Agenda item

·       Ian Thomas, Strategic Director, Children and Young People’s Services Directorate to report.

Councillor Hamilton welcomed Ian Thomas, Strategic Director, Children and Young People’s Services Directorate, and Michelle Whiting, Interim Looked After Children Adviser, Safeguarding Children and Families’ Services, to the meeting. 

Ian and Michelle, with reference to the submitted reports, informed Elected Members about the current situation relating to Rotherham’s residential homes.  Ian started his presentation with an apology to Elected Members for the very disappointing outcomes that had been reported.  Ian expected progress and knew that there was much more to do. 

Ian and Michelle covered the following areas in their presentation on Rotherham’s Woodview and Saint Edmund’s residential homes: -

·       Regular independent Regulation 44 Visits had been conducted.  Copies of the reports were submitted to the Assistant Director for Safeguarding Children and Families and Ofsted;

·       The material condition of the homes;

·       Practices in the homes;

·       Culture and that fact that homes were not child-centred;

·       None of the children living at the homes were being abused whilst in the Local Authority’s care, but the mechanisms in place at the homes did not show that staff were curious about the comings and goings of the young people living there;

·       The Local Authority had taken the decision to close Woodview.  The children who had lived there were moved to provision that was Ofsted judged to be Good or better;

·       Management actions following the close of Woodview would be appropriate;

·       In relation to Saint Edmund’s, an improvement plan had been issued and submitted to Ofsted;

·       Educational outcomes had been found to be good at Saint Edmund’s, although there were still areas of concern.

Ian described a future options appraisal process that would take place in relation to Rotherham’s current offer of residential homes.  The process would look at value for money and outcomes. 

The role of Regulation 44 visits was considered, along with the enhanced involvement that Rotherham’s Corporate Parenting Panel would have.  This included ensuring that there were strong protocols around the visits so that they were conducted in a controlled way that did not encroach on the young people’s homes.  It had also been agreed that elected members would act in roles as ‘Champions’ for issues relating to looked after childrens’ lives. 

Discussion followed and the following questions were raised: -

·       Councillor M. Vines described the Ofsted outcomes as embarrassing. He asked what the hold-up was in progress being seen? – Ian explained how the improvement journey would take three to five years.  Progress had been made in the developing Mash and tackling CSE.  The negative outcomes in relation to the residential homes were set-backs.  The Local Authority was committed to its looked after children and had launched the nine Promises to them setting out what they could expect and what they were entitled to from Rotherham Council; 

·       Councillor Hoddinott asked why issues at the homes had not been tackled based on the reports provided by the Independent Visitor?  It was really disappointing to learn that staff at Saint Edmund’s awareness of CSE was found to be low.  – Ian explained how the issues had come to the fore and how proprieties had addressed.  The concerns reported around CSE related to recording and monitoring, rather than there being a direct issue.  Michelle explained how work with the Police had taken place to ensure that there were strengthened risk assessments;

·       Councillor Jones asked why the monthly Regulation 44 visits had not identified the problems that were clear to Ofsted.  Michelle explained that the interim Head of Residential had been tasked with understanding the evidence that was coming forward;

·       Councillor Jepson asked whether the positions found at Woodview and Saint Edmund’s applied at the other homes? – Ian explained the work that was continuing to look at standards.  These issues would be considered through the options appraisal;

·       Councillor Ahmed explained how she was deeply saddened and concerned about the failure for the young people.  She was concerned about the emotional impact that living in inadequate environments could bring.  The looked after young people needed the best environment, any exposure to poor environments could make young people think that that level was acceptable.  How would they be able to challenge poor experiences if they did not know their rights? -  Ian explained the voice and influence work that was taking place.  A video had been produced for all stakeholders.  An event had been held at the New York Stadium where the pledge to looked after children and young people had been shared.  There were independent channels by which to raise concerns.  All staff were encouraged to treat and respond to looked after young children as though they were their own child.  The Independent Reviewing Officer team was a small team with a range of experience and specialisms;

·       Councillor Clark had submitted a question via Deborah Fellowes, Scrutiny Manager, asking about the process for informing Ward Members.  She had not been aware until it was raised with her in the Ward.  – Ian explained that there was a sequence of who was informed and when.  There were some who were informed first because of their statutory responsibilities;

·       Councillor Hoddinott felt that these issues should not have been a surprise.  They should have been picked up by the Regulation 44 visits.  It was important that Elected Members had oversight of all issues and services for looked after children. – Ian and Michelle agreed that the services needed to be rigorously scrutinised;

·       Councillor Hamilton asked what would happen to the intended refurbishment of the residential homes? -  Ian explained that this would be placed on hold until the outcome of the options appraisal was known. 

Councillor Hamilton thanked Ian and Michelle for their presentation and informative contribution to the discussions.  She asked that the Improving Lives Select Commission be kept informed of the progress in relation to residential homes for looked after children and that they be considered as stakeholders to the decisions made. 

Resolved: - (1)  That the information shared be noted. 

(2)  That future updates be provided to the Improving Lives Select Commission informing them of progress made.