Agenda item

The Children in Care Performance Scorecard for May 2022 is attached.

The Corporate Parenting Panel considered the Children in Care Performance Scorecard which provided an overview of the May month. The Panel received an overview from the Head of Children in Care and Care Experienced Young People, Shaun Hanks.

In response to queries raised by the Panel, the Head of Children in Care and Care Experienced Young People clarified the following:

In relation to the significant reduction of Children Looked After being a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and its consequence, and the unaccompanied asylum-seeking children, would the numbers increase as the country moved out of the pandemic? The answer was unknown as statistics had shown that during the pandemic caseloads did increase and caseloads had also reduced. There was continued support from the Early Help services to address some of the arising issues in supporting families. The Director of Children Services added that the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic had seen numbers risen for Child Protection cases where some children had gone into care, and this had been due to the impact of services available. Services were doing all they could to manage this. The Service Manager IRO & Children’s Participation also addressed the issue around the judiciary of supervision orders where services were much more reluctant to separate children, and thus the focus to return children home was under review.

In relation to the low percentages relating to the key indicator CLA 17 (the initial health assessments requested for health service within three working days of date child become looked after), and the key indicator CLA 18 (the initial health assessments delivered within 20 working days of date child became looked after), the Panel heard that this was a result of how quickly a form was completed within a certain time as the turmoil of a child going into care was sometimes missed. There was also a small number of children who led to the variant of percentage being reported, and this could be missed by a day and a half. Officers further informed that the service was working on including the parent’s agreement for children to be giving a medical. This included providing more parent friendly paperwork for parents to avoid complication or a notion of uncertainty. The work included the front door service tracking all children who came into care and ensuring all forms were completed within a certain time and included consent for the health service.

Panel Members commented on the excellent work over the last twelve months in relation to the key indicator AD8 (the average time between the LA receiving court authority to place a child and the LA deciding on a match to an adoptive family (days) (12 months rolling average)), and asked what learning was required throughout the year and how could it be carried in the future. The Head of Children in Care and Care Experienced Young People shared that the proactive approach in working with the Adopt London South helped provide better communication with other services and in relation to the judiciary and delays, further, there had also been enthused conversations to ensure services were working better together.

Further, Panel Members noted that children were adopted quickly, and asked whether Croydon was part of a service where adoption was. It was confirmed that Croydon was part of the Adopt London South. The regional adoption agency was made mandatory which was two years old. Staff were working with the reviewing officers as there was a lot more focus on adoption. It was noted that some adopters were approved foster carers, though there was a different process for relinquished children. There were also children who did not match to a family and was the alternative picture in the data.

The Chair referenced the number of red key indicators on the scorecard and queried on the progress. The Head of Children in Care and Care Experienced Young People informed that the key indicator CLA14 (the percentage of eligible CLA with an up-to-date Care Plan (6 months)), and CLA 15 (the Percentage of eligible CLA with an up-to-date Pathway Plan) were linked together.

In detail, the Head of Children in Care and Care Experienced Young People informed that the key indicator CLA14 had jumped up in percentage and the key indicator CLA15 (for children aged 16-17) were looked after children of which most of them had a care plan and a pathway plan for being looked after for more than thirteen weeks. Though every child had a care plan, it was apparent not all had a pathway plan. Of the 174 children in care; 125 had an up-to-date pathway plan; there were 27 children who did not have a pathway plan triggered or started due to case transfers between services and system issues; and there were 22 children who had a pathway plan out of date.

The Chair was optimistic that the service was working towards green key indicators. There was also a lot of green key indicators on the scorecard which had shown there was a lot of improvements, additionally, the scorecard reflected on how the service was looking after the young people.

The Chair encouraged the Panel to review the Scorecard carefully and to scrutinise what was working and not working for children and young people and the reasons and challenges that lie behind the indicators.