Minutes and Action Log

Transcription

1 LSCB Board Meeting Wednesday 6 th July 2016 Minutes and Action Log Bill Whimster Suite, Weston Education Centre, King s College Hospital, Denmark Hill 14:00-17:00 Chair: Andrew Christie Independent LSCB Chair Attendees: Adela Karcsprzak Assistant Chief Officer, Lambeth NPS Cluster Alison Barnwell Designated Doctor for Safeguarding, Lambeth CCG Ann Corbett Director Community Safety Arnie Wickens Lay Member Avis Williams-McKoy Designated Nurse for Safeguarding, Lambeth CCG Candida Thompson Housing Needs representing Rachel Sharpe Catherine Davis Head Teacher St Ann s School (Primary) Jan Shadick Head Teacher Lambeth Academy (Secondary) Jenny Cunniffe Voluntary Sector Representative Margaret Hill Safeguarding Named Nurse Guys and St Thomas s represented Debbie Saunders Maria Millwood, Director Integrated Commissioning, Lambeth Council and Lambeth CCG Mark Stancer Director of Improvement Children s Social Care represented Ian Smith Nick Collins Chief Inspector, Metropolitan Police Paul Archer Named Nurse Safeguarding Children, South London and Maudsley Rosalinda James Head of Nursing, Safeguarding Named Nurse, Kings College Hospital Advisors Abdu Mohiddin Public Health Andrea Klingel LSCB Policy and Performance Officer Maria Burton LSCB Business Manager Naeema Sarkar Head of Quality Assurance, Safeguarding & Transformation, Children s Social Care LSCB Minute Taker Danielle Richardson - LSCB Administration Officer Apologies: Alo Raptopolous Voluntary Sector Representative Annie Hudson Strategic Director, Children s Services Cassie Newman, Head of Stakeholders and Partnerships, Lambeth Community Rehabilitation, Lambeth Probation Trust

2 Cathy Twist, Director of Education, Learning and Skills Cllr. Jane Edbrooke - Cabinet Member for Children and Schools Cllr. Jane Pickard Cabinet Member for Families and Young People Debbie Saunders Head of Safeguarding Named Nurse G&StT Dominic Bergin Head Teacher, Elm Green School (Secondary) Dr Nandini Mukhopahyay, GP Clinical Lead, Lambeth CCG Greg Pople CAIT, Metropolitan Police Fiona Connolly, Service Director, Adult Social Care Ian Luke-MaCauley - Senior Service Manager CAFCASS Ian Smith Director Children s Social Care Kate Atkins Head Teacher Rosendale School (Primary) Sian Walker Independent Chair, Adult Safeguarding Board Tim Weetman Head of Performance, Policy and Communications Minutes from last meeting ( ) / Matters arising Andrew Christie Introductions were made. Actions from last meeting A report on the Safer Lambeth Partnership consideration of the Domestic Homicide Review is an item on the agenda. In Ian Smith s absence Naeema Sarkar agreed to ensure that CAMHS Tier 4 provision is included in the scope for the review of children in residential care. Housing representation is in place. Maria Burton confirmed that the Domestic Abuse multi-agency audit report had been sent to the VAWG Strategy task and finish group. Naeema Sarkar confirmed that she would be leading work on the Domestic Abuse audit recommendations. Actions arising from the performance digest will be picked up under that agenda item. Abdu Mohiddin provided an update on plans to reduce the backlog in CDOP consideration of cases. Lambeth cases are being prioritised for discussion at both the Neonates Panel and the main Panel and the backlog is reducing. There will always be cases being prepared for the Panel and/or awaiting Coroner s reports/post-mortems so a running backlog of cases at any point in time is reasonable. An interim administrator has been recruited and is working through the outstanding cases and preparing them for Panel discussions. Recruitment to the joint Coordinator post is with Southwark HR at present. Andrew offered support if this matter required escalation. Maria Burton stated that the Escalation Policy will go on the LSCB website. The chart and guidance has also been amended, hard copies will be printed and the electronic version loaded on to the website. Andrew advised the Board that agencies need to make sure that staff are aware that the policy is on the website.

