Agenda item

(To receive a report which provides an update on the content and progress of the original action plan devised from the Frontline Social Workers and Safeguarding Task and Finish Group of October 2013)

Consideration was given to a report which provided an update in the content and progress of the original action plan devised from the Frontline Social Workers and Safeguarding Task and Finish Group of October 2013.

It was reported that two rounds of visits to the frontline teams had been completed between February and October 2015, involving 12 Councillor visits to teams around the county.  Scrutiny members had not identified any concerns during these visits that would suggest that there was and reduction in the robustness of safeguarding practice in the frontline teams or issues about the levels of support frontline social workers received.

It was an extensive action plan, and there were a number of matters which had come out of the visits.  In relation to the last two recommendations regarding IT advancements, there had been some delay in implementing the new Mosaic system, and therefore these recommendations would not be achieved in this financial year, as without Mosaic, the mobile technology could not be piloted;

Four frontline Social Workers were in attendance at the meeting to share their experiences and answer any questions raised by the Committee.

Members of the Committee were 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:

·         Signs of safety were now embedded well within the frontline teams and it was still having a positive effect in practice, and it was opening up new ways to speak to and work with families and was helping to bring out the voice of the child.  Staff were able to be more honest with families and get them to look at what they thought their priorities were;

·         Practitioners reported that they were feeling more confident regarding adapting signs of safety to individual families;

·         It had been more difficult to implement signs of safety in the Children with Disabilities Team as the families did want to work with the authority, and parents were worried that this implied they were not able to look after their children, and it was thought that some of the language used was not appropriate e.g. the use of danger statements;

·         It was generally felt that signs of safety was working really well in the teams;

·         In terms of the parental survey, it was noted that these were being carried out in a different way, and a researcher was going out and doing face to face interviews.  A different way of working had also been devised, and the survey's had been included as part of the closure process, and so social workers were having these conversations with families;

·         It was noted that it could take up to 40 days to complete an assessment, but the timescales would vary depending on the nature of the case;

·         Recommendation 5 – offering parental training to all teenagers – had been completed as a letter had been sent to all schools.  There was currently no intention to follow this up, as it was up to the school whether to include it in the curriculum.  It was noted that the issue could be raised at a future conference, it was noted that this was about the universal offer.  However, if scrutiny felt that there was a need for additional help in early help for vulnerable young girls, that was a different debate.  If this was an area of concern, further work could be done on this.

·         In relation to parental training, it was noted that there were huge demands on the curriculum, and it would be very difficult to include.  However, it was queried whether it was possible to include this sort of material in an assembly, as had been done with other issues such as anti-bullying, and could be delivered by non-specialist PHSE staff;

·         It was noted that there were a lot of resources available within schools, however, it was time that they were short on;

·         Members commented that they would like to see good child development taught within schools, but it was realised that this was a national conversation;

·         It was commented that the document attached as Appendix B – Safeguarding Children – A practical guide for overview and scrutiny councillors, was a very good document.  It was queried what the Council did to support members to feel confident in scrutinising safeguarding.  It was felt that this Committee was proactive in terms of carrying out visits, and had also held a task and finish group, and that the Service was open and inviting to members.  However, there could be a need for more consistency around questions when undertaking visits, but it was important not to limit a councillors ability to ask questions when visiting.

·         It was reported that there were positive relationships between all academies, except one, and the council.   The Lincolnshire Learning Partnership had been established for maintained schools and academies.  This was powerful, as all were agreeing to to work in a collaborative way to review the education they provided;

·         What all social workers wanted was more time to spend working with the children and their families, and Mosaic should allow for this when it was implemented;

·         It was felt that there was a lack of specialised care providers in Lincolnshire for children with disabilities.  It was noted that some additional work was being done around training for domiciliary care;

·         There was a need for a message to go back to Serco, letting them know that the problems with Agresso were not acceptable, as it was making the job of front line professionals harder.  Members were advised that Serco had taken action to bring in new people, and were very aware that Councillors and senior officers were dissatisfied with the implementation of the Agresso system.  The Value for Money Scrutiny Committee had requested an end date for the issues to be resolved by.

RESOLVED

That the Action Plan and Executive Comment be received;