Agenda item

The Executive Director of Children’s Services will provide the Panel with an update on progress in relation to the Children’s Services Improvement Programme, including the findings of the most recent Ofsted Monitoring Visit in December 2021. 

The Executive Director of Children’s Services provided the Panel with update on progress on the Children’s Services Improvement Plan in the context of the most recent Ofsted monitoring visit to Children’s Services in December 2021.

 

The second Ofsted Monitoring Visit since the full inspection in 2019, took place on 14 and 15 December 2021 and was undertaken by two inspectors following two weeks of preparation and liaison.

 

The focus of the visit was: Children in Need; Children in Need of Protection and Public Law Outline.

 

The Ofsted letter was published on 31 January 2022 and was circulated with the agenda prior to the meeting.

 

A summary of strengths was provided as follows:-

 

·        No child was found to be at risk of immediate harm or in need or urgent action.  (Significant progress from the 2019 inspection when more than 10 children were found to be at immediate risk).

 

·        Senior Managers know their services well and had a realistic understanding of progress.  (Again, significant progress as the 2019 inspection found a lack of awareness around being inadequate).

 

·        There had been successful focus on improving the capacity of staff, decreasing caseloads and employing more permanent, qualified and experienced staff.  (Recruitment and retention of staff (particularly recruitment) continued to be an issue.  There was currently a £5,000 ‘welcome’ payment to attract experienced, qualified Social Workers, however, it was having limited impact.  Despite being valued, Middlesbrough continued to have a higher number of agency staff than it would like).

 

·        Auditing was a particular strength – a wide in-depth coverage of the quality of the service with a robust moderation process. 

 

·        Successful focus on compliance.

 

·        Appropriate focus on improving the quality of practice through increased training and learning opportunities.

 

·        ‘Some’ examples of good practice.  (Where planning (Smart plans) for children was good).

 

·        Stronger practice where there were immediate safeguarding concerns and children on the edge of care.

 

·        Social Workers:-

 

-        Knew their children and had enthusiasm and passion for improving their lives.

-        Felt supported during lockdowns.

-        Reported how Children’s Services had improved and that they were better supported to do their work.

 

In terms of areas for development:-

 

·        There was still a stubborn 20% of inadequate practice where concerns were not addressed and work was not progressing appropriately.  However, in Early Help, all work was ‘required improvement’ or better.  (Since the letter was published, this figure had reduced to around 10% in some areas of practice, but further work was required to reduce further).

 

·        Plans and planning were not focused and lacked timescales relevant to the child.  This led to delays in progressing plans so some children remained in situations where their needs were not met or risks sufficiently managed.

 

·        Insufficient focus on the lived experience of the child.  (Need to think more about what life is like for the child on a daily basis, such as are they going to school hungry? Is the home warm?).

 

·        Social work tools not sufficiently used to focus on patterns of behaviour and cumulative risk.  (Sometimes issues were looked at in isolation and consideration not always given to issues that had occurred in the past/patterns of behaviour).

 

·        In the main, supervision was not sufficiently driving improvements, management recording of decision making was too limited.  (One to ones with Social Workers were happening but not yet driving improvements in practice).

 

·        Positive steps had been taken to improve pre-proceedings work but management oversight did not always identify what needed to change.  (Need to be more explicit in telling families what specific changes were needed).

 

·        Evidence of a risk averse culture.

 

-        Some families found themselves subject to statutory Child Protection planning when not needed, eg families who needed support but worked well with Social Workers and other agencies.  (The Panel heard that this was based on evidence from only two cases).

 

-        Small number of Safety Plans were still in place when cases closed when other support packages would be more appropriate.  (This had been worked on over the last few months).

 

In terms of the next steps, the Children’s Services Improvement Plan would be revised to reflect Ofsted’s findings.

 

The Panel was advised that Middlesbrough had been fortunate to secure grant funding of £330,000, from the DfE which had been used to bring in experienced Practice Leaders to support quality of practice.

 

The next Ofsted Monitoring visit would take place on 29/30^th March 2022 and would focus on:-

 

·        Court Work

·        Children and young people who had been looked after for a year or more

·        Permanence – moving children to their forever homes.

 

An Annual Engagement Meeting with Ofsted would take place in April. (Common to all authorities).

 

Work was continuing to ensure a more ‘joined up’ approach with partners and work was being undertaken to prepare for a Joint Targeted Area Inspection (JTAI).

 

There would be a further Monitoring Visit in June 2022 and it was possible that the full inspection would take place towards the end of the year.

 

During discussion, the following issues were raised:-

 

·        Reference was made to the £5,000 welcome incentive for qualified Social Workers and it was queried whether there were conditions attached which might be acting as a deterrent to take up.  The Executive Director stated that the incentive had not been in place for long, however, she had hoped for a quicker response, but felt it was generally attributable to a lack of experienced Social Workers which was a regional and national issue.  The incentive was not open to newly qualified social workers as they were unable to take on complex work initially.  It was highlighted that the only condition was that a proportion of the welcome payment must be repaid if they left within the first year.  It was highlighted that a three-year retention allowance programme had been introduced which had been more successful.

 

·        A Member acknowledged that £5,000 was a good incentive to attract Social Workers but queried how Middlesbrough compared with other Tees Valley authorities in terms of salary.  The Executive Director responded that whilst Middlesbrough’s was not the lowest salary in the region, it was also not the highest which was one of the reasons that the recruitment and retention incentives had been introduced.  It was also important to put Middlesbrough on the map and to continue improving practice to show people that Middlesbrough was a good place to live and work and it was possible that people were deterred by the fact that Middlesbrough was currently rated as an ‘inadequate’ authority as they could not see the improvements being made.

 

·        Reference was made to the 20% inadequate practice and it was queried which areas were of most concern and what was being done to address it.  The Executive Director responded that there was a variation across the directorates but the key to addressing inadequate practice was to carry out audits and improve through learning.  Some audits were themed, for example, looking at visits by Social Workers and by trends.  Training and development could be provided where appropriate or even support provided from the Practice Leaders.  It was vital to use learning to improve practice – learning through audits, complaints, comments, scrutiny, corporate parenting, etc, and it had improved greatly in some areas.  Transparency was also key to improving by understanding the current position.

 

The Chair thanked the Executive Director for her presentation.

 

AGREED that the information provided be noted.