3 With reference to Section 11 audits, Maria Burton updated that she had not yet contacted CCG and Council commissioners regarding auditing of commissioned services but had been in liaison with Greenwich and other London boroughs on their approach. The minutes were agreed as an accurate record. 1. Naeema Sarkar to follow up on CAMHS Tier 4 provision and the review of children in residential care. 2. Naeema Sarkar to lead work on the Domestic Abuse audit recommendations. 3. Escalation Policy, Threshold Chart and Guidance to be made available on the LSCB web site, partners informed and partners (Board Members) to publicise within their organisations. 4. Maria Burton to contact CCG and Council commissioners with reference to S11 audits. Neglect Multi- Agency Audit Report Dr Alison Barnwell Andrew Christie informed the Board that he had decided to withdraw the Neglect audit report from consideration at this meeting pending a discussion with lead partners. A meeting will be arranged involving Andrew Christie, Naeema Sarkar, Avis Williams-McKoy, Ian Smith, Andrea Klingel and Michael Permaul to discuss. This to be brought back to the next Board meeting. 1. To add the Neglect multi-agency audit to the next meeting agenda. Lambeth Local Safeguarding Board Performance Digest review of indicators Andrea Klingel Andrea Klingel introduced the indicators which have been suggested by partners for addition, others proposed for removal and some to be allocated to a different theme. Andrea went through the indicators that it is proposed to add to the LSCB performance digest. Proposed additional indicators 1. No of young carer assessment

4 Andrew recommended rejection of this proposal as this indicator does not fit with Board priorities. Maria Millwood added that this data should be considered by the Health and Wellbeing Board. The Board determined to reject the addition of this indicator. 2. Serious Youth Violence Ann Corbett stated that this is being reported to the YOT Management Board as a contextual indicator and to the Safeguarding Lambeth Partnership. This measures the number of victims of serious youth violence. The number of offences vary per month. Lambeth is higher than the average compared to other London Boroughs. The Board determined to reject the addition of this indicator. 3. No. of step downs by Social Care to MAT Maria Millwood stated that we need to review the basket of Early Help indicators. The Board determined to reject the addition of this indicator. 4. Number of year olds that approach Housing Support for support or assistance Andrea proposed that the existing indicator be reworded. The Board accepted this proposal. 5. Agency attendance at CP Conferences and Core groups Andrea stated that it had not been possible to obtain data on attendance at Core Groups. Naeema added that it was not possible to get a report from the IT system and suggested that instead information is obtained by auditing or case sampling. Andrew asked Naeema to develop a proposal to gather information on agency attendance at Core Groups. 6. No. of cases subject to a CP Plan for 18 months (to include current arrangements for reviewing children who have been subject to a CP Plan for 18 months in commentary Naeema stated that she has put this in place. The Board accepted this proposal. 7. Number of attendances for FGM recorded

5 Andrea stated that the proposed indicator would be useful for benchmarking, as the data is collected nationally. Abdu mentioned that the HSCIS data set is a reasonable one to use; there are some gaps as it is still being populated. The Board accepted this proposal. Indicators considered for removal Understanding Need UN19-26 Jan Shadick spoke of the importance of these indicators in identifying risks and vulnerabilities in the early years. Jan suggested rewording the indicators in terms of progress. Andrew suggested that these indicators may be in the remit of the Health and Wellbeing Board. The Board agreed to remove these indicators. Safe from Harm SH04 % of Initial Child Protection Conference held within 15 days of Section 47 decision Members queried the low percentage (34%) and Naeema agreed to look into this and report back to the next meeting. SH05 % of referrals responded to within 24 hours Andrea stated that the data is currently not available. Jan asked if it should be available? Avis mentioned that it is key performance data in social care, Ofsted also looks at this data. Naeema stated we need to talk with the Mosaic providers and see what can be done to produce the data. It was agreed that Naeema would report back on this indicator after making further enquiries. SH08 No. of unallocated cases of children with CP plans Andrew stated we need to check that the system is working effectively. Jenny Cunniffe reported that her experience, on more than one occasion, was that children on child protection plans did not always have an allocated worker and she was told when raising a concern to contact the duty social worker. Margaret Hill added that she often experienced social care not attending meetings as there was no allocated worker for the child. Mark asked those agencies reporting concerns to contact him with examples of the situations they have experienced. Catherine Davis stated that schools need to know who to go to. It was agreed that Maria Burton would circulate the Escalation Policy and Children s Social Care management contact details to Board members.

6 It was agreed that Mark would report back to the Board on this indicator and it would not be removed from the digest. SH11and SH12 No. of Initial Child Protection Conferences postponed/rearranged and No. of Review Child Protection Conferences postponed/rearranged Avis Williams McKoy stated that this is basic information which needs to be considered. The Board agreed to remove these indicators. SH04 % of Initial Child Protection Conference held within 15 days of Section 47 decision Members queried the low percentage (34%) and Naeema agreed to look into this and report back to the next meeting. SH15 No. of formal complaints Naeema stated that the annual complaints report was to be written for the previous year and would be circulated to the LSCB. The Board agreed to remove these indicators. Early Help EH01 No. of completed CAFs Maria Millwood reported that CSC would gather data on early help assessments. It was agreed to delete this indicator at this stage but a revised indicator may be considered in future. It was noted that the basket of Early Help indicators would benefit from further consideration dependent upon the data being considered by other partnerships / Boards. VC01 No. of people on Matrix indicator Ann confirmed that this is reported elsewhere. The Board agreed to remove this indicator. Items suggested to regroup NG01 Andrew suggested to leave it as it is. SH06 Proposal accepted to reorder. Andrew asked if there are any performance questions regarding the data set SH07 Alison Barnwell questioned why there has been such a drop in the percentage of Section 47 to Initial Child Protection Conference?

