North Yorkshire County Council Children and Young People’s Service

Children’s Social Care

INDEPENDENT REVIEWING SERVICE

Annual Report

1st January 2013 – 31st December 2013

Contents

1  Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3 

2  The IRO Service ............................................................................................................... 3 

3  The Looked After Children population in North Yorkshire year ending 31/03/13 ...... 4 

4  Key Responsibilities of the IRO Service ....................................................................... 8 

5  IRO Activity ...................................................................................................................... 9 

6  IRO Service Performance ............................................................................................. 12 

7  Implementation of the IRO Handbook – achievements to date ................................. 13 

8  Key Areas of the IRO Handbook where implementation remains outstanding ....... 15 

9  Performance Monitoring of LA key performance indicators ..................................... 17 

10  Quality Issues Alert System and Reporting Mechanisms ......................................... 20 

11  Issues Identified through the Quality Alert System ................................................... 20 

12  Dispute Resolution Process ......................................................................................... 21 

13  CSC Action Plan ............................................................................................................ 22 

14  Areas for Development of the IRO Service ................................................................. 22 

15  Recommendations to CSC to improve outcomes for LAC ........................................ 24 

Appendix 1 - CSC Updated Action Plan ............................................................................. 26 

Appendix 2 – Letter from Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Children and

Families ................................................................................................................................ 29 

1 Introduction

1.1 The Independent Reviewing Service Annual Report covers the reporting period of the 1st January 2013 - 31st December 2013 and is submitted to North Yorkshire County Council under the requirements of the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (England) Regulations 2010 and the IRO (Independent Reviewing Officer) Handbook 2010.

1.2 The IRO Handbook 2010 came into effect from the 1st April 2011 and replaces the Adoption Act 2002 IRO Guidance. The Handbook is statutory guidance and requires the IRO Service to produce an annual report for the scrutiny of the members of the Corporate Parenting Board.

2 The IRO Service

2.1 The IRO Service is delivered by a county wide team based in three geographical locations. The team comprises of one Senior Manager Band SM2, who combines responsibility for the IRO Service with other management responsibilities. The IRO Service has two full time dedicated IRO Managers (Band 16) who have complementary responsibilities. One has a portfolio lead on Safeguarding, which includes the duties formerly grouped under the role of the Designated Manager of the Central Database. The other has the portfolio lead for Looked After Children and represents the IRO Service at a strategic level in relation to Looked After Children. There are 13 FTE IRO posts (Band 15) and two dedicated full time IRO (CPQA) Child Placement Quality Assurance Posts who are responsible for carrying out the foster carer review

2.2 The team has been fully staffed during the last quarter of the calendar year however there have been significant staffing difficulties in the IRO team throughout most of the calendar year. There have been two episodes of long term sickness, and in addition four part-time members of staff retired in March/April 2013. The combination of staff retiring, the time it takes to recruit and induct new staff and two episodes of long term sickness in the team caused an immense pressure on the service particularly in the first half of the calendar year when capacity was down by almost 40%. Whilst the meetings were all chaired within statutory timescales some children were without allocated IROs to monitor and track their cases until the incoming IROs took up their posts and completed their induction. Some of the children without allocated IROs experienced substantial changes without an IRO being available to monitor and track the plans. The impact of the staffing difficulties was also felt by those children who had allocated IROs because the team had to prioritise the chairing of meetings leaving little time for the tracking of children’s cases. CSC responded positively to requests to help with the staffing difficulties in the team and a short term agency IRO was employed and sessional staff were recruited to assist with the chairing of child protection conferences. Without this support the statutory timescales for conferences and Looked After Reviews would not have been met.

4

2.3 The gender breakdown of the team is 2 males and 13 females. Fourteen members of the team are white British and one member of the team is African Caribbean/white UK.

2.4 IROs have been working with caseloads of 85-100+ for most of this calendar year, due to the staffing difficulties. This runs contrary to the IRO Handbook, 7.15 which states “It is estimated that a caseload of 50-70 looked after children for a FTE IRO would represent good practice in the delivery of a quality service, including the full range of functions set out in this Handbook”. Now that the team is fully staffed the caseloads should settle around an average of 70 children per full time equivalent IRO.

3. The Looked After Children population in North Yorkshire year ending 31st December 2013

3.1 As of the 31st December 2013 there were 473 children who were looked after including 20 children with disabilities who receive a high level of short breaks. This reflects a very similar picture to the 31st Dec 2012 when there was 480 children who were looked after. Whilst the figures for children who were Looked After on the 31st Dec 2012 and the 31st Dec 2013 remains very similar, the activity that has taken place in the intervening months is important to note. In 2012 the Looked After population started at 459 children and finished at 480, overall, maintaining a steady climb throughout the year. This contrasts to the activity in 2013 where the Looked After children population started at 489 rising to 495 in June 2013 and then reduced to 473 by Dec 2013. The slow steady decline in numbers from July to November 2013 can be seen clearly on the graph “Numbers of Looked After Children per month end”.

3.2 In addition to the 473 children who are Looked After there are 48 children who have disabilities who receive regular short breaks which are reviewed by an IRO under Section 20 Regulation 48 of the Care Planning Regulations. It needs to be noted that these children are only looked after by the local authority for very short periods of time in which they receive short break care.

