Agenda and minutes

Councillor Jarvis declared a personal interest in Minute No. 08 (CSE Post Abuse Services Update) as she was an unpaid trustee for Rotherham Rise.

Councillor Senior declared a disclosable pecuniary interest - Minute No. 08 (CSE Post Abuse Services Update) on the grounds of being a provider of practical, emotional support, advocacy and signposting for individuals and families.

Ms Jones – Co-opted Members declared a personal interest - Minute No. 08 (CSE Post Abuse Services Update) on the grounds of being a provider of practical, emotional support, advocacy and signposting for individuals and families.

There were no members of the press or public present at the meeting.

Corporate Parenting Panel

Councillor Cusworth had provided Members of the Select Commission with a written summary of the last meeting of the CPP which was circulated by email.

Councillor Napper

Councillor Napper announced that he would no longer be a member of the Select Commission. The Chair thanked him for his contribution to date.

Resolved:- 

(1)  That the minutes of the previous meeting of the Improving Lives Select Commission, held on 22^nd March, 2017, be approved as a correct record for signature by the Chairman.

(2)  That an update be provided to the next meeting with regard to social worker and team manager vacancies (Minute No. 54 – Children and Young People’s Service Performance Report January 2016/17).

(3) That an update be provided to the next meeting on the Liquid Logic Case Management System (Minute No. 54 – Children and Young People’s Service Performance Report January 2016/17).

Ms M Jarrett, Service Manager, Children with Disabilities, presented a report to support the implementation over the next year of a Children and Young People’s Resource Allocation System (RAS) to promote financial transparency and to deliver person-centred outcomes for children and young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND).

The Children and Families Act (2014) and subsequent Special Educational Need and Disabilities (SEND) Code of Practice makes it mandatory for Local Authorities to have a Personal Budgets policy and to consider, upon request from parents, any instance where a Personal Budget could contribute in part or full towards a young person’s Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP).

Children’s Disability Services has worked with the leading national personalisation charity ‘In-Control’ to develop a RAS which will enable, in the first instance, social workers and disability family support workers to develop an outcome-based, person-centred plan which is costed to match the level of need of the young person. A RAS therefore creates equity of provision and an understanding of the resource required to deliver social care.

Discussion ensued on the report with the following issues raised/clarified:-

-       The scheme offers clarity and rationale for decisions made about resource allocation for disabled children.

-       As part of the implementation of the RAS, each personal budget would be reviewed initially on a three monthly, six monthly and then, annual cycle to ensure that the package is delivered according to plan. Staffing was sufficient to undertake these assessments. Should a child’s circumstances change, a swift re-assessment could be undertaken as required.

-       What happens if families don’t have access to bank accounts – exploring pre-payment cards and other mechanisms to support families, including giving administration of the direct payment to a third party agency who would manage it on the parent’s behalf

-       Work was underway with the transition teams in Adult Services to ensure that transition was as ‘seamless’ as possible.

-       Would RAS apply to care-leaver? Depending on their assessed needs, care leavers would be entitled to a full package of support.

-       Direct payment are not part of household income and can be recovered if used for other purposes or if child/young person’s circumstances change

-       How would over-payments be addressed? These would be dealt with promptly and sensitively.

-       Appeals process – the Council’s complaints process was the route to progress complaints.

-       Feedback from parents forum – the Parents/Carers Fora gave helpful feedback including examples from other authorities; suggestions about how to work with vulnerable families, how to measure outcomes etc. These suggestions have been included in the Personal Budget Policy (attached as Appendix 1)

-       How was the voice of child reflected in this work? Direct feedback from children and young has been limited. Some work had taken place but further work was planned particularly with young people approaching transition but recognised that this was an area for development

-       Are there any issues emerging from other local authorities who are implementing this scheme.

-  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.

Mr D McWilliams, Assistant Director: Early Help, presented a report which sought approval for a Whole Service Review for Early Help Service to commence, for implementation by April 1, 2018.