7 Naeema responded that this will be covered by the Section 47 audit. Paul Archer reported that the CAMHS data (VC10-17) would be circulated. Maria Millwood assured the Board that SH21 (% of children looked after initial health assessments completed within 20 working days) was being addressed. 1. Andrea Klingel to update LSCB Performance Digest as agreed. 2. Naeema Sarkar to develop a proposal to gather information on agency attendance at Core Groups. 3. Naeema to look into SH04 (% of Initial Child Protection Conference held within 15 days of Section 47 decision) and report back to the next meeting. 4. Naeema Sarkar to report back on SH05 (% of referrals responded to within 24 hours) after making further enquiries. 5. Agencies with examples of child protection cases where there is no allocated worker to contact Mark Stancer. 6. Maria Burton to circulate the Escalation Policy and Children s Social Care management contact details to Board members. 7. Mark Stancer to report back to the next Board meeting on indicator SH08 (No. of unallocated cases of children with CP plans). 8. CSC annual complaints report to be added to the LSCB forward plan for circulation. Morning Lane report on Board improvement journey Andrew Christie Andrew reminded the Board that Fran Pearson from Morning Lane had provided a verbal report at the previous meeting and this was her written report to the Improvement Board. Board members agreed that the report reflected their views on the Board s improvement journey. 1. The report was noted.

8 LSCB Annual Report 2015/16 for consideration Andrew Christie The Board was happy with the draft Annual Report for 2015/16 and agreed that it reflected the work undertaken. 1. The Annual Report 2015/2016 was approved. Update of 2016/17 Business Plan - Agreement of Board priorities Andrew Christie Maria circulated a briefing on the Wood Review of Local Safeguarding Children Boards. Andrew recommended that the key partner agencies (Health, the Police and the Council) give further consideration to the review and the following legislative changes in preparation for the local arrangements that will need to be made. The meeting then went on to consider the four priority areas recommended for adoption following the Board development session held on the 29 th June. Proposed LSCB Business Plan Priorities 1. Getting Child Protection Right 2. Child Exploitation including CSE, missing and FGM. 3. Neglect 4. Violence including domestic violence and serious youth violence. Getting Child Protection Right Andrew asked the Board how we would deliver on this priority area, how will we measure and know we have made a difference. Catherine Davis stated that the number of children coming off child protection plans appropriately and not returning would be an indicator. Mark Stancer added that there is an issue with children on child protection plans that shouldn t be and some that should be. There needs to be a fundamental agreement of what child abuse is and is not. Nick Collins contributed that we need to be satisfied that the system works quickly and effectively. Alison Barnwell commented that it is more challenging to measure those children who should be on child protection plans who are not than those who have a plan. Jenny Cunniffe proposed looking at the number of times children are referred and turned down.

9 Adela Karcsprzak stated that we need to be satisfied that we have effective information exchange between agencies to be able to deliver. Avis Williams McKoy added that the Front Door and referral recognition need to work effectively. Every board member should have a narrative explaining what makes children safe and unsafe in Lambeth and how other Boards are informed about the issues for children. Andrew stated by the end of the year we need to know that we have made a difference. Children who have been on plans would have received a positive intervention. Conferences were convened and notifications were given sufficiently in advance. Andrew asked how we are going to make this happen? Jan Shadick mentioned sharing information with the people who operate the system at a basic level to go through what meets statutory requirements and where the gaps are would be helpful. Andrew stated that we may need a focus group around that to capture some of the difficulties. Abdu Mohiddin stated that CHIP programme includes a needs assessment around looked after children in Southwark, this will move to Lambeth in the next few months. There has been interesting findings about different tier services. Child Exploitation Andrew asked where this work would take place. Nick Collins responded by referring to the risk management panel and the MASE panel. Andrew asked what would success look like by the end of the year? Naeema Sarkar stated that we need hard measures. Mark added that if the young person is on a child protection plan they should be protected and it is wider meta data that is required. We need more information to help the risk assessment and understand the problem. Ann Corbett added it is about understanding who are the young people, victims, where are the vulnerable locations in the borough and in particular who are the suspects and perpetrators. Maria Millwood stated that it is also about understanding what services are in place, and what services need commissioning, especially for looked after children. Andrew concluded that by the end of the year we will have a better understanding of the risks of exploitation, the practice and the right services being in place.

