Agenda item

Alan Hazell, Independent Chair of Rotherham Local Safeguarding Children Board, and Phil Morris, Business Manager, Rotherham Local Safeguarding Children Board, to report.

Alan Hazell, Independent Chair of the Rotherham Local Safeguarding Children Board, and Phil Morris, Business Manager, Rotherham Local Safeguarding Children Board, presented the first annual report on the effectiveness of safeguarding children in the local area.

The Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009 introduced a requirement for Local Safeguarding Children Boards (LSCBs) to produce and publish an annual report on the effectiveness of safeguarding children in the local area.  A copy of the annual report had to be submitted to the Children and Young People’s Trust Board.

In May, 2011, Professor Eileen Munro published her third and final report on her Government commissioned Review of Child Protection.  In July, 2011, the Government published its response in which all but 1 of her recommendations were accepted.

It was intended that the 2011/12 report and the 2012-15 business plan would be published concurrently as the current business plan was regularly updated in the light of outcomes achieved and new objectives required.  The business plan submitted represented the most recent update.

The Select Commission gave serious consideration to the report with the following issues raised/clarified:-

-        South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service had recently become a Board member.  The UK Border Agency was to join the Exploitation Sub-Group

-        2011/12 was the first full year of lay members – the annual report would include a section on their views

-        Rotherham had 1 Board for Children and 1 for Adults.  Extensive consideration had been given to this during the past 12 months and there was no other area that had a joint board.  They both had huge agendas in their own right, each with competing priorities and statutory duties.  The Independent Chair had a place on the Adults Safeguarding Board and vice versa.  The interface between Adults and Children Services had been strengthened considerably during the last year

-        The number of Board members had been kept to the minimum whilst recognising the need for agencies to be there together with advisors.  There was a system of named deputies in operation.   A number of 1-1 meetings with each member of the Board were being arranged to challenge what they were doing, how they got their message across and how concerns/messages from agencies were fed into the Board 

-        The sub-groups operated on a ‘3 strikes out” basis with each sub-group Chair being a member of the Board.  If an agency was not represented on the Board but was on the sub-group a report was submitted.  Sub-groups submitted 6 monthly reports

-        There were now only 6 sub-groups – Policy and Procedure, Exploitation, Performance and Quality Assurance, Learning and Development, Child Death Overview and Serious Case Review

-        In accordance with the 2006 Act, it was a requirement for every local authority to have a Local Authority Designated Officer.  It was a very specific role which dealt with allegations relating to a parent, carer or someone in a specific role/responsibility for looking after children.  The number of allegations in Rotherham was equivalent to those nationally.  However, they were becoming more complex due to the cross cutting boundary issues which may involve more than 1 police force and LADO

-        There were various opportunities for discussing policies and procedures across all authorities 1 of which was the 4 Independent Chairs for South Yorkshire meeting

-        In 2012/13 there would be a 6% reduction in budget which would have to be factored in as well as not knowing what would be contained in the new Guidance.  The new budget (£196,000) covered staff costs, Chair expenses and fees.  It would mean that the Independent Chair would not be working as many days as previously together with a reduction in the training and learning development and would have to be replaced by services in kind.  This would also be raised in the 1-1 meetings i.e. what contributions in kind could the agencies offer

-        The Government had given extra money in terms of learning and development relating to a number of recommendations in the Munro report – Early Intervention and Prevention

-        The Board recognised that there were new arrivals in Rotherham particularly of Roma heritage and that they were a vulnerable group.  In terms of Child Protection Plans and the increasing numbers, it may not be because there were more child protection issues but due to agencies becoming better at identifying child protection issues.  The families may need assistance rather than a child in need of a Plan

-        Rotherham’s Social Worker vacancy rate had much improved and was currently only 1.5% with a 90% retention rate.  It was the duty of all agencies to identify children in need not just a Social Worker

-        Rotherham had no qualified Social Worker(s) from Slovakian heritage or Asian speaking, however, there were a number of Family Support Workers and workers in schools who could interpret.  There was also Language Line if a specific dialect was required

-        The information quoted regarding the 500 babies was from the Children and Young People’s Plan and the issues contained therein addressed by the Children’s Trust Board with the Safeguarding Children Board influencing the Plan 

-        Lifestyle Surveys often related to specifics e.g. bullying, feeling safe on transport to and from school.  They would be taken account of as far as possible but if it was only a small proportion it was more difficult to give credence to the results.  However, any issues were referred to the appropriate partner i.e. Safer Rotherham Partnership, who would submit a response to any issues/queries raised

-        Schools were encouraged to participate in the Primary Lifestyle Survey but it could not be enforced

Alan and Phil were thanked for their attendance.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the report be received.

(2)  That the 2011/12 Rotherham Local Safeguarding Children Board annual report be submitted following its publication in June, 2012.