Children, Families and Learning: Councillor Michael Carr

Executive Director for Children, Families and Learning, Gill Rollings

22 June 2010

PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
  1. To inform Executive of developments in arrangements for safeguarding children and young people following an unprecedented increase in demand and to demonstrate the measures that have been put in place to manage the impact on services and to propose arrangements for annual reporting in line with Government guidance.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
  1. Executive is asked to:
  2. Note the additional investment made in safeguarding services and the actions taken to make more effective use of the funding available.
  3. Note the formation of the Middlesbrough Safeguarding Children Board (MSCB) with effect from April 2010;
  4. Note the outcomes of the annual rating for children’s services and the unannounced inspection of contact, assessment and referral arrangements.
  5. Endorse the strategy set out in paragraphs 63, 64 and 65.
  6. Await a report from the Chief Executive on the relationship between the Children and Young People’s Trust and MSCB, how responsibilities have been assigned within the Authority and among Trust partners and how targets for improving safeguarding and progress against them are reported to the Local Strategic Partnership.

IF THIS IS A KEY DECISION WHICH KEY DECISION TEST APPLIES?

It is over the financial threshold (£75,000)
It has a significant impact on 2 or more wards
Non Key / X

DECISION IMPLEMENTATION DEADLINE

  1. For the purposes of the scrutiny call in procedure this report is

Non-urgent / X
Urgent report

If urgent please give full reasons

BACKGROUND AND EXTERNAL CONSULTATION

  1. Safeguarding children and young people is a key responsibility for the Council and its partners and is the subject of a continuing national focus as a result of a number of high profile cases. The deaths of Victoria Climbié and Baby Peter in Haringey led to national reviews by Lord Laming with new legislation and revisions to Government guidance. This has affected arrangements for Local Safeguarding Children Boards, Children’s Trusts and the roles and responsibilities of the Director and Lead Member for Children, Families and Learning as well as the Chief Executive and the Mayor.

6.The government has now announced a further review of safeguarding arrangements to be led by Eileen Munroe and with a remit to determine what helps professionals make the best judgement they can to protect a vulnerable child. This is expected to result in reform of frontline social work practice. The review will consider early intervention, improving trust in frontline social workers and ensuring transparency and accountability.

  1. There have also been changes to inspection arrangements with Ofsted carrying out an annual rating of children’s services and an unannounced inspection of contact, assessment and referral centres in Middlesbrough over the last year.
  1. Within this changing context Middlesbrough, in common with other local authorities, has experienced unprecedented levels of demand for safeguarding services with significant resource implications for the Council and its partner organisations. The Council has addressed its responsibilities for safeguarding both through additional investment and a relentless focus on improving the processes and procedures which protect children.
  1. This report brings together the developments which have taken place over the last year in the context of the additional resources committed by the Council to safeguarding arrangements in 2010/11 within a context of reducing overall resources for Council services. It is a pre-cursor to a formal annual report on safeguarding services provided by the Council and its partners which is a requirement under revised Government guidance.

WORKLOAD PRESSURES WITHIN SAFEGUARDING

9.There are currently 71 social workers working in six Locality Teams, four Specialist Teams and the Enquiry and Assessment Team. The Locality Teams and three of the Specialist Teams work with around 2,000 children in need at any given point in time. The Enquiry and Assessment Team deals with an average of 142 referrals per month.

10.This level of activity has produced significant workload pressures for front line social workers and means that caseloads are currently considerably higher than both our internal target and a national benchmark set by Lord Laming. A range of management actions have and will continue to be made to address this and to ensure staff have capacity to address children’s needs in an appropriate manner. Senior managers from the Chief Executive downwards have made it clear that whilst budgetary considerations are important, decisions must be made in the interests of children and their families.

