Agenda item

(To receive a report by John Harris, Children's Services Manager: Regulated (North and Fostering), which sets out the issues relating to the performance data for placement stability as requested by the Panel at its meeting held in October 2019)

It was reported that the Corporate Parenting Panel had oversight of issues pertaining to children who were cared for by the authority and reviewed a number of the key performance indicators relating to children who were looked after.  At a recent meeting of the Panel held in October 2019, the issue of placement stability were raised.  A request was made that a report be prepared for the Panel setting out the issues relating to the performance data for placement stability.  There was also a request to provide information as to what impact placement resources has had on the placement stability.

There were two performance indicators which measured placement stability as follows:

·         NI062 – The percentage of children who are looked after with three or more placement moves in a twelve month period.

·         NI063 – The percentage of looked after children (aged under 16) who have been looked after continuously for at least 2.5 years and have remained in the same placement for at least two years, or are placed for adoption and their adoptive placement together with their previous placement together last for at least 2 years.

It was reported that placement stability and permanence were interlinked, and there was a consistent number of young people who had stability.  Indicator NI063 had fluctuated, but some information could be discounted as children looked after were allowed 21 days of respite each per year.  These periods of respite were not counted as placement moves.  It was also noted that one of the foster carers had moved house, and this had showed as a negative move for the child even though they remained with the foster carer.

The Panel was advised that retention payments had been brought in for foster carers, and it was believed that this had given those who were feeling undervalued some recognition.  It was acknowledged that this would not prevent foster carers leaving for reasons to do with age, health or life events.

The panel was provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         It was queried whether if the trend for losing foster carers continued, had it been considered that there may be a need for more accommodation in children's homes if there were fewer foster carers.  Members were advised that this was not just about numbers, as it as was recognised that there was a group of children who did not function in families.  Investing in residential provision was a national trend.

·         It was noted that there were so many individual stories, so a one size fits all approach would not work.  Over the last 3 – 4 years there had been an increasing complexity of needs in children.  In recognition of this, the authority was investing in in-house children's homes provision.  These would be small, three bed, therapeutic units and would require a high level of staffing.  There would be psychological support as well as speech and language therapists.  There was a four year plan, and it was hoped to open the first home in 2020, and then another the following year.  The independent market was not meeting the needs of these children.

·         An open meeting was held for those people considering becoming foster carers, an activity day with social workers was also held where people could view profiles of some of the children. 

·         It was commented that fostering was a very controlled process, as was the matching process.  It could be extremely challenging, but also rewarding.

·         A member commented that after visiting Denton Avenue, the age group seemed to be getting slightly older, and it was queried whether the authority was going to end up in a position where there were more children still in residential care due to a reduction in the number of foster carers.  Members were advised that the pressure was more likely to be from younger children as the authority was now better placed than ever before to manage the 16+ age group.

·         It was noted that some children in residential care did go back to their birth families.  Fostering was not always the best option for a child.

RESOLVED

            That the report be noted and that the Corporate Parenting Panel endorsed the work being undertaken.