Number of children who have an allocated IRO

31st December 2013

31st December 2012

Looked After Children 473 480

Short Breaks (section 20 Reg 48)

48 41

5

3.3 The breakdown of the gender of Looked After Children 31st December 2013 is as follows:

Number of Looked After Children

31st December 2013

Male 273

Female 200

Total 473

3.4 A breakdown of the ethnicity of Looked After Children 31st December 2013 is as follows:

Ethnic Origin

31st December 2013

Number of Children 31st December 2012

A1 - White - British (WBRI) 432 447

A2 - White - Irish (WIRI) 1 1

A3 - Any Other White Background (WOTH) 6 7

B1 - Mixed - White And Black Caribbean (MWBC) 2 1

B2 - Mixed - White And Black African (MWBA) 5 1

B3 - Mixed - White And Asian (MWAS) 12 9

B4 - Mixed - Any Other Mixed Background (MOTH) 6

5

C1-Asian/Asian Birtish-Indian 0 0

C2 - Asian/Asian British - Pakistani (APKN) 1 1

C3 - Asian/Asian British - Bangladeshi (ABAN) 4 4

C4 - Asian/Asian British - Any Other Asian Background (AOTH) 1

2

D3 - Black/Black British - Any Other Black Background (BOTH) 2

1

E2 - Any Other Ethnic Group (OOTH) 1 1

Total 473 480

6

3.5 The age of the Looked After Children Population and the type of living arrangement they had on the 31st December.

Child Numbers

0-4 5-10 11-15 16+ Total In-house Fostering 43 51 77 30 201 Family & Friends 15 29 23 5 72 Specialist 0 6 17 6 29 TFCP (Treatment Fostering)

2 3 1 0 6

IFA (Independent Fostering Agency)

0 7 14 9 30

EBD (Emot. And Behav Difficulties)

0 0 9 4 13

Secure 0 0 0 3 3 DCS (Disabled Children’s Services Ext)_

0 0 7 5 12

OLA (Other Local Authority)

0 0 0 0 0

Supported Lodgings 0 0 0 13 13 Residential 0 0 5 8 13 Placed for Adoption 22 5 0 0 27 Placed with Parents 13 7 7 5 32 V4 to V2 ( Looked After by virtue of short breaks)

0 1 5 4 10

Others 0 3 4 5 12

95 112 169 97 473 3.6 The Legal Status of the Looked After Children Population – 31st December

2013

Legal Status of Looked After Children 31st December 2013

Number of children

Interim Care Order 35 Care orders 267 Section 20 Accommodation (Voluntary care) 110 Police Protection Order 0 Emergency Protection Order 1 Subject of Placement Order placed with adopters but not yet adopted

59

Young People on Remand 1

7

3.7 The Graphs below illustrate the activity of Looked After Children moving in and out of the care system during this reporting period compared with 2012

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Number of LAC Discharges ‐ calendar year 2012 & 2013

2012 2013

8

4 Key Responsibilities of the IRO Service

4.1 The Team is responsible for: -

Carrying out the statutory child care reviews for North Yorkshire’s Looked After Children, including reviewing the plans for those children who are placed outside the County.

Monitoring Looked After Children’s cases on an on-going basis. Monitoring the local authority’s performance as a corporate parent and

bringing any areas of poor practice to the attention of senior managers. Chairing the Initial Child Protection Conferences and Child Protection

Review Conferences. (Whilst it is not a statutory requirement for IROs to chair Child Protection Conferences it is a key responsibility in North Yorkshire).

Contributing to delivering training for the North Yorkshire Safeguarding Children’s Board.

Chairing the foster carer’s reviews. Contributing to the Regulation 33 rota for the Inspection of Children’s

residential establishments.

4.2 Under the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (England) Regulations 2010, every child who is looked after is required to have an IRO appointed prior to their first review and as a matter of good practice within 5 working days of being looked after. In North Yorkshire the IRO Service appoints an IRO as soon as the Service is notified that a child has become Looked After, (normally within 24 hours). In addition every child who has a short break provided under Section 20 of the 1989 Children Act modified under Regulation 48 is also required to have an IRO.

4.3 Section 25 B (1) (a) 1989 Act requires the IRO to monitor the Local Authority’s performance of its functions in relation to the child’s case. It marks a critical change in the legislation whereby the IRO responsibilities have been extended beyond the review meeting, requiring the IRO to track the progress of the child’s

9

Care Plan in between reviews. The intention is that the IRO has effective independent oversight of the child’s case and ensures that the child’s interests are protected throughout the care planning process.

4.4 One of the key findings from the OFSTED thematic report “Independent Reviewing Officers taking up the challenge” June 2013 is that -”the pace of progress in IROs taking on the full scope of their enhanced role was too slow in most authorities” and “the effectiveness of IRO oversight of individual looked after children’s care plans was not consistently good enough”. Whilst North Yorkshire was not part of the thematic inspection this is clearly one of the biggest challenges for the IRO Service in North Yorkshire.

4.5 The IRO Service in North Yorkshire has responsibility for ensuring that the Foster Carer reviews are conducted under the Fostering Service Regulations 2011 regulation 28. The Fostering Regulations require that “A review shall take place not more than a year after approval and thereafter whenever the Fostering Service considers it necessary, but at intervals of not more than a year”. The service is delivered by two dedicated IRO CPQA (Child Placement Quality Assurance) posts. North Yorkshire had 345 registered Foster Carers, including Family and Friends Foster Carers (NYCC Register of Foster Carers 31st December 2013).

5 IRO Activity

5.1 There were 880 children that had allocated IROs on the 31st December 2013 which is significantly less than in December 2012 when there were 997 children who were allocated IROs. Whilst the number of Looked After children remains largely the same at the calendar year end as last year there has been a substantial reduction in the number of children subject to child protection plans which accounts for the fall in the number of children with an allocated IRO.