10 Abdu added that Public Health would support this work by undertaking a needs assessment for Lambeth. Neglect Andrew proposed that consideration of this priority area take place at the next Board meeting alongside consideration of the findings from the Neglect multi-agency audit. Violence To be considered under the next agenda item. The meeting noted that consideration would need to be given to the governance structure required to support the work on the priority areas. 1. The Board agreed the four priority areas for 2016/ Andrew Christie to bring a report to the next Board with proposals for the governance structure to support the priority areas. Safer Lambeth Partnership discussion of the Domestic Homicide Review Domestic Abuse Minutes of Safer Lambeth Executive Ann Corbett Ann Corbett reminded the Board of the background to the Domestic Homicide Review, considered at the March Board meeting. The purpose of the review to establish what is to identify what those lessons to be learnt are to each individual agency and to apply those lessons to service responses and to prevent a domestic homicide. The Safer Lambeth Partnership, as the lead body, had submitted the Review to the Home Office and had agreed recommendations and an action plan. The response from the Home Office was awaited. The key issues arising were that Ms A. had no contact with any agencies in relation to domestic violence. The perpetrator did not have leave to remain which is why the UK enforcement were involved. Ms B also had no right to remain in the UK. One of the key recommendations to the Home Office was that people with no right to remain in the UK should not be subject to abuse; they should receive the same support as everyone else. The family do not want the report to be published and therefore it has been proposed to only publish a set of recommendations and key actions. The action plan contains 17 actions for various services. This Board needs to be reassured in terms of actions regarding safeguarding and child protection plans. Adela Karcsprzak informed the Board that a lessons was that probation staff did not have sufficient knowledge of child protection issues. There were flaws in terms of their assessments and information sharing.

11 Candida Thompson stated that Housing had rolled out a programme of safeguarding training for all their staff and are reviewing a single domestic violence policy for Housing. 1. LSCB to circulate the DHR action plan and executive summary to Board members. 2. The next Board to consider the Violence Needs Assessment produced by Public Health. 3. Andrew Christie to discuss lessons for probation staff with Adela Karcsprzak. Update on key actions arising from South London and Maudsley CQC report Paul Archer. Paul Archer gave an overview of the South London and Maudsley CQC inspection and the issues it identified in relation to safeguarding children: 1. ability to collect safeguarding data 2. the follow through where incidents have been raised around allegations against staff, which led onto a LADO investigation. Paul stated that SLaM now have a mechanism for providing the CCG and the Board with meaningful safeguarding data. This will need to be embedded in practice. The first report will be run for Quarter 3. With regard to LADO referrals, the safeguarding team have been working with HR to enhance staff understanding of safeguarding. Many of those in admin roles have only received Level 1 safeguarding children training. Systems are now in place for any allegations made against staff and are being recorded on how many of those have resulted in a referral to the LADO and how many have resulted in referral to DBS and Governing Bodies. Paul was thanked for the update. Serious Case Review Action Plan Exception Report (Child H and Child I) and Action Plan for Child J Maria Burton Child H Maria proposed that the following actions be closed as completed: In late Autumn 2014 the LSCB should commission an audit of cases where there is known domestic abuse in order to satisfy itself that this knowledge and awareness is held within front-line practice (Action 1.5 and also Action 4.3).

12 The audit of cases where there is known domestic abuse was considered at the May Board meeting. Although further work is planned to address the areas of continuing concern found by the audit, the Board is asked to consider closing Action 1.5 and Action 4.3 as completed and monitor further work to address safeguarding children in cases of domestic abuse as part of the multi-agency audit programme. Andrew confirmed that this monitoring would be under the remit for the Learning and Improvement group. Other areas being worked on in relation to Child H are supervision, interpreting and development of a Serious Injury Protocol. All are underway but not yet concluded. Child I A number of actions arising from the Child I Serious Case Review relate to the Neglect audit or the Section 47 audit. Both are scheduled to report to the next Board meeting. Child J All actions are underway but two have been rated as Red because they have not been completed to the deadline agreed. 1. The Board agreed the recommendation to close actions 1.5 and 4.3 from the Child H Serious Case Review. AOB Nick Collins mentioned that Red Thread will be extending their service in Kings and an evaluation will take place. He will bring a fuller report to a future Board meeting. Andrew reminded the Board that this would be Dr Alison Barnwell s last meeting as she was leaving Lambeth and the UK and thanked her for her valuable contribution to the work of the Board.