Agenda item

The Service Manager will provide a presentation to the Board.

The Chair welcomed the Service Manager from Adoption Tees Valley to present the bi-annual report which covered the period of 1.4.20-30.9.20

 

The Manager advised that she would discuss some of the key issues/ challenges and issue how this has been overcome. The first 6 months of the year has been dominated by Covid which brought challenges, although ATV dealt with the challenges were dealt with well and in terms of children being adopted, the service had placed more children than the corresponding period in the previous year.

 

Covid-19

 

Covid undoubtedly has had a massive impact on adoptive services, and on planning for children to be placed with their permanent new families.

 

The government issued amended regulations and flexibilities on operating adoption services and these were reflected upon, including how ATV has used the flexibilities.

 

The Manager advised that one of the main aspects that stopped initially during the first lockdown of the pandemic was the placing of children. Like many local authorities, Middlesbrough chose to temporary stop moving children into adoptive families, however continued to develop childrens' care plans and matches to panel.

 

During this time ATV worked with the Adoption leads across the Tees Valley (Paula Jemson in Middlesbrough) and developed a thorough risk assessment to include everyone who would be included in the child's plan in moving on e.g. child, foster carer, adoptive parents, and all workers.

 

When ATV decided to start to reintroduce visits, these risk assessments continued and are signed off by the service Manager.

 

Children began to move into their adoptive families in May 2020. Each placement was underpinned by the risk assessment, taking account of all parties, and in line with Stockton Borough Council policy for covid, and policies for the placing Local authority. In the first 2 quarters 45 children have been placed with adoptive families, compared to 33 from the previous year.  Placing children takes integrated collective work with children's services and this has been a real success.

Amended regulations from Government.

 

The manager advised that the government issues a number of amendments to the regulations, these were as follows:

 

·         Adoption agencies were no longer required to constitute and adoption panel but had the power to do so. If they chose to constitute an adoption panel, only 3, instead of 5, panel members, of which one must be an independent person, were required for it to be quorate.

·         Adoption agencies were permitted to make a decision that a prospective adopter may enter the assessment (Stage 2) even if information in relation to the health of the adopter, and the DBS had not yet been obtained. Where the agency decided that the adopter was not suitable to adopt because of information received in relation to these checks in stage 2, the prospective adopter may not make an application to have their case reviewed by the IRM.

·         The adoption agency may decide that a child relinquished for adoption does not require being referred to the adoption panel.

·         The adoption agency may decide not to hold a review of the child’s case under adoption agency regulations, where it decides that it is not practicable to carry out a review of the child’s case, and it is satisfied that a review is not necessary to safeguard and promote the welfare of the child.

In response to these regulations, ATV agreed to do the following:

 

i.        A panel has always been convened for usual panel business. No adopter has been approved, and no match has proceeded to a decision, without being considered at the adoption panel.

ii.        The Agency produced amended procedures to allow for the possibility that the panel may not achieve quoracy of 5, in unforeseen circumstances. On 4 occasions the agency has operated with 4 panel members, and on all other occasions, there have been at least 5 panel members. The panel is independently chaired, and there is always at least 2 further independent panel members.

iii.        No relinquished child has been referred or considered within this period.

iv.        The agency has progressed adopters to stage 2 of the assessment process, without having yet obtained health information, and/or DBS information. This has been necessary, as GP’s have not been able to prioritise adoption medicals of prospective adopters. This has taken place in 9 cases.

v.            No adopter who were required by regulation to have a medical assessment have been approved without a medical assessment having taken place and considered by one of the Agency medical Advisors.

 

Social Work Practice

 

The Board were advised that much of the social work practice has taken place via video conferencing, especially in the early days of lockdown. The Manager outlined that social workers and families reported that where a relationship existed, continuing via video conferencing did not significantly affect assessment work, or support work.

 

However in the later stages of the period, social workers felt that where they had not met the adopters previously, there was concern about the degree to which they were satisfied that they were able to get to know families without meeting them on more than one occasion. Due to this, the service agreed that more face to face visits were needed and this had been progressed. At all times, children’s safety and welfare has been the priority and all adopter assessment work is about finding good safe homes for children.

In terms of assessment work, the face to face visits have been limited, however the service has learnt a great deal from the pandemic e.g. about times for meetings.

 

Adoption panel has operated totally on a video conferencing platform. And whilst initially, Panel Chairs and panel members took some time to get used to this method, it is being used well to manage all panel Business, and there is no evidence of less rigour in considering cases.

 

The Service Manager expressed that there have been some challenges in respect to checks and medical issues, as whilst ATV has been fully operating, not all employers are in work, and therefore a significant amount of time has been taken up with chasing up the required information.

 

Middlesbrough's situation

In terms of progress in Middlesbrough, the Service Manager outlined that within the first 2 quarters more children were being referred and more being placed for adoption, and more adoption orders have been achieved. The Board were made aware that on the converse there has been some longer adoption scorecard timescales for Middlesbrough as there have been some children who have waited a long time to be adopted. However it is important to remember that there have been some really positive outcomes for children who have been placed, and are now adopted and have achieved a permanent family. In terms of positives, we have had two groups of sibling groups of three children who have been adopted together.

Over the period, we have had 7 children over the age of 5 who have been adopted and this is something that should be celebrated.

 Middlesbrough Council have had 23 children placed for adoption this financial year, and there have been 19 adoption orders granted.

 

In terms of timescales, Middlesbrough and ATV have worked closely together and the Service Manager has been attended the improvement board to discuss permanency. We have been working in an integrated way to highlight where there are challenges in terms of some of the processes involved there has been some positive work.

 

Early Permanency

The Board also learnt of the work around early permanence. The Service Manager outlined that ATV have been looking at “whole system change” and have been working with children's services, IRO's and family justice boards to put plans in place to consider Planning for early permanence and looking at the legal measures available. The outcome is that ATV want to look at reducing movement for children in care and helping children be placed at an earlier stage with their permanent carers, which is known has better outcomes for children..

 

Middlesbrough practice week for Children's Services

This will be taking place in March 2021 and information would be shared with the Corporate Parenting Board in due course. ATV will be contributing to this as ATV have been looking at how they can work more collectively with the 5 local authorities.

 

Lifestory work

There have been challenges in Quarter 1 and 2 over lifestory work and there have been in-depth discussions about when life story work is undertaken and whether ATV have the correct model in place.

There has been early planning to develop life story work much earlier and ATV have been looking at digital platforms. ATV are also working with a PHD student from Newcastle University around lifestory work, and we hope to be able to provide some outcomes from this study in near future.

 

The Manager wanted to recognise the work of her team in ATV and social workers in the Local Authorities and noted the hard work and shared approach from ATV and the local authorities.

 

Following the presentation, the number of Board members made comment in relation to the lifestory work and  although covid has been difficult, it had been positive in adapting different communication methods for perspective adaptors. Paula Jemson also added that there had been a 35% improvement in Middlesbrough of children being placed, which is a huge achievement.

 

The Chair gave her thanks to the Service Manager and all staff involved.

 

AGREED- That the report be noted.