Breakdown of Children open to IRO Service

31st Dec 2013

31st Dec 2012

Looked After Children 473 480 Short Breaks (section 20 Reg 48) 48 41 Child Protection Plans 359 476

5.2 In addition to this the IROs retain responsibility for a small number of young people who have just left care. The IRO will undertake the review of the first pathway plan following a young person leaving care if the young person wishes before handing over to the Leaving Care Team to conduct future pathway plan reviews. This is to provide continuity in the move across to Leaving Care Services and the pathway reviewing system. The number of Pathway Plan Reviews carried out by the IROs is not currently captured. There is clear evidence to support that the closer to adulthood a young person over the age of 16 leaves care the better the outcomes for that care leaver. The Manager of the Leaving Care Service has formally requested that IROs continue to review the pathway plans for children until they reach the age of 18 yrs. This would mean doing the pathway plan reviews for an additional 40 children creating potentially an extra 80 meetings per year.

10

5.3 In total IROs chaired 2,450 meetings in the 2013 calendar year compared to 2,370 meetings chaired in the 2012 calendar year. The number of Looked After Reviews chaired in 2013 was 1,351 which was an increase on the number of looked after reviews chaired in 2012 which was 1,105. The number of conferences chaired in 2013 was 1,099 which is a very slight decrease on 2012 when 1,105 conferences were chaired.

                 

Numbers of meetings chaired each month by IROs in 2012 and 2013

     

 

6 IRO Service Performance

6.1 The IRO team is directly responsible for two key performance indicators in relation to Looked After Children:-

Timeliness of Reviews Children’s Participation

6.2 It is important to note that these can only be achieved in partnership with the operational teams within Children’s Social Care.

6.3 Timeliness of Reviews

6.3.1 Under the Care Planning Regulations, the child’s first review must be

held within 20 working days of the child becoming looked after, the second review within no more than three months after the first and the third and subsequent reviews no more than six months after the previous one.

6.3.2 A total of 1,351 Looked After reviews were held in the calendar year

2013. The percentage of children who had a review on time was 97% Whilst the service strives to achieve 100% it is commendable to the IROs and the admin staff that 97% of the reviews were held within the statutory timescale given the staffing difficulties that the team faced in this calendar year.

6.3.3 Of the 1,009 child protection conferences that were held in the 2013

calendar year,100% were held within the statutory timescales, maintaining last year’s excellent performance.

6.4 Participation of Looked After Children in Review Meetings

6.4.1 The Local Authority reports to Government the percentage of Looked

After children who communicated their views specifically for each of their statutory reviews.

6.4.2 Out of the 1,351 reviews conducted, there were only five reviews that took place where the child/young persons’ view was not known. The performance in relation to the number of children who communicated their view in this reporting period is 99%.

6.4.3 The above relates to children’s views that are known at the review

meeting and the child’s view can be conveyed in a number of ways. The number of children aged 4years and above who attend their review meetings and actively participate is 50%. Whilst accepting that a number of children/young people may choose not to attend their review meeting the IRO Service would like to see more children and young people actively engaged in their review meetings. It is hoped that with a consistent approach to undertaking visits to children, prior to their first review, and being able to extend this to seeing more children prior to their reviews that the IROs will be able to actively engage the

13

children/young people in the review process and that this may well lead to an increase in the number of young people attending their review meetings.

6.4.4 Children’s Social Care has commissioned Viewpoint which is an IT interactive programme for children and young people which allows them to express their views in relation to the meetings that concern them. Currently a pilot is taking place in the Hambleton/Richmond area offering Viewpoint to children who are subject to a Child Protection Conference or who have become newly Looked After and have their first review coming up. The plan is to extend Viewpoint across the county in 2014.

6.4.5 The post card system for children to feedback on their experience of

the review has been in operation throughout this calendar year. Between the 1st April 2012-31st March 2013, 103 children and young people have responded and returned their postcards. The survey results indicate that the majority of those responding (98%) thought their reviews were excellent or good. There was also high satisfaction with the individual arrangements made for these meetings. The area where most ambivalence was expressed was in the helpfulness of the review meetings. Two thirds of the 103 young people felt their reviews were “helpful or very helpful” but a third felt they were just “ok”. There will be a further report done to collate the feedback received from the 1st April 2013-31st March 2014. The information will be used to inform the development of the Service. It is acknowledged from feedback that has been received that the postcard is now dated and need to be replaced. A new system of feedback will be developed in 2014.

7 Implementation of the IRO Handbook – achievements to date

7.1 The IRO Service has continued to work towards implementing the IRO Handbook in full. The implementation has focused on those things which are low cost but bring about positive changes to practice.

7.2 Work has been completed with the NYCC legal department to ensure that the IRO Service meets the requirement to have access to independent legal advice outside of its own authority. This has been achieved by the development of a reciprocal agreement between North Yorkshire/Cumbria/East Riding and Hull. It is based on the model used by the West Yorkshire Local Authorities. The IRO Service will in the first instance use North Yorkshire’s Legal Services for advice but where there is a conflict of interest or a second legal opinion is felt to be necessary this will be provided by one of the other Local Authorities with whom the reciprocal agreement is held with.

7.3 There has been a significant amount of work undertaken with strengthening the role of the IROs with the Court and with CAFCASS to implement the requirements of the Handbook. A protocol is now in place between the IRO Service and CAFCASS for the liaison between IROs and Guardians as cases are progressing through proceedings and for the handover at the end of proceedings. The work on strengthening the relationships between the IROs and the Guardians will continue in the 2014 calendar year to ensure that the

14

protocol is embedded and to promote good links between the two services and the courts.

7.4 Training has been provided to the Magistrates and Court Advisors for York and North Yorkshire about the IRO role and their relationship with the Courts. This has been done alongside the work that Judge Finnerty (Designated Family Judge for York County Court)has been doing with the Magistrates and has also enabled a positive relationship to develop between the IRO Service and Judge Finnerty. The intention has been to raise the profile of the IROs and to ensure that the IRO’s voice in relation to the Care Plan is being seen in the Court process. This is crucial given the changes brought about by the Family Justice Review whereby the Courts are moving to agreeing the broad Care Plan entrusting the detail to be followed through and implemented by IROs. It is absolutely essential to ensure that there is a strong link between legal, courts and the guardians for this to work effectively.

