The minutes of the meeting on 25 June 2012 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The minutes of the meeting on 19 July 2012 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

44.1     Cathy Griffiths, Head of Quality presented the report. She also introduced Helen Price, Lead Commissioner Families, Jane Price, Referral and Assessment Team Manager, and Lyn Green, Participation Officer, who were attending the meeting to inform members on this matter.

44.2     It was questioned why the report referred to ‘early intervention’ being a problematic term. The Head of Quality explained that this reflected that this term was frequently used but did not necessarily mean the same thing to all professionals; it can mean early in life, or early in the child’s exposure to risk. In the report she had wanted to be clear as to exactly what was being discussed. She also explained that intervention was only undertaken when really necessary. Members were informed that social workers indicated that it was possible to anticipate those children that would potentially need early intervention. Factors involved here included the parents’ experience of parenting, the child’s needs and the environment they lived in. It was further explained that it was sometimes possible for commissioners to pre-empt these situations and bring in additional services to support the family.

44.3     Members noted the identification of gaps in the provision available to meet the needs of families with young children who were experiencing chronic and neglectful parenting. It was explained that the commissioners had worked with the Dartington Social Research Unit to look at how to better respond to these issues. We would now be using a multi agency approach, including extra language support, to better support quality of life.

44.4     Committee members welcomed the development of a toolkit for schools (including academies) to be used in PSHE lessons in order to raise issues about domestic abuse and how to get help. This was seen as good news given that domestic abuse and its potential impact on children and young people has been a particular concern of this committee for some time.

44.5     Members were interested in how the referrals were managed and whether there were any particular problems expediting the telephone calls. The Referral and Assessment Team Manager explained that there was not an even amount of calls coming in to the team. The team has good relationships with the child protection team in the Police service and were therefore able to respond quickly if a child is at risk. The referral team was also able to bring the strategic (multi agency) meeting together quickly (sometimes within half an hour) to discuss the case. The committee was also informed that although officers across all the agencies have the ‘day job’ to do they will manage their workload in order that the needs and safety of the child are put first. The Head of Quality informed members that she had been in a social care team when seven child protectionreferrals came in on the same day. She had been impressed with the team’s ability to prioritise their work, their strong organisational skills and the professional approach to their work. Members indicated that they were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

The committee to receive a presentation on this matter.

45.1     The committee received a presentation on the implications of the Children and Families Bill for children and young people who were disabled or have special educational needs (SEN). (The sliders were included within the minute book for information.)

45.2     The committee was informed that the green paper commitments included (by 2014): -

Þ            A single assessment process which was more streamlined, better involved children, young people and families and was completed quickly;

Þ            An Education, Health and Care Plan which brought services together and was focused on improving outcomes; and

Þ            An offer of a personal budget for families with an Education, Health and Care Plan.

45.3     Members were informed that the government wanted a stronger emphasis on families feeling more in control of services available to support their child, and also having the right information available to them. This reflected the view that for many parents getting support for their child was challenging. Improved early identification and intervention was also emphasised. Support form the local authority to the individual would now cover the age range 0-25.

45.4     In order to make things clearer for parents each local authority would be required to publish a local offer showing the support available to disabled children and young people and those with SEN, and their families.

45.5     The committee agreed that this approach did seem to offer a positive way forward for families. It was commented that on the face of it this was a simple idea, but that having said that implementing these changes would be complicated. Members were informed that the government had set up a pathfinder programme in 2011 in order to test the process. There were twenty local pathfinders involving thirty one local authorities and their health sector partners currently in place testing the key reforms. Despite having been a pathfinder for Aiming High and therefore arguably further along this path than some other local authorities Gloucestershire was not a pathfinder.

45.6     Members indicated that they felt that how the funding would work would be a particular challenge. It was acknowledged that this would not be straightforward, and it was explained that this was one of the issues that the pathfinder authorities were working on. The focus of this Bill was on personalisation and improved outcomes. As an authority we have already been providing direct payments for adult care and would be taking forward the learning from this.

45.7     It was noted that funding would not be drawn from the schools block of the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG). Funding to support these young people would be drawn from the high needs block which was managed centrally not by the school. This did not preclude the fact that the council would want to work closely with schools, and health, to support the individual.

45.8     Members were informed that it was thought that one factor of the schools’ funding changes that would better support this approach was that special schools would now receive £10k  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

46.1     The committee was informed that officers were pleased with progress against targets and that we were now starting to see sustained improvement, for example the reduction in the percentage of children becoming subject to a child protection plan for a second or subsequent times. There were concerns regarding performance against the NEET (not in employment, education or training) target in that we were seeing an increase in numbers, but it was noted that we were still performing better than comparator authorities.

46.2     The committee was informed that work was in place to understand the increase in the numbers of looked after children. Although it was thought that this was more about the council taking action appropriately, rather than a rise in numbers for unaccountable reasons. It was also noted that the peer challenge of the adoption service had been extremely useful.

46.3     Members were pleased to see the number of compliments received and hoped that we could learn as much from them as we could complaints.

46.4     In response to a question it was explained that early intervention funding was one aspect of DSG that could be de-delegated and that therefore funding was available to support schools at risk of special measures.

46.5     It was commented that whilst it was good to hear earlier in the agenda about the good work that officers do to ensure that children and young people were protected it was of concern to see that there has been a reduction in the timeliness of child protection conferences. The committee was informed that this was due to the long term absence of a member of the team. Additional resources had been brought in and it was hoped that the next report would show that this situation has improved.

46.6     Members questioned what was happening with regard to the Education Psychology Service. The committee was informed that a new Principle Educational Psychologist was about to be appointed. It was also made clear that the service did need to change to ensure that resources were used in the best possible way to ensure that the required outcomes were generated.

47.1     The Finance Manager Children and Young People gave a full presentation of this report. Members questioned the percentages related to education and skills in annex 1. It was explained that this was a mistake and would be rectified in the next report to the committee.

47.2     The view was expressed that underspends should be invested in services and not carried over. There was concern that early years continued to show an underspend and members asked for assurance that this funding would be used to support this service. It was explained that the underspend related to the tendering and set up timescales for the required specialist services.

47.3     It was explained that there had not been any carry over of underspends from the previous financial year. It was also explained that within the context of the meeting the challenge work any underspend across the authority would be transferred into the transformation budget. It was noted that DSG was ring fenced.

47.4     With regard to the overspend relating to looked after children and safeguarding it was questioned whether the staffing structure was stable. This was an important area of work and members of the committee were concerned that the overspend related to staff vacancies. Members were assured that the Operational Lead Children and Young People’s Services was managing this situation and would be moving resources around accordingly. Members were also assured that this area was kept under close scrutiny by senior managers.

47.5     In response to a question it was explained that the early intervention ring fenced grant was disappearing and this funding would now be part of the central pot. The committee was also informed that overall the local government settlement situation was challenging, other funding streams were also disappearing and it was anticipated that grants would be significantly reduced. Officers were planning accordingly.

47.6     A member asked where we were with regard to the ‘targeted twos’. It was explained that this was a huge task. We needed to create about one thousand places of 15 hours of nursery time per place by next September. We were a pathfinder authority for this area of work. At present we did not have enough places of sufficiently high quality. It was noted that this reflected the national position. It was commented that there was evidence that this type of support could make a difference, but only if the places were of high quality.

The committee agreed to delegate the report to the Chairman.