11.As a result, work continues to be allocated but there are a number of social workers carrying significant caseloads. The workload management scheme allocates a number of hours to a particular social work task and is measured over a 12 week period of 444 hours. The target measurement of 444 hours per caseload is currently exceeded by 28 out of 42 social workers in the Locality and Children with Disabilities Teams. This figure is based on an analysis of caseloads on the 31 March 2010.

12.Lord Laming observed that social workers should carry no more than 12 to 15 children on their caseloads. On 31 March 2010, 24 out of the 42 social workers in Middlesbrough had more than 20 children on their caseload.

13.This demonstrates that whilst every effort is made to maintain caseloads at a reasonable level the current volume of work is putting significant pressure on limited resources. To address the unprecedented levels of activity, the Council has agreed to fund an increase in the number of social workers from 71 to 77. This will reduce the caseloads carried by individuals. The Council also continues to use agency social workers to reduce the workload of permanent staff.

14.The staffing position is under constant review and will continue to be. There are a range of other changes to arrangements detailed elsewhere in this report which result from this and have impacted positively on how social workers carry out their duties. Despite the pressures being faced by staff, morale is relatively high and the demonstrable commitment of staff to children was commented on by Ofsted inspectors when they visited Middlesbrough in December 2009.

BUDGET PRESSURES IN SAFEGUARDING SERVICES

14.Middlesbrough has historically experienced relatively high levels of child protection cases and high numbers of looked after children. This is demonstrated in Tables 1 and 2 which compare Middlesbrough to the regional and national average as well as the average for similar authorities or statistical neighbours. For children subject to a child protection plan, Middlesbrough has the highest number per thousand under 18s amongst its statistical neighbour group. For children looked after, Middlesbrough was close to the average for its statistical neighbour group in previous years. In 2008/09, Middlesbrough ranked above the average for the statistical neighbours group and was 4th out of 11 authorities.

15.At the end of March 2010, there were 344 children subject to a child protection plan and 329 looked after children in Middlesbrough. This represents a significant increase against the previous year but it is known that other authorities in the North East have also experienced significant increases. Comparative figures for statistical neighbours and England are awaited.

TABLE 1

NUMBER OF CHILDREN SUBJECT TO A CHILD PROTECTION PLAN (2004/05 TO 2008/09)

Numbers
2004/05 / 2005/06 / 2006/07 / 2007/08 / 2008/09
No. / Per 10,000 under 18s / No. / Per 10,000 under 18s / No. / Per 10,000 under 18s / No. / Per 10,000 under 18s / No. / Per 10,000 under 18s
Middlesbrough / 170 / 52 / 180 / 55 / 145 / 45 / 215 / 68 / 255 / 80
Statistical Neighbour Average / 164 / 42 / 134 / 35 / 129 / 34 / 164 / 43 / 183 / 48
North East / 1,985 / 36 / 2,025 / 37 / 2,250 / 42 / 2,525 / 47 / 2,535 / 48
England / 30,700 / 28 / 31,500 / 28 / 33,300 / 30 / 34,000 / 31 / 37,900 / 34

TABLE 2

NUMBER OF LOOKED AFTER CHILDREN (2004/05 TO 2008/09)

Numbers
2004/05 / 2005/06 / 2006/07 / 2007/08 / 2008/09
No. / Per 10,000 under 18s / No. / Per 10,000 under 18s / No. / Per 10,000 under 18s / No. / Per 10,000 under 18s / No. / Per 10,000 under 18s
Middlesbrough / 240 / 72 / 240 / 74 / 245 / 77 / 270 / 85 / 275 / 87
Statistical Neighbour Average / 305 / 73 / 305 / 73 / 311 / 76 / 312 / 78 / 313 / 79
North East / 3,290 / 60 / 3,160 / 58 / 3,250 / 61 / 3,260 / 61 / 3,250 / 61
England / 61,000 / 55 / 60,300 / 55 / 60,000 / 55 / 59,400 / 54 / 60,900 / 55

16.The Association of Directors of Children’s Services has carried out a survey of authorities across the country with two thirds responding to a range of questions on safeguarding. This showed that between the end of 2007 and the end of 2009, there was a 33% increase in the number of children subject to a child protection plan, with 28 authorities experiencing an increase of more than 50%. The rise in the number of looked after children over the same period was around 8% although there was a 17% increase in those starting to be looked after.