7.5 The IRO Service has continued to implement the quality alert system which is the mechanism for IROs to raise any concerns that arise in the course of their quality assurance function. The quality alert system is the process for notifying operational and senior managers when there is a concern that something has not happened that should have and needs to be put right. The quality alert system is also used to notify managers where there have been a breach of procedures or there are issues with regards to a case that the IRO feels a manager should be made aware of. There is a plan to develop the quality alert mechanism further, to raise issues with other agencies and this has just been agreed by the NYSCB (North Yorkshire Safeguarding Children’s Board). The IRO Service as part of its business plan is seeking to implement an electronic tracking system that clearly links review decisions, the quality alerts and the dispute resolution system.

7.6 A system of bi-annual reporting to Senior Managers has been established so that performance and quality assurance issues are reported back on a regular basis. Recommendations from the IRO Service are made in the bi-annual reports which are incorporated in the senior management action plans.

7.7 The IRO Annual Report 2011-12 has been posted on the NYCC website, along with the young people’s version so that it is accessible to members of the public. It is envisaged that the 2013 IRO report will have an accompanying young people’s version both of which will be accessible on the NYCC website.

7.8 The IROs from the 1st May have been working to a minimum standard that all children and young people are seen prior to their first review meeting. As the team has become fully staffed in the last quarter of the reporting year this has become much more established. The team also see a proportion of children prior to their on- going reviews but this is currently on a needs led basis rather than being the established norm. A system has been developed for capturing the information on IRO visits on the child’s electronic file so that there can be an accurate report on this information in 2014. There has also been an interview schedule drawn up by the Young Inspectors and the Participation, Quality, Standards Officer in conjunction with the IRO Service. This questionnaire survey has been tested on a very small number of young people to gain

15

feedback on their experience of meeting with the IRO and the preparation for their first review. The interview schedule will be refined and then used in 2014 to gain feedback from a wider group of young people in order to assist with the development of the service that is offered. The IRO Service has reviewed the information that is available to young people about Looked After Reviews and the IROs. A new introductory sheet, which contains information about who the IRO is, how to contact them and what a review is, has been developed in conjunction with Looked After young people and will be introduced in 2014

7.9 The IRO Service is playing an active part in the introduction and pilot of Viewpoint an electronic interactive system for children and young people to be consulted about their views prior to a Looked After Review.

7.10 The IRO managers have ensured that in the 2013 calendar year attention has been paid to the training and development of the IROs. In-house training has been provided by the Youth Justice Service regarding the legislative changes arising from the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offender Act (LASPO) and training on changes to Adoption Legislation and practice issues has been provided by the Adoption Manager and the Independent Chair of the Adoption panel. There have been legal briefings provided by the Senior Child Care solicitor for North Yorkshire and a joint CAFCASS and IRO event to look at the joint working protocol and establishing closer working relationships between the two services. The managers have also worked with the team on further developing the IRO quality assurance role and developing systems for capturing evidence and effectiveness of the IRO intervention.

7.11 IRO managers have established a system of audit of Looked After Review records and feedback into supervision in order to quality assure the work of the IROs. Whilst the management time available to do this in 2013 was limited due to operational pressures within the IRO service the systems are clearly established and the quality assurance role of the IRO managers will extend beyond audits of review records to include the observation of IRO practice in 2014.

8 Key Areas of the IRO Handbook where implementation remains on-going

8.1 The caseloads of the IROs in the 2013 calendar year have consistently remained above the recommended caseload level in the IRO Handbook. Section 7.15 of the Handbook states “It is estimated that a caseload of 50-70 looked after children for a FTE IRO, would represent good practice in the delivery of a quality service, including the full range of functions set out in this handbook”. With a fully staffed team the caseloads at the end of the 2013 calendar year should on average be around the low 70s and whilst this is close to the recommended levels in the Handbook, in a rural authority the size of North Yorkshire, with the associated travel requirements, implementing the full requirements of the Handbook remains very challenging even with caseloads getting very close to the recommended levels in the Handbook.

8.2 The IRO Service since the 1st May has been undertaking to see all children and young people prior to their first review meeting as a minimum. In addition to this a proportion of children and young people are seen prior to review meetings on

16

a needs led basis. The IRO Service has not had the capacity, in this calendar year to ensure that all children are consistently seen prior to their reviews. Section 3.9 of the IRO Handbook states that the IRO must speak with the child, prior to their review. Section 3.14 elaborates on this further and refers to the contact with the IRO being a visit. (The DFE have been very clear that they expect IROs to visit children separate to the review and not just to see the child half an hour before the review meeting). The IRO service now has in place a system on the child’s electronic file to record when IROs visits to children/young people have taken place. This will allow information on visits to be captured and analysed so that compliance with the IRO Handbook can be accurately reported on in 2014. In 2014, the IRO service will undertake to engage with all children who are looked after prior to all reviews. The IRO service is exploring various options, including the use of technology to facilitate this requirement of the handbook so that young people and IROs can maintain contact in between reviews and prior to review meetings.

8.3 The IROs are restricted in their capacity to undertake reviews as a series of meetings or processes. The IRO Handbook emphasises the importance of children being central to their review meetings and consulting with them about who they wish to attend. The Handbook advocates holding reviews as process meetings - with two or more parts to the review, where this will work more effectively, to engage the child/young person in the review process. Currently the service can only undertake this where there is a good practice reason to do so rather than being able to routinely offer this as a matter of choice for the child/young person.