What is early help ?

Early Help is concerned with identifying needs within families early, and providing support before problems become complex and more costly.

Effective early help relies  upon local agencies working together to;

·         identify children and families who would benefit from early help

·         undertake an assessment of the need for early help and 

·         provide targeted early help services to address the assessed needs of a child and their family which focuses on activity to significantly improve the outcomes for the child.

Local authorities, under Section 10 of the Children Act 2004, have a responsibility to promote inter-agency cooperation to improve the welfare of children.

Guiding Principles

1. Build on what’s working well

•      Integrated locality working

•      Whole family working: One Family, One Worker, One Plan

•      Work restoratively ( Work ‘with,’ not ‘done too.’)

•      Continuous improvement

•      Value For Money

•      Culture of excellence

2. Whole service review & re-design

•      All staff and managers in scope

•      Reduced Management structure

•      New (fewer) Job roles

•      Clear progression routes

•      Workforce Development: Investing in training, professional development

•      Equity and Parity in pay across roles and responsibilities

•      Affordable and sustainable  fit for purpose structure: Low cost / High quality

•      Agile workforce, flexible working, responsive to needs and expectations of families

•      High quality delivery points, staff bases and negotiated space

3. Achieve our savings target for 2018/19

•      Whole Service Review: Timescales

•      Potential structure / operating model

•      Potential Savings through service redesign

•      Draft structure suggests a 20% saving based on reduction in management costs (Head of Service to Band I)

•      A further £150k will be achieved through smarter use of fit for purpose buildings and decommissioning or closure of some

Discussion ensued on the report with the following issues raised/clarified:-

-        A number of centres currently have historicalopening hours. Have you reviewed the impact that the reduction in opening hours may have in provision? Proposals will be based on footfall and participation levels – some provision, included targeted work, may be expanded. The redesign proposals will be informed by an impact analysis.

-        The Children’s Commissioner for England recent report suggested that 670,000 children are living in families that have vulnerabilities and 800,000 children and young people suffer mental health disorders. Reassurances were sought that this report would be considered as part of the review.

-        What linkages are there between early help provision and community involvement teams based in localities?

-        If buildings are closed, savings would be released to the ‘corporate pot’  however, there was the potential to utilise school sites more efficiently. Potential closure of a building does not mean a reductions or loss of the ‘offer,’ just that the provision will be targeted. The Early help strategy describes delivery points and negotiated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

Mr S Hill, Commissioning Officer, CYPS, introduced a briefing paper outlining the Council and Barnardo’s partnership with the DFE and KPMG. This has led to the successful creation and implementation of an outreach service called Reach Out. This project strives to support and protect children and young people who at risk of CSE in Rotherham, with shared funding from all partners.

The Reach Out project is funded for a period of three years 2016 - 18 with Rotherham Council contributing £234k per annum alongside partners KPMG Foundation Trust (£1,229k), DfE (£500k) and Barnardo’s (£425k).

Most young people referred to the Reach Out service are identified as at risk of CSE because of concerns about their ability to identify abusive, exploitative behaviour and/or concerns about their ability to keep safe on-line.  However, there is often a range of other issues underlying these concerns, including emotional health/mental wellbeing issues, worries about relationships with friends/peers and family as well as unhealthy personal and sexual relationships.

The Reach Out Project has delivered the following key areas of work up to present:

·         Preventative education in schools and other settings (primarily delivering the healthy relationship education package ‘Real Love Rocks’);

·         Targeted outreach to young people at risk;

·         Direct support to individual young people and their parents.

Barnardo’s is currently forward planning and developing the ReachOut Service to ensure sustainability into the future.

The Reach Out service commenced in January 2016 and has now been operational for over a year.

Evaluation of the service has been separately funded and is being undertaken by Bedfordshire University.

