Northumberland€¦ · Web viewKeeping Children and Young People Safe from Harm, Abuse and Neglect....

Keeping Children and Young People Safe from Harm, Abuse and Neglect

Northumberland Safeguarding Children Board

NSCB Annual Report 2013 – 2014

Annual Report 1st April 2013 to 31st March 2014

Item 4b


CONTENTS1. Welcome........................................................................................................................4

2. Introduction and purpose of this report.........................................................................4

3. Trying to make this report as understandable and as accessible as possible.................5

4. Local Safeguarding Children Boards – some background information...........................6

5. About this Report...........................................................................................................8

6. Being a child and young person in Northumberland......................................................9

8. 2013 -2014 The important questions and answers.......................................................12

Q1: Did the Safeguarding Board meet regularly, was it well attended and were the meetings effective?................................................................................................................................12

Q2: Did the Safeguarding Board make sure that it was involved with and in, the other important strategic partnerships in Northumberland so that safeguarding is a shared priority?..................................................................................................................................17

Q3: Did we make sure that Policies, Procedures and Protocols for joint working were up to date, accessible and useful/used?..........................................................................................18

Q4: Did we make sure that everyone who works with children and young people knew about the standards to use to work together?.................................................................................19

Q5: Did we make sure that we looked at how effectively members and their organisations were doing what they said they would to ensure that children and young people got help and were protected?..............................................................................................................22

Q6: Did we look at on a regular basis how professionals worked together with families to see how well this was working and what effect it was having?....................................................24

Q7: Did we make sure that there was training available for all the different professionals and people who work together, so that they were well informed, improved their skills and that this improved joint working practices?...................................................................................25

Q8: Did we make sure that we looked at in detail practice where things went well and also where they did not go so well, so that we could identify learning to improve joint working arrangements and practice?...................................................................................................26

Q9: Did we ensure that whenever a child or young person dies in Northumberland this was reviewed to make sure that we were sure that everything that could and should be done to prevent this was?....................................................................................................................28

Q10: Did we make sure that organisations were recruiting safely and that all allegations against adults who work with children were looked into effectively?....................................29

Q11: Did we make sure that everyone was doing all they could to make sure children or young people who we knew were or felt might be especially vulnerable were known about and that there was an effective joint working response?.......................................................30

Q12: We know that being child focused and focused on positive outcomes is fundamental to effective safeguarding, how did we progress this?.................................................................31

2


Q13: What does this Annual Report tell us about how effective the Safeguarding Board was and therefore how effective were the joint working arrangements to protect children and promote their welfare during the year?.................................................................................32

Q14: Should we be and are we assured that the joint working arrangements to protect children and promote their welfare in Northumberland are “sufficient,” that is adequate for the purpose and legally satisfactory?.....................................................................................35

8. Conclusion:...................................................................................................................36

Appendix 1 Board Membership..............................................................................................37

Appendix 2 NSCB Attendance.................................................................................................40

Appendix 3 Sub-Committee Attendance from March 2013 to April 2014:.............................45

Appendix 4 Summary of performance data from March 2013 to April 2014:………………………46

3


1. Welcome

Thank you for taking the time to learn about the Northumberland Safeguarding Children Board and its annual report for 2013 – 2014.

We are trying a different approach this year and have built the report around 14 important questions that we think best help to explain how the organisations and their representatives who form the Board have gone about meeting their “statutory responsibilities” as a Board and promoted a “learning culture” that means that people (whoever they are and whatever they do) are working together as effectively as possible to protect children and young people in Northumberland.

It is important and right that each year as a Board we present evidence and examples of this and make a clear statement about how “sufficient” the arrangements are.

This year there is every indication that all of the agencies and professionals have maintained and, in many instances, increased their capacity to recognise and act when there are concerns that a child is being harmed or may be at risk.

The Board seeks to set, by agreement, standards for this and then hold its partners to account on the basis of scrutiny of performance, looking at the quality and identifying what effect this has on children.