8.4 The time available to the IROs to track the progression of the case in between reviews and to follow up whether decisions are being acted on is also limited due to the size of the caseloads and the travel requirements. The IROs ensure that the reviews and conferences are taking place within the statutory timescales. They also ensure that cases with the most urgent need are effectively tracked but have been unable to ensure consistent tracking across all cases. Developing an electronic system of tracking would be very helpful to the IROs and would lead to greater efficiency and a more effective system. There is a need to link an electronic system of tracking with the issuing of quality alerts and the dispute process to enable the IROs to be more effective and to have a transparent system where the evidence of the IROs intervention and the effectiveness of the IRO can be clearly seen. A system is currently being developed utilising Business Intelligence and should be operational from the summer of 2014.

8.5 The tracking role and evidencing the effectiveness of the IRO role is one of the biggest challenges for the IRO Service in the light of the findings of the June 2013 OFSTED thematic inspection of IRO Service “Independent reviewing officers: taking up the challenge? Following the publication of the report Edward Timpson, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Children and Families, wrote to Lead Members and Directors of Children’s Service in a letter dated the 5th June 2013 asking Directors to use the Ofsted thematic report on IROs to review and improve their service in line with its recommendations. A report has been presented to the Director, in November 2013 reviewing the

17

service in the light of the finding of the Thematic report. A copy of the letter in in appendix 2 .

8.6 An area for performance improvement is in relation to the statutory requirement of ensuring that the IRO review record is written up within 15 working days of the review meeting being completed. This is the statutory timescale required in 3.69 of the IRO Handbook. The IRO Service in the 2013 calendar year has been working to ensuring IRO review records are completed within 20 working days of the review meeting but given the team is now fully staffed the Service will be seeking in 2014, to ensure that review records are completed within 15 working days of the review.

9 Performance Monitoring of LA key performance indicators

9.1 Core Assessments

Every child should have a completed Core Assessment before they became Looked After as the Core assessment will identify the child’s needs and how these are best met. The assessment should inform the decision as to whether a child needs to be looked after and what the areas of work are in order to return the child to family care.

Number of Core Assessments seen at 20 Day Looked After Reviews

1st Jan to 31st Dec

2013

1st Jan 2011 to 31st Dec 2012

No. of 20 Day Reviews held 192 221 No. of Core Assessments seen

138 182

18

The performance of completed core assessments by the 20 day review in this calendar year was 72% and is a dip on the 2012 calendar year performance which was 82%. The absence of a core assessment makes it difficult to determine if the Care Plan is the right plan for the child. CSC need to take action to address this problem as it serves to undermine the LAC strategy for reducing the number of Looked After Children and could reduce the effectiveness of the 28 day accommodation strategy if children/young people are being accommodated without a completed core assessment.

9.2 Care Plans

Under the Care Planning Regulations 2010, the Local Authority is required to have a Care Plan in place prior to the child coming into care, or if this is not practically possible, within 10 working days of being in care. Children, parents and Carers should be provided with a copy of the Care Plan.

The IRO has a key quality assurance role to play in ensuring that every child has an appropriate Care Plan that meets the needs of the child and is being implemented in a timely manner. The IROs check that a Care Plan is in place by the 20 day Looked After Review.

The Care Plan template which is on the ICS (Integrated Children’s System) is not a user friendly document and it is difficult for children and their families to see very clearly what the plan is. There is a need to review the template with a view to producing a more simplified Care Plan which will be more meaningful for children and their families.

Number of Care Plans seen at 20 Day Looked After Reviews

1st Jan to 31st Dec

2013

1st Jan to 31st Dec

2012 No. of 20 Day Reviews held 192 221 No. of Care Plans seen 137 187

19

The performance in relation to Care Plans seen at the 20 day review in this calendar year was 71% which represents a down turn in performance from 2012 calendar year which was 85%. The number of children without a Care Plan in place by the 20 day review is a significant concern which needs to be addressed.

9.3 Placement Plans

A Placement Plan and Care Plan should be in place at the point a child is placed with a carer, with a copy of each given to the carer. By the 20 Day Review one would expect to see all Foster Carers having a copy of the child’s Care Plan and a copy of the Placement Plan. If carers do not have full information about the child it can compromise their ability to provide safe and appropriate care for the child.

20 Day Looked After Reviews - Information in place with Foster Carers

1st Jan to 31st Dec

2013

1st Jan to 31st Dec

2012 No. of 20 Day Reviews held 192 221 No. of Carers that have a Care Plan

130 169

No of Carers that have the PP

128 177

20

In this calendar year 68% of carers had a copy of the Child’s Care Plan compared to 76% in the 2012 calendar year.

67% of carers in this calendar year had a copy of the Placement Plan compared to 80% in the 2012 calendar year.

There has been a marked fall in performance which needs to be addressed by CSC.

10 Quality Issues Alert System and Reporting Mechanisms

10.1 There have been 277 Quality Alerts raised in total by the IRO service in this calendar year.

10.2 Bi-annual reports from the IRO Service to SMT have been established in which there is a summary of the alerts that have been issued. Recommendations arising from the quarterly reports are incorporated into an SMT action plan

10.3 The IRO managers need to do some further work with the team to ensure that there is consistency of practice across the County in the issuing of alerts.

11 Issues Identified through the Quality Alert System

11.1 There is a lack of clarity around the permanence planning process for children who require long term foster care. CSC has commenced work on establishing a permanence strategy and following on from this there needs to be a clear policy and procedure in place which carefully maps out the processes for achieving the different routes to permanence. There have been occasions in the last reporting period where the IRO for the child has not been aware that a foster placement has not been approved as a long term placement for a child.

