Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence from any members of the Committee.

Apologies for absences were received from Josephine Copeland (Non-voting Teacher representative).

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 21st June 2022 as an accurate record.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on the 21st June 2022 were approved as an accurate record with the amendment that Councillor Mike Bonello was in attendance.

Members and co-opted Members of the Council are reminded that, in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct and the statutory provisions of the Localism Act, they are required to consider in advance of each meeting whether they have a disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI), another registrable interest (ORI) or a non-registrable interest (NRI) in relation to any matter on the agenda.  If advice is needed, Members should contact the Monitoring Officer in good time before the meeting.  

If any Member or co-opted Member of the Council identifies a DPI or ORI which they have not already registered on the Council’s register of interests or which requires updating, they should complete the disclosure form which can be obtained from Democratic Services at any time, copies of which will be available at the meeting for return to the Monitoring Officer.

 Members and co-opted Members are required to disclose any DPIs and ORIs at the meeting.  

·           Where the matter relates to a DPI they may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must not stay in the meeting unless granted a dispensation.  

·           Where the matter relates to an ORI they may not vote on the matter unless granted a dispensation.   

·           Where a Member or co-opted Member has an NRI which directly relates to their financial interest or wellbeing, or that of a relative or close associate, they must disclose the interest at the meeting, may not take part in any discussion or vote on the matter and must not stay in the meeting unless granted a dispensation.  Where a matter affects the NRI of a Member or co-opted Member, section 9 of Appendix B of the Code of Conduct sets out the test which must be applied by the Member to decide whether disclosure is required.

The Chair will invite Members to make their disclosure orally at the commencement of Agenda item 3, to be recorded in the minutes.

Councillor Henson stated that they had previously held the role of Deputy Cabinet Member for Children and Young People and would refrain from asking questions on theChildren's Centre Contract - Insourcing of the South Locality Children’s Centre Delivery paper.        

To receive notice of any business not on the agenda which in the opinion of the Chair, by reason of special circumstances, be considered as a matter of urgency.

There was none.

The Children & Young People Sub-Committee is asked to: -

1.         Note the Croydon Safeguarding Children Board Annual Report 2021-2022

2.         Consider whether there are any considerations or concerns it may wish to submit to the Cabinet during its consideration of the Annual Report.

3.         In particular, give consideration as to whether the Annual Report provides sufficient reassurance on the performance and effectiveness of the Croydon Safeguarding Children Board.

The Sub-Committee considered a report set out on pages 13 to 40 of the

agenda, which provided the Croydon Safeguarding Children Partnership Annual Report for 2021-22. The Corporate Director Children, Young People & Education introduced the item and the Independent Scrutineer, Eleanor Brazil, to the Sub-Committee. It was noted that the Independent Scrutineer would be leaving the role soon and had served Croydon in many roles over a number of years; officers and Members thanked her for her hard work.

The Independent Scrutineer explained their role in the Partnership as an external person to the key organisations delivering services to children and young people in the borough; the Independent Scrutineer’s role was to support and challenge key members of the Partnership organisations to help ensure safeguarding arrangements were effective. It was highlighted that safeguarding children was challenging as it was not always possible to ensure all children were safe from harm, although this was always the aim. Safeguarding Practice Reviews were undertaken by the Partnership when children died or were seriously hurt and thankfully these cases were not high in number.

The Independent Scrutineer went through the key points of the report and explained that the Partnership tried to capture the voice of children and young people in the borough. The work of the Partnership was guided by the Executive Group made up of key members from the statutory bodies – the Council, Croydon CCG and the Police. There were a number of multi-agency groups set up by the Partnership, with specific areas of focus, which reported to the Executive Group.

The Partnership had identified a number of themes throughout the year, and these were: the importance of Fathers/Male Carers; Professional Curiosity; Information Sharing; Safeguarding Supervision; Extra-Familial Harm. These themes had been used to influence the training offer for the following year. The Sub-Committee heard that an independent review of the Partnership had been commissioned to identify any areas of learning to inform the work and priorities of the Partnership in the coming year. The following had already been identified: Safeguarding Asylum Seekers; Early Help Transformation; Partnership Communication Strategy; Domestic Abuse; Sexual Abuse (inter and extra familial abuse).

The Chair noted the absence of a police representative and expressed the disappointment of the Sub-Committee. The Independent Scrutineer and Corporate DirectorChildren, Young People & Education explained the commitment of the Police to the work of the Partnership and suggested the necessary change of dates may have led to their non-attendance. The Sub-Committee queried the disparity of proactivity and funding from some partners and the Corporate Director Children, Young People & Education responded that there had been huge pressures for all partners and there had been significant work over the last 12 years to improve frontline availability and engagement on children’s’ safeguarding from the Police. The Police were also responsible for chairing the Priority Vulnerable Adolescents Group and Members heard that the independent review would help to gauge the effectiveness of the Partnership; feedback so far had suggested that engagement and the willingness to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5/22

The Children & Young People Sub-Committee is asked to: -

1.     Receive the update on the Children's Centre Contract award for North and Central, and the insourcing of the South Locality Children’s Centre Delivery 

2.     Consider whether there is assurance that there is sufficiency of children’s centre provision to meet local need.

The Sub-Committee considered a report set out on pages 41 to 52 of the

agenda, which provided an update on the Children's Centre Contract award for North and Central, and the insourcing of the South Locality Children’s Centre Delivery. The Director of Education introduced and summarised the report.