Discussion ensued on the report with the following issues raised/clarified:-

-        The Barnardo’s review and independent evaluation of programme by University of indicated high levels of activities with good outcomes.

-        How were schools engaged? Is this activity proactive or responding to particular issues or concerns?

-        Are all schools signed-up?

-        How is the ‘training-the-trainer’ activity being evaluated to ensure that training is high standard?

Resolved:- 

(1)  That the briefing be noted.

(2) That a further update be provided in six months’ time outlining:

-        Work underway to evaluate the impact of the training package;

-        A detailed account of work with schools and levels of engagement.

Mr S Hill, Commissioning Officer, CYPS, introduced a briefing paper outlining the current position of RMBC in relation to the provision of Post Abuse Support in Rotherham.

Long term post CSE support services for victims, survivors and their families in Rotherham that have been commissioned from the 1 July, 2016 for 3 years, with an option to extend for a further 2 years.

There are two main service areas that have been commissioned which provide a range of services to meet the levels of needs identified and also to offer a choice to individuals. These services include:-

i.          Practical, emotional support and advocacy and

ii.         Evidence based therapeutic interventions.

The demand for post CSE support services from July was estimated based on above needs analyses and the number of victims, survivors and family members that are currently receiving services including those supported by the former BASE Project, funded by Minister of Justice (MoJ). The service specification was been developed with direct input from people affected by CSE.

A transition plan for victims and survivors currently accessing services through organisations that were not re-commissioned was developed in line with the arrangements described for step down. Additional capacity has been factored into the first year of the long term post CSE contract to enable victims and survivors currently receiving support to continue to receive support.

Discussion ensued on the report with the following issues raised/clarified:-

-       Given the last needs analysis was undertaken in 2015, are there plans to refresh?

-       How long do survivors have to wait to access services? Waiting times are an issue for some services however, it is hoped that this will be addressed should the NCA ‘Fusion Bid’ be approved. There is a good level of joint working between adult services and health partners.

-       What contingencies are in place if the ‘Fusion Bid’ is not successful?

-       This briefing focuses on services commissioned by the Council, but there a number of third sector organisations who provide related services which are not reported on. Are all related services mapped in Rotherham? How are non-RMBC commissioned services monitored and evaluated?

-       Reassurance was sought that survivors are being supported post trial as required, particularly as the number of prosecutions have increased.

-       The current services were originally commissioned in 2015 on an assumption that demand would decrease, with a corresponding reduction in year-by-year funding to reflect this assumption. What has been the impact on the funding reductions on voluntary sector provision and service users?

-       Once a contract is coming to an end but there is still a requirement to provide a service, is the service recommissioned fully or the contract extended?

Resolved:- 

(1)  That the briefing be noted.

(2) That a further update be provided in six months’ time outlining:

-        A map of all provision across Rotherham, with an outline of how provision is being quality assured;

-        The impact of funding reductions on voluntary sector provision and service users;

-  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

Ms C Webb Senior Adviser (Scrutiny and Member Development) reported that Members of the Improving Lives Select Committee held an informal work planning session on May 17, 2017 to consider what items to include in the commission’s work programme for the 2017/18 municipal year. In doing so, Members gave consideration to the following items which have been prioritised:

-       CSE    Evaluation of ReachOut Project

            Post-abuse support - Focus on recovery.

-       Domestic Abuse: update

-       Local Children’s Safeguarding Board Annual Report

-       Adult Safeguarding Annual Report

-       Home-to-School Transport

-       Missing from Home and Education

-       Early Help

-       Improving outcomes for Looked After Children

Resolved (1) That approval be given to the prioritised items within the Improving Lives Select Commission’s work programme 2017/18

(2) That the Commission agrees to undertake a scrutiny review on improving outcomes for looked-after children (LAC) and care leavers.

Wednesday, 25^th July, 2017 at 5.30 p.m.

Resolved:-

That the next scheduled meeting be held on Tuesday, 25th July, 2017 at 5.30 p.m.