11.2 There is a need to improve the social work practice in relation to communicating more effectively with foster carers and working in partnership with them. There are many good examples of social workers working well with foster carers but equally there are a number of QAs issued in relation to where this has not worked well. For example foster carers are not always being consulted about complex contact plans. Other examples of poor communication centre on important information that foster carers have about children not always effectively gathered by social workers. This is a missed opportunity to use information to help plan for that next move and to assist new carers in meeting the needs of children.

11.3 There are issues about delays in life story work being undertaken with children. This affects children who are being adopted and children living in long term care. There is some excellent life story work being undertaken by Family Support Workers but there does not appear to be enough capacity to meet the demand. The life story work is really important to ensure that children understand what has happened in their life and to help then with their sense of identity.

11.4 Disruption meetings are still not being held for those children in long term placements which end in an unplanned way. The disruption meeting is designed to help inform the next move for the child and for the organisation to

21

learn from this in order to prevent other placements breaking down. The disruption meetings have not been held due to the capacity issue within the IRO Service however a new way forward with this is currently being explored within the IRO Service which it is expected will enable disruption meetings to be undertaken by the Service in 2014.

11.5 The quality alerts have highlighted a need to revisit the procedures around allegations against foster carers and to review the practice in relation to allegations. Work on this is currently underway and should be completed in this reporting period.

11.6 Quality alerts have been frequently issued where there has been a breach of the Care Planning regulations, for example, failure to notify IROs of significant events happening in a child’s life for example change of school, move of placement. There have been occasions when children accommodated under Section 20 have been returned home without consultation with the IRO or a review decision to agree the plan of return home and discharge from care. Alerts have been issued where an up to date Care Plan or Core Assessment is not in place or carers do not have the required information eg signed copy of the Placement Plan. There is a need for CSC to review their procedures to ensure they comply with the Care Planning, Case Review Regulations (England) 2012 and then there is a need to ensure that social work staff comply with the procedures.

11.7 The quality alert system has raised that some children who go to respite foster placements, often over a weekend, do not receive social work visits when in respite care and often there is no follow up contact with the carers. Issues have also been raised that sometimes respite carers experience delays in receiving payment. These issues have already been raise in the quarterly reports to CSC Senior Management Team.

12 Dispute Resolution Process

12.1 The IRO Service has amended and updated the dispute resolution procedure to ensure that it is compliant with the requirements of the IRO Handbook. Each IRO Service is required to have a dispute procedure in place for seeking resolution where the IRO service has a dispute with the Local Authority. In accordance with the Handbook the procedure clearly sets out that an IRO should seek informal resolution and where this is not successful or cannot be achieved swiftly should then invoke “formal resolution”. The amended procedure also clearly sets out that an IRO can refer a matter to CAFCASS at any point in the dispute process and reflects the changes in legislation that a referral to CAFCASS should no longer be used as a last resort.

12.2 Work has been completed in this calendar year of ensuring that the dispute resolution procedure dovetails with the quality alert procedure. There is work to be done in the next calendar year about ensuring that the changes to procedures are clearly embedded in the practice of the IROs and that the procedure is readily available on the CSC intranet.

12.3 In this calendar year all the dispute resolutions have been done through “informal resolution” i.e. through discussion with the Social Worker or Team Manager. Discussions take place on a daily basis, and most things are

22

resolved quickly at first line management level. This is good practice and is in line with the IRO Handbook.” Informal resolution” is most commonly used to resolve things at Team Manager level when review decisions have not been acted on or implementation of the plan is deemed by the IRO to be progressing too slowly. Where the IRO is concerned that the team are not addressing the issues that they are raising they will seek “informal resolution” through the Group Manager.

12.4 There have also been a number of issues resolved through “informal resolution” with Senior Managers. North Yorkshire has a flatter management structure and accessible Senior Managers which is not always the case in other authorities. This means that IROs are able to seek informal resolution very quickly and directly with senior managers without having to resort to the formal resolution process. A good example of this is when the IRO is querying a decision made by placement panel where they may be concerned that a placement being offered to a child is in the IRO’s view not going to meet the child’s identified needs. The IRO will intervene by directly communicating with the Head of Safeguarding who chairs the Placement Panel. IROs have requested a placement freeze when a children/young people have not been happy about a proposed move until there has been time to explore this further with the child and resource panel. There are effective lines of communication in and out of placement panel and there have been numerous examples of IROs being able to effectively intervene about resource issues for children through informal resolution.

12.5 There is now in place for the IRO Service a reciprocal legal agreement for independent legal advice which further strengthens the IRO service in being able to challenge the Local Authority if this is required.

13 CSC Action Plan

13.1 An action plan was drawn up to incorporate the recommendations from the previous IRO Report (1st April 2011 -31st March 2012). With the exception of two recommendations they have all been achieved in full; the remaining two will be carried forward into this year’s action plan.

13.2 The updated action plan from 1st April 2011-31st March 2012 is in appendix 1.

14 Areas for Development of the IRO Service

14.1 There is a need to further develop and embed the Quality Alert system and develop an electronic system of tracking which will evidence the links between tracking review decisions, the issuing of QAs and the use of the dispute resolution process.

14.2 IRO managers ensure there is a consistent approach to the operation of the Quality Alert system.

14.3 The IRO Service to ensure the introduction of the IRO information sheets for young people on the IRO Service and the review process and to ensure all looked after children/young people receive a copy.

23

14.4 The IRO Service to ensure that all children who are newly looked after are consistently seen prior to their 20 day review and to increase the proportion of children who are seen prior to all reviews. The IRO service in 2014 will explore various options including the use of technology, to enable the IROs to be able to maintain contact with children and young people in between and prior to review meetings.

14.5 The IRO Service to request assistance in undertaking a survey of young

people using the questionnaire that has been developed to gain feedback on the IRO visits to young people prior to their first review.