17.In common with other local authorities, Middlesbrough has experienced unprecedented increases, over the last two years, in both the numbers of children subject to a child protection plan and the number of children looked after. This has put significant pressure on Council resources and has resulted in significant additional investment in resources for placements and staffing.

18.Investment has been essential to maintain services at a time of unprecedented demand, a number of actions have been taken to address the pressure on budgets over the last two years. The most significant areas of budgetary pressure are placements for Looked After Children; the use of agency placements has become common practice as demand for placements has increased, as has the complexity of the children who require placements. This is an area of activity that must be continuously and carefully managed and the following sets out some of the actions taken to date.

Foster Care Placements

19.The Authority places looked after children in foster care, either with ‘in-house’ foster carers or through placements with independent fostering agencies. The cost of using agency placements is significantly higher than placing children with in-house foster carers. In 2009/10, the Authority funded an ‘invest to save’ scheme which enhanced the rates paid to in-house foster carers with a view to improving recruitment and retention. This has proved successful with three additional foster carers approved and nine progressing through the necessary training and approval processes.

20.The Authority is also leading on a collaborative project with other Tees Valley Authorities within the North East Improvement and Efficiency Programme. This will focus on improving recruitment of in-house foster carers through common campaigns and processes.

21.In terms of the fees paid to independent fostering agencies, fee negotiations resulted in the majority of agencies agreeing to no annual uplift for 2009/10, providing a saving of £122,750. There was also a £906,008 saving on those placements where it had been anticipated that they would continue throughout 2009/10, but for various reasons have ceased at an early date.

22.In addition, a new age range banded payment system was agreed with the preferred provider for a new agency foster care placements made from 1 April 2009. This provided a saving of £10,715 within the 2009/10 placements budget and will show further savings in 2010/11. The contract for independent fostering has recently been retendered jointly with Stockton-on-Tees and Redcar and Cleveland Authorities to benefit from economies of scale. This will reduce costs in 2010/11 and a saving of £10,000 was made in 2009/10 as 5 providers agreed to allocate the new tender rates to current placements.

Residential Placements

23.Negotiations on fees for residential placements resulted in savings of £57,540 in 2009/10. Reviewing placements that were expected to continue through 2009/10 but ended earlier than originally planned also provided savings of more than £300,000. The cost of individual residential placements have been challenged and in 2009/10 fee reductions have been negotiated where more than one child has been placed. This produced a saving of £6,000.

24.A pilot programme operated in 2009/10 offering short stay residential accommodation to enable young people to return home after a short intensive period of intervention. This has ended due to pressure on long term placements. The contract with Five Rivers for residential care in Middlesbrough is due for renewal in five years time and work will begin shortly in considering the nature of any future contract to be tendered.

Reducing the Number of Looked After Children

25.Alongside actions to manage the placement market, five strategies have been employed to seek to reduce the overall number of Looked After Children. These have been progressed at all stages in the context of ensuring the needs of children take priority.

(i)With the appointment of new Common Assessment Framework Co-ordinator (CAF) the local CAF Panels have been reinvigorated to target vulnerable children with early intervention packages. In the medium to long term this will result in a reduction in the number of children who will be accommodated.

(ii)Family Group Conferences are an effective way of managing and enabling families to address their own problems. A Family Group Conference Convenor has been identified and new arrangements will become operational in July 2010. This will also have an impact on future numbers of children who will be accommodated.

(iii)There are currently 18 children placed at home with their parents on Care Orders. These placements are being reviewed with a view to, where appropriate, discharging the Care Orders. This strategy will reduce the number of looked after children and the associated bureaucracy for social workers.

