Agenda and draft minutes

To consider and approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on 28 January 2025, as a true and correct record of the proceedings and to be signed by the Chair.

Resolved: - That the Minutes of the meeting of the Improving Lives Select Commission, held on 28 January 2025, be approved as a correct record of proceedings.

To receive declarations of interest from Members in respect of items listed on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of any part of the agenda.

There were no items of business on the agenda that required the exclusion of the press and public from the meeting.

To receive questions relating to items of business on the agenda from members of the public or press who are present at the meeting.

There were no questions from members of the public or press.

This item will provide an update to the Commission relating to recent national developments in Kinship Care and how the national developments have been applied locally.

The agenda item provided an update on the Local Kinship Care Offer, which included an overview of the recent national developments relating to Kinship Care and how these had been applied locally. 

The Chair welcomed to the meeting Jane Wood, Head of Service for Children in Care and Chris Macdonald, Service Manager for the Central Locality Teams and Family Activity Base.

The Chair invited The Service Manager for the Central Locality Teams and Family Activity Base to present the presentation, during which the following was noted:

The National Context-

• The Department of Education definition of kinship care was “any situation in which a child is being raised in the care of a friend or family member who is not their parent. The arrangement may be temporary or longer term’.
• There was a current focus on kinship care through new statutory guidance which was published in October 2024 via the Department of Education. The focus started from an Independent Review of Children’s Social Care in 2022.

The Rotherham Family Approach-

• What matters most and guides our work with families:

o   That children could understand what the service were doing, could tell their story and could be seen by the local authority as unique individuals.

o   That families could feel involved and respected, choosing their solutions where this would be possible.

o   That the local authority see’s children as located in a network, which would be more than their household, recognising the importance and contribution of family, friends and school.

o   That the service would do all that they could to support families to stay together safely, with a clear vision of how to get there.

o   That all social workers would have consistent, reliable supervision and management oversight.

Routes to Kinship Care-

• Kinship fostering, either temporarily or long term.
• Child Arrangement Orders and Special Guardianship Orders.
• Informal arrangements and private fostering.

Kinship Fostering-

• Where a Looked After Child would move to live with a ‘connected person’. Regulation twenty-four permitted placing the child after an initial assessment, but before full fostering panel approval, for up to 16 weeks.
• The local authority had parental responsibility, rather than the carer. Almost all kinship carers approved as foster carers continued to secure their own order.
• There was a statutory requirement to support.
• Fostering panel could approve kinship carers for the specific child only for the long-term.

Child Arrangement Orders-

• Child Arrangements Order’s provided the holder with parental responsibility and would specify that the child would live with them.
• It was not specific to family and/or friends, and it was the same order used to settle disputes between parents about where a child would live.
• Where the carer was a kinship carer, parental responsibility was held equally with the parents.
• There was no statutory requirement to support. The local authority policy included a financial allowance where the child was looked after, or would otherwise have become looked after, with specific criteria to assess against.

Special Guardianship Orders-

• Special Guardianship Orders (SGO’s),  could only be made to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

This item will provide an overview to members of His Majesty Inspectorate Probation (HMIP) new inspection framework standards, for Youth Justice Services. It will also provide an update on the proposed work being undertaken in preparation for an inspection under the new framework.

The agenda item provided an overview on His Majesty Inspectorate Probation (HMIP) new inspection framework standards for Youth Justice Services, as well as update on the proposed work being undertaken in preparation for inspection under the new framework.

The Chair welcomed to the meeting Councillor Cusworth, Cabinet Member of Children and Young People Services (CYPS), Kelly White, Interim Assistant Director for Early Help and Business Support and LINK Officer for the Commission, and Zulfiqar Shaffi, Youth Justice Service Manager.

The Chair invited the Youth Justice Service Manager to provide the presentation, during which the following was noted:

Inspectorate Aims When Changing the Framework-

• Ensure children and victims would be at the forefront of its inspections.
• Be proportionate in its inspection activity; be responsive and agile.
• Ensure inspections would have a positive impact; drive effective practice and improvement.
• Look at the quality of work based on the needs of the child rather than the type of disposal they received.
• Ensure a greater focus on the service victims were receiving, many of whom were also children.
• Increase the frequency with which inspections occurred, to avoid long delays between inspections.

The Critical Changes-

• The new framework considered the impact of contextual safeguarding and how best to promote positive outcomes.
• There was a significant change of language and focus throughout which was positive and was compatible with the language of the child first, and child first principles.
• It highlighted the importance of the Youth Justice Service partnership and the Board. 
• It had a greater focus on victims.
• All work with children was combined into a single domain. There was a clearer focus on the child’s needs and not the disposal and/or outcome they received.

Introduction of Two Types of Inspection-

• The first type was an Inspection of Youth Justice Services (IYJS), which would last for two weeks and would focus on practice and governance. This type of Inspection would include the Partnership Board and governance and approximately 15% of Inspections would be this type.
• The second type was an Inspection of Youth Justice work with children and victims’ (IYJWCV). This type of Inspection  would last for one week and would focus on mainly on practise and children and victims only, approximately 85% of Inspections would be this type. Previously the Inspection only looked at certain children based on their pathway, the Inspection will now focus on all children within the service.

The Two-Week Inspection, Based on Domains One and Two-

• This would be completed over two weeks, week one of the inspection would require a presentation, case inspection (children and victims), and children’s, parents and carers participation. Information from week one would then inform the themes for week two.
• Week two would be triangulation meetings, focus groups, multi-agency case discussion sessions and meetings with the Youth Justice Board, Board Chair, and staff.
• There would be a three-and-a-half-week announcement period, an example was provided of how the Inspection would be announced on a Wednesday, a planning meeting would then be arranged for the Friday or  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

To consider and approve the Commission’s Work Programme.

The Committee considered its Work Programme, and the following was noted:

·       The Commission’s Work Programme was included within the agenda pack for members information and initial discussions.

·       At the next meeting in April, the Commission would receive an update on the Domestic Abuse Strategy.

·       The Revised Elective Home Education Policy Update that was scheduled for the next meeting, was rescheduled as a result of a request from the service.

·       Members were invited to attend a hybrid workshop on the 1^st May which would focus on the following:

·       The Prevent Programme

·       Keeping Children Safe in Education.

·       An additional session focused on capturing members views on the revision of the Elective Home Education Policy, was recently well attended my members of the Commission. The summary notes would be circulated to members shortly.

Resolved: - That the Work Programme for 2024/2025 be approved.

For the Chair/Project Group Leads to provide an update on the activity regarding sub and project groups of the Improving Lives Select Commission, including the following:

·       Proposed Review- Trauma and Children Missing Education.

The Chair provided a progress report on sub and project group activity.

Resolved: - That the update be noted.

To consider any item(s) the Chair is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency.

There was no urgent business.