14.6 The IRO service to continue to support the implementation of Viewpoint as a consultation tool for children and young people to use prior to their Looked After Reviews

14.7 The IRO service to collate the feedback from the post card survey from the

1st April 2013 – 31st March 2014 and to use the findings of the survey to inform the development of the service.

14.8 The IRO service to seek to develop a new feedback mechanism for children and young people following their reviews and to maintain the postcard system until a new system is in place.

14.9 The IRO managers to ensure the quality assurance of IROs work is prioritised in the next reporting year and to ensure that observations of IROs chairing reviews is undertaken in addition to audits of the looked after review records.

14.10 The IRO Service to continue the work on developing the relationships between the IRO Service/Legal service/Courts and CAFCASS

14.11 CSC to support the IRO Service in developing a model for disruption

meetings and delivering the Service. 14.12 The IRO Annual Report to be posted on the NYCC website along with a young people’s version. The Young people’s Council to receive a copy of the young people’s version of the IRO report and the report to be made available to all Looked After young people.

24

15 Recommendations to CSC to improve outcomes for LAC

15.1 The Director of Children’s Service to review the IRO Service in line with the recommendations of the Ofsted thematic inspection (June 2013) as requested by the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Children and Families in a letter to Lead Members and Directors of Children’s Service dated the 5th June.

15.2 CSC to review the additional tasks that IROs undertake in order to allow them to focus on their primary function as IROs for Looked After Children. Within this the request from the Manager of the Leaving Care Service for IROs to review the pathway plans for children who leave care after the age of 16years until they reach the 18years needs to be considered.

15.3 CSC must review the gate keeping mechanisms to ensure that core assessments are completed prior to a decision being made about a child coming into care. The completion of core assessments is a vital component which underpins the LAC strategy to reduce the number of children coming into the care system and the 28 day admission strategy.

15.4 CSC must review the mechanisms for ensuring that they are meeting the legal requirements to ensure that a Care Plan is in place within the required timescales.

15.5 CSC should also take the opportunity to revisit the ICS Care Plan template to see if a shorter more streamlined document can be developed which is child and family friendly. The production of a simplified Care Plan will promote greater ownership of the Care Plan by children and their families.

15.6 CSC need to complete the work on the permanence strategy and to ensure that there are clear policies and procedures in place regarding the different routes to permanent placements.

15.7 CSC need to seek to review the mechanism for ensuring that carers have copies of the Care Plan and Placement Plan at the point a child is placed.

15.8 There is a need to ensure that there is consistently good communication between Social Workers and foster carers and effective partnership working in in place. CSC should consider awareness raising and training in respect of these issues. This could be achieved by having the input of the Fostering Service/IRO Fostering Officers working collaboratively with CSC to do a training input at one of the CSC management days and Social Work practitioner events.

15.9 CSC needs to review the CSC Looked after Children procedures to ensure that they are fully complaint with the Care Planning and Case Review Regulations (England) 2010.

15.10 CSC to ensure that the updated quality alert and dispute resolution procedure are available to all CSC staff on the intranet

15.11 CSC to ensure that the work that is underway on reviewing and updating the procedures regarding allegations against foster carers is completed.

25

15.12 CSC should review and address the problem of resourcing the demand for life story work to be undertaken with children and young people

15.13 CSC to ensure that all social work staff are aware of their responsibilities to visit children in placement when they are having respite care.

Author: Angela Murray

Independent Reviewing Team Manager (Looked After Children) Date: 31.1.14

Appendix 1

CSC Updated Action Plan

Independent Reviewing Service Annual Report 1.4.11 -31.3.12 – Action Plan Updated 6.1.14

RECOMMENDATION

ACTION

HOW

WHO

RAG

rating

Comment

13.1 Any action not completed from the 1.7.10-31.3.11 action plan to be carried forward

16.4

CSC need to review the mechanism for ensuring that Carers have a copy of the Care Plan and Placement Plan at the point a child is placed with them.

General Managers to implement through team procedures

Group Managers Head of Assessment & Commissioning (care)

Mechanisms reviewed and changes implemented but still need to see further improvement on performance

16.5

The County Council’s review of Special Guardianship Allowances should be concluded as soon as is reasonably practicable and that information about Special Guardianship Allowances should be made widely available and easily accessible to staff, carers and families.

The review is currently before Executive Members and once a decision and policy is made its content will be widely available

Head of Safeguarding

Family & Friends Policy agreed & implemented

16.7

The Directorate and Members will need to undertake a review of the IRO Service to assess options for compliance with the new IRO

Await report from the piece of work being undertaken by the external consultant

Head of effective Practice & Quality

Interim review completed and resources requested to assist with compliance.

27

RECOMMENDATION

ACTION

HOW

WHO

RAG

rating

Comment

Handbook

Change Manager Assurance

13.2

IRO Service to work toward full implementation of the 2011 IRO Handbook

IRO Managers to progress the IRO Handbook Implementation Plan

IRO Managers IRO Handbook implementation is on-going and will be completed during 2014

13.3

CSC to ensure that there are good communication links between the Placement Panels and the IROs

Develop a structured communication process with IRO’s and Placement Panel

Performance, Standards & Commissioning Manager

There are clear communications links established which are working effectively

13.4

CSC to ensure that there is effective gate keeping of Core Assessments and Care plans being in place at Placement Panel

Effective pre-panel gatekeeping process established & implemented

Performance, Standards & Commissioning Manager

Gatekeeping in place

13.5

CSC to conclude the work on the Family and Friends policy and ensure that the information is readily available to carers

Family & Friends Police agreed and implemented

AD CSC Family & Friends Police accessible on the website

13.6

IRO Service to refine the quality alert system

Review current system and ensure there is a policy and procedure to underpin the QA system

IRO Managers Review completed and a draft policy and procedure has been circulated. Procedure is being taken to the Safeguarding Board to seek a multi-agency sign up.