(iv)Work is underway around 21 children who are in long term foster placements to encourage foster carers to apply for Special Guardianship Orders. Again, this would reduce the number of looked after children and the associated bureaucracy for social workers.

(v)The Primary Care Trust is funding research by Teesside University which is looking into the reasons behind the high numbers of children in Middlesbrough who are subject to a child protection plan. A report is expected in July and actions to address the issues it raises will be determined.

CONTINUING CARE

26.A number of children who are looked after require additional educational/health input to meet their specialist needs. The responsibility for meeting health needs in such circumstances rests with the Primary Care Trust (PCT). The Department of Health has recently issued guidance on meeting the health care needs of such children and is being adopted locally.

27.Negotiations between the Council and the PCT are underway in using the guidance to both assess new cases and review existing contributions. PCT contributions to the cost of placing looked after children are unusually low in Middlesbrough and this anomaly is being actively pursued by the Council. The experiences of adult social care services are being drawn as continuing care arrangements have been operating in the adult context for a number of years.

PREVENTION AND EARLY INTERVENTION

28.In the longer term, the key to reducing the number of children who require protection plans or need to become looked after will be through early intervention and prevention. The Council is actively pursuing innovative ways to work collaboratively with colleagues from agencies within the town and with communities within the town.

29.There are four main strands to prevention and early intervention. Through Sure Start there are now thirteen Children’s Centres have been established across the town focusing on very young children and their families. There are also three Family Intervention projects undertaking intensive programmes of work with targeted families, offering a range of interventions from Court Ordered programmes to self referral advice schemes, parenting schemes and one Youth Crime Family Intervention Project.

30.Each of these programmes has a remit to delivered tailored programmes. This is in addition to the universal provision within Sure Start/Children’s Centres for families who are, for example, at risk of eviction due to their anti-social behaviour and substance misuse. Further, a recent event celebrated the improvements in parenting skills which have been achieved through Sure Start.

MIDDLESBROUGH SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN BOARD

31.Working Together to Safeguard Children sets out the statutory guidance on how organisations and individuals should work together to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. It has recently been updated in the light of the Laming review carried out post Baby Peter and continues the requirement for each area to have a Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB). The core objectives of a Local Safeguarding Children Board are:

  • to co-ordinate what is done by each person or body represented on the Board for the purposes of safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children in the area of the authority; and
  • to ensure the effectiveness of what is done by each such person or body for that purpose.

32.Safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children is defined as:

  • protecting children from maltreatment;
  • preventing impairment of children’s health and development;
  • ensuring that children are growing up in circumstances consistent with the provision of safe and effective care.

33.Until 31 March 2010, Middlesbrough’s safeguarding arrangements were overseen by the South Tees LSCB which covered both Middlesbrough and Redcar and Cleveland. From 1 April 2010, Middlesbrough has its own Board, MSCB.

34.The Board has been created in recognition of both the prominence of safeguarding matters and revised statutory guidance on co-operation arrangements, including the Children’s Trust Board and links to the Children and Young People’s Plan (CYPP). This makes keeping children safe a top priority for the Children’s Trust Board and each of the Children’s Trust partners, statutory and non-statutory alike. Children’s Trust Boards must work closely with, and be clear how they relate to, the LSCB.

35.The roles of the two boards are complementary. The Children and Young People’s Trust Board is concerned with ensuring that services work in co-operation to improve children’s well-being (across the five Every Child Matters (ECM) outcomes) and MSCB ensures the effectiveness of the arrangements made by individual agencies and the wider partnership to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. Although ‘welfare’ is a constituent part of ‘well-being’ and safeguarding is one of the five ECM outcomes, ‘stay safe’, an LSCB has a separate identity and independent voice from the Children’s Trust; MSCB is therefore not subordinate to or subsumed within the Children and Young People’s Trust Board.