Agenda item

[To receive the IRO’s Annual Report 2014/15]

Mandy Lee, Safeguarding Manager - Children, presented the Annual Report of the Independent Reviewing Officer Service 2014/15. She reported that the Wolverhampton Safeguarding Service had a statutory duty for overseeing and ratifying the care plans for Looked After Children (LAC) via the activity of the Independent Reviewing Officers. As such, the service was bound to provide the Board with an annual report that outlined the activity of the service, the impact for children and recommendations for service improvement that would enhance young people’s experiences. Furthermore, she reported that a real challenge faced by the service was a lack of useful performance management data and that requests for such data had been outstanding from the past three annual Reports over a period of two years. The Chair, Cllr Val Gibson, sought clarification as to the type of information required. The Safeguarding Manager - Children explained that she required the Business Intelligence Service to treat the request as a priority. The Service Director, Children and Young People reported that the request had now been actioned.

Cllr Julie Hodgkiss referred to paragraph 3.4 of the report inasmuch as it referred to caseload. The Safeguarding Manager - Children explained that the IRO Handbook recommended IRO caseloads of 50 – 70 children per IRO. Despite being fully staffed and having an additional agency IRO it had not been possible to achieve this recommended caseload due to the high number of LAC. She informed the Board that IRO’s were also required to undertake Chairing duties at Child Protection Conferences and together with ensuring that reviews were undertaken on time it was not always possible to monitor LAC between reviews. She assured the Board that the statutory minimum duties were fulfilled. The Service Director, Children and Young People reminded the Board that caseload had now reduced significantly with additional opportunities created to monitor LAC between reviews.

Cllr Peter O’Neill referred to those LAC with mental health problems and who were remanded in custody and questioned where the reviews were undertaken. The Safeguarding Manager - Children reported that the reviews would be undertaken wherever the LAC was living and confirmed that the reviews would be undertaken by City of Wolverhampton Council employees.

Cllr Stephen Simkins referred to paragraph 3.4 of the report and the earlier comment that IRO’s were also required to Chair Child Protection Conferences resulting in caseloads exceeding the recommended levels. The Safeguarding Manager - Children reported that three new IRO’s had been appointed, some IRO’s would only deal with LAC and not Child Protection cases and that some had a caseload of 70 or under. She advised that caseload management was important as every effort was made to maintain a relationship between an individual IRO and a LAC. With the reduction in the LAC population caseloads were now more manageable. Cllr Stephen Simkins advised that he remained to be assured on the current position. The Service Director, Children and Young People advised that it was common practice for IRO’s to combine their duties with Chairing Child Protection Conferences as the roles complimented each other. She emphasised the importance of maintaining the relationship with the LAC and the family. In relation to this point, Cllr Stephen Simkins questioned the independence of the IRO. The Service Director, Children and Young People explained that the role of the Social Worker was entirely different. The Safeguarding Manager - Children explained that the term “caseload” referred to the number of LAC and the number of Child Protection Plans which were the responsibility of an IRO. The Service Director, Children and Young People assured the Board that there was no tension between the dual roles and that the high caseloads were being addressed through the reduction in the number of LAC and additional temporary resources within the service.

Cllr Martin Waite enquired as to the follow ups conducted after reviews and the actions taken to ensure that Social Workers were following the correct procedures and taking any necessary actions. The Safeguarding Manager - Children explained that this was the type of information which was required from the Performance Monitoring Data referred to previously. Cllr Martin Waite opined that after each review the IRO should be in a position to report back on any steps required. The Safeguarding Manager - Children reported that did happen and was how the RAG ratings were established and referred the Board to paragraph 5.2 of the report. She assured the Board that any issues arising were reported to her and the appropriate steps were then actioned.

Cllr Paula Brookfied commended the steps taken to maintain the relationship between IRO’s and individual LAC in the face of the previous high caseload.

Cllr Julie Hodgkiss enquired whether the Performance Monitoring Data, once available, would include comparisons with other local authorities. She also suggested that the next Annual Report include a case study with all names redacted to ease the Board in understanding the role. The Safeguarding Manager - Children explained that comparisons would only be possible on common elements.

Cllr Peter O’Neill referred to paragraph 7.2 of the report inasmuch as it referred to increasing LAC caseloads and the impact on the ability of IRO’s to monitor progress of cases where some areas of shortfall had been identified. The Safeguarding Manager - Children explained that Ofsted required to know where IRO’s had challenged the local authority. She confirmed that during the period of high caseloads it had not always been possible to monitor progress of cases but the situation had eased with the reduction in the LAC population.

Cllr Stephen Simkins questioned whether, in the event of an area of concern being established, it was possible to circumvent the system and for a report to be made direct to the Cabinet Member. The Safeguarding Manager - Children reported on the “dispute resolution” procedure which operated at Officer level and on the facility available for matters to be escalated upwards to CAFCAS and to the Courts. She advised that it had never been necessary to use the escalation measure. The Chair, Cllr Val Gibson, reported that if non –case specific matters could not be resolved appropriately that the matter would be drawn to her attention. Cllr Stephen Simkins welcomed this assurance and reminded the Board that all 60 Councillors were Corporate Parents. The Service Director, Children and Young People confirmed that in the event of blockages within the system that the matter would be referred to the Cabinet Member. Cllr Stephen Simkins opined that this Board should receive early notification of any such issues. The Chair, Cllr Val Gibson, advised that such issues would be included within the Performance Monitoring Report considered at each meeting or be the subject of a report to the Executive Team with a view to securing the allocation of additional resources as had occurred when the LAC population had increased.

Cllr Rita Potter queried the level and quality of participation of LAC in the reviews. The Safeguarding Manager - Children explained that this varied depending upon the individual child but that it was the role of the IRO to establish ways of communicating with the individual child. Alison Hinds, Head of Service, Looked After Children referred the Board to the Performance Monitoring report which indicated a 91% participation rate of children in reviews. Cllr Rita Potter asked what steps would be taken if a child did not wish to or refused to participate in a review. The Head of Service, Looked After Children reported that it would be for the IRO to establish a way forward.

Resolved:

That the report be received and noted.