13.7

IRO Service to ensure the QA system

IRO Managers Work has been completed on reviewing

28

RECOMMENDATION

ACTION

HOW

WHO

RAG

rating

Comment

IRO Service to ensure there is a reliable mechanism in place for measuring the effectiveness of the IRO challenge

dovetails with the Local Dispute Procedure so that there is a formal mechanism for recording resolution of disputes.

the Dispute Resolution procedure to ensure that it dovetails with the draft QA procedure

13.8

IRO Service to strengthen the link between the IRO Service and the Access and Inclusion Service

To review the lines of communication between the IRO Service and the Access and Inclusion Service

IRO Managers Work has been completed on this. Some minor adjustments to the QA procedure and Dispute procedure were required.

13.9

IRO to promote the use of View Point for children and young people in the review process

IRO Service to work with CSC to introduce and promote the use of Viewpoint

IRO Managers IRO Manager is part of the implementation steering group and IRO Service staff are supporting the introduction of Viewpoint

13.10 The IRO Report to be publicly accessible on the North Yorkshire Website

Upload onto website IRO Managers Annual Report available

29

Appendix 2

Edward Timpson MP Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Children and Families

Sanctuary Buildings 20 Great Smith Street Westminster London SW1P 3BT tel: 0370 000 2288 www.education.gov.uk/help/contactus

To Lead Members and Directors of Children’s Services

5 June 2013 Corporate Parenting and the Voice of the Child in Care

I am writing to you today around the importance of strong corporate parenting and embedding the voice of the child in care in local practice.

Children and young people in care have a unique place in society. Central government and local authorities share responsibility for being their corporate parents. I know that each one of you is as committed and determined as I am about giving children in care the support and opportunities they need to turn their lives around. Many local councillors have become champions of the children in their care and are already making a real difference to improving their lives.

I want all Lead Members for Children’s Services, working with Directors of Children’s Services, to have a real sense of parental responsibility for their outcomes. This concern should encompass their education, their health and welfare and their aspirations as they enter adulthood. I recognise that it is a huge challenge and responsibility to be a good corporate parent, particularly if you are a newly elected councillor or Lead Member. That is why we have funded the National Children’s Bureau to develop materials, based on the best local practice, to support corporate parents to narrow the gap between the outcomes of looked-after children and their peers. These were published today at : www.ncb.org.uk/corporateparenting. Please use these to improve the support you provide to children in your care.

Children in Care Councils (CiCC)

At the heart of the care system should be the voice of the child. Listening and talking to children is crucial to their development. It helps them learn thinking skills and improves self-esteem and confidence. Children in care know better than anyone else what works well, what is less successful, and what needs to change. They need to be able to challenge and influence strategic planning and day to day decisions. That is why every local authority has a Children in Care

30

Council and I would urge Lead Members and Directors of Children’s Services to hold regular meetings with their local CICC to discuss how support for children in care can be improved.

Role of Independent Review Officers (IROs)

IROs also have a key role in promoting the voice of the child. I recently held a roundtable discussion with IRO Managers and local government and voluntary sector partners to consider the role of the IRO. We agreed there was some excellent local practice which needed to be spread to all local authorities. Key aspects of a good service that we identified are:

• IROs having the required skills, training, and knowledge to undertake all duties set out in the IRO Handbook;

• IROs having manageable caseloads and the ability to effectively challenge poor practice;

• The quality of the IRO service is continuously improved by managers and IROs acting on feedback from children and young people;

• Annual reports on IROs performance are published and discussed with lead members and DCS.

I would ask Directors of Children’s Services to use the forthcoming Ofsted thematic report on IROs to review and improve their services in line with its recommendations.

Advocacy

I meet regularly with groups of children in care and separately with care-leavers and have been struck by how many of them say they do not have access to advocacy services. All children in care have a statutory right to have access to advocacy services and I would ask all Lead Members and DCS’ to ensure that children in your care know how to access your local services. I am also delighted to announce that the Government will, from April 2013, support both the National Youth Advocacy Service (NYAS) and Voice to provide an advocacy advice service for looked-after children and care leavers.

“Freezing” decisions whilst a complaint is investigated

The Children’s Rights Director recently told me that he regularly has to remind local authorities of the statutory guidance on “freezing” decisions. I would like reiterate that when a decision is made that a child objects to e.g. a placement move, the decision should be frozen whilst the complaint is investigated. (Getting the best from Complaints. Statutory Guidance 2004.) Of course, the decision may well not alter, but the key point is that a child is given the chance to have their voice heard before final decisions are made.

NSPCC Childline number and services

The NSPCC Childline is an important service which offers children in care help, advice and counselling. Many children and young people in care experience

31

instances of loneliness, depression or a feeling of isolation. A child in care can contact a ChildLine counsellor at any time who will listen and offer advice and support. I am therefore asking all Directors of Children’s Services and Lead Members to ensure children in their care know about the NSPCC Childline. The NSPCC website is: http://www.nspcc.org.uk/ ; and the Childline number is: 0800 1111.

Keeping children informed

Children in care often tell me that they do not know what they are entitled to while they are in care. I am aware that many of you already provide very helpful and accessible information, often utilising innovative websites. The Department has also produced a looked-after children and care-leavers’ entitlements information sheet, which can be found at http://www.education.gov.uk/childrenandyoungpeople/families/childrenincare/a00 208882/leavers

I would like to take this opportunity to remind all Lead Members and Directors of Children’s Services of the need to regularly review and improve the information given to children in care so that they are aware of their legal entitlements.

Thank you for all you are doing to support children in care.

Edward Timpson MP Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Children and Families