The Sub-Committee asked why the Council was not able to find a provider for the South Locality but were able to for the North and Central Localities. The Director of Education explained that this was largely due to the funding envelope available, concern around Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (TUPE), a lack of clarity around building costs and issues with the internal capacity of the bidders. After the first round of commissioning, bidders had been asked to provide the reasons for not bidding and a warming exercise has been conducted.  The provider for the North and Central Localities had not been able to take on the South Locality due to a lack of capacity.

Members asked if there were any lessons that could be learnt as a result of the failure to commission for the South Locality. The Director for Education explained that learning had been taken into account after the first round and had led to conducting a warming exercise, but this had not been enough to result in a successful bid. Members heard that unfortunately some things could not be changed, such as the funding envelope and the services the Council needed to be provided, TUPE and lack of clarity around the maintenance costs of buildings. Members heard that there was always an attempt to develop learning after any commissioning exercise. The Director Quality, Commissioning & Performance added that these were small providers, and the unknown costs were bigger risks for them than a larger business.

The Sub-Committee queried the £97k budget pressure due to redundancies and asked why only families in the South Locality would experience reduced services as a result. The Director of Education responded that the risks to service delivery in the South were low, and that ways to mitigate removing this amount from the budget would be looked at to ensure that impacts would be minimal; an example of this was encouraging staff at risk of redundancy to apply for vacant posts within the Parenting Team.

Members asked about the Purley Oaks Centre and the importance for parents in building relationships with staff before they were likely to ask for help; currently the Centre was only open for two and a half hours a week and it was asked why this was so limited. The Director of Education explained that, as part of the Hub and Spoke Model, most activity would be carried out in the Hubs with reduced activities in the Spokes; because staff had just transferred in on current terms and conditions, the model was still being developed and this had been more complicated at Purley Oaks due to staffing issues. Staff at the Purley Oaks Centre were available one day a week and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6/22

To receive the Early Help, Children’s Social Care and Education Dashboard.

The Sub-Committee considered a report set out on pages 53 to 56 of the

agenda, which providedthe Early Help, Children’s Social Care and Education Dashboard.

The Sub-Committee commended the performance under indicators CYPE 20 and 21, noting the difficult environment of the last two years in which these had been delivered.

The Sub-Committee asked about CYPE 27 & 29 and heard the Director of Education responded that as CYPE 27 had increased, this had a knock-on effect to CYPE 29. The resource was being looked at as a whole to work across the whole age group as there were usually more assessments for younger children; an annual reviewing team had been brought in to look at the backlog. It was acknowledged that this indicator was stubbornly red on the RAG rating, but that more Education Health & Care Plans were issued within 20 weeks and there was month on month improvement.

The Corporate DirectorChildren, Young People & Education explained that indicators that were static were being reviewed regularly and CYPE 27 & 29 had recently been reviewed by the internal control board. Improvements in these areas had been reflected in a 2021 inspection, but demand and work in this area were huge. The Cabinet Memberfor Children and Young People commended the work that had been done so far but acknowledged the work still to be done; the Cabinet Member explained that their LGA mentor had complimented the work of Croydon’s SEN Service.

On CYPE 24, Members asked why this was increasing. The Director of Education explained that this was looked at in conjunction with CYPE 23; the NEET team was relatively small which meant that work needed to be focussed and was often on and with individuals, but figures had improved. It was noted that CYPE 24 was high due to the time of year with many young people transitioning between different education and employment settings. There was now a strategic lead for NEET who would maintain focus in this area.

On CYPE 04 and 06, it was asked when the missing data would be available. The Director Quality, Commissioning & Performance explained that this had now been completed and would be included on the next report. Members requested that on any Red or Amber ratings commentary was always provided as it was missing for some indicators.

The Chair requested information on the transfers of Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children (UASC) to other local authority areas, and the amount of time that UASC spent in the borough before they were transferred. The Director Quality, Commissioning & Performance explained that the new requirement for a mandatory National Transfer Scheme (NTS) came into place in November 2021, and the target period for transfers to take place had previously been 10 working days and was now reduced to 5 working days. This was designed to limit the impact on the child of staying too long in the area and becoming connected to the local community, starting school, etc. The Council referred to  the NTS as soon as young  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7/22

To consider any additions, amendments or changes to the agreed work programme for the Committee in 2022/23.

The Sub-Committee agreed with the Corporate Director Children, Young People & Education that the Educations Strategy and Standards report be added to the Work Programme for the January 2023 meeting.

The Sub-Committee discussed supplementary visits and activities to enhance the Work Programme. It was suggested that there be a meeting with Health Visitors and Antenatal workers in advance of the next Sub-Committee. Some other suggestions noted were meetings with frontline social workers and visiting the Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH).

The Sub-Committee highlighted the importance of the Police attending the next meeting in November 2022.