This year has been a very important one with major changes to what is expected from everyone and from Safeguarding Boards, and the report shows generally how the NSCB and its partners have approached this in a considered and constructive way.

The report does show that the pressures on partners and the increase in expectations are starting to give potential rise for concern especially as the strategic arrangements and context change.

This has to be a long report and needs to be useful to a wide range of audiences, this reflects the many organisations, professionals and people involved. For those who want to know more about safeguarding and LSCB’s, then the first part of this report (up to page 6) will be helpful

Each of the questions will address particular areas of the Board’s statutory responsibilities, and questions 13 and 14 summarise this.

2. Introduction and purpose of this report

The purpose of this report is to provide an account of, and to account for, how all the organisations and their representatives, who make up the Northumberland Safeguarding Children Board (NSCB), worked together to ensure that children and young people in Northumberland were protected and their welfare was promoted.

4


The report looks back over the year but also looks forward as working to ensure children are safe is an ongoing process.

It is a public document and is formally presented to the Chief Executive of Northumberland County Council, The Police and Crime Commissioner and the people in charge of all the different organisations who work with children and young people in Northumberland. It will also be published on the Safeguarding Board website.

It was formally commissioned by the Board 16th May 2014 and will be published once the Board has signed it off in September 2014.

The report is a part of a continuous process of review and evaluation, but after publication the Board will pause to consider the learning from the report and review its business plan.

If you want to look at reports from previous years please follow this link but we have summarized the priorities from last year below (see page 8)

In the report we will explain in more detail what the Board is set up to do and its main responsibilities. We will also tell you who are members of the Board and what it can and cannot do as well as what was done during the year.

3. Trying to make this report as understandable and as accessible as possible

Safeguarding and protecting children is complex, not just because of the fact that it involves so many people, but also because we have high expectations of organisations and professionals to ensure that children are effectively protected. We also have an expectation that members of the community also want to play their part in seeing that children are kept safe.

This means that we have to do our best to make sure that everyone knows what is expected, it can also mean that reports like this can be long and technical, this is important as some of the people who read it expect to be able to see some detail. Last year some people told us that although they understood that the report was produced for people from different backgrounds and that it was long because of the all the things the Safeguarding Board has to do, they felt it could be better at;

- explaining what the Safeguarding Board is and does- Showing what this means

This year we are trying a different approach, this means that we have only included essential information in the text of the report, and have used links to take you to more detail. (If you are not able to follow the links as you read the report then contact

The Board and its membership seeks to make sure that we all;- Know how to recognise when a child may be at risk of being harmed, being abused or neglected- Know what we should do about this and who we should speak to- Know what is expected of us and what to expect from the professionals who are there to ensure children are protected.

5

http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=10601


[email protected] and we will make sure you can). You will still find some appendices but we have tried to keep these to a minimum.

We have structured the majority of the report around the important things that the Board is required to do and the kind of questions that might reasonably be asked. These questions try in their answers to do 3 things:

1. To provide an understanding of what is being talked about and why this is important 2. To show that we have tried to make a fair judgement as to whether this was

effective and how we know this.

3. To always look at things from the perspective of the child or young person.

We hope this means that the report can achieve its main purpose which is to set out as a Board how effective joint working arrangements to protect children and promote their welfare are in Northumberland and what we will be doing to further improve on this in the future. If you feel there are changes we can make for the next report please let us know.

4. Local Safeguarding Children Boards – some background information

If you follow these links they will take you to information that helps to explain the statutory basis and expectations of the Safeguarding Board

Department for Education Working Together To Safeguard Children March 2013 Working Together to Safeguard Children March 2013 Chapter 3

These are the statutory objectives and functions of a LSCB

Section 14 of the Children Act 2004 sets out the objectives of LSCBs, which are:

a) to coordinate what is done by each person or body represented on the Board for the purposes of safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children in the area; and

b) to ensure the effectiveness of what is done by each such person or body for those purposes.

Regulation 5 of the Local Safeguarding Children Boards Regulations 2006 sets out that the functions of the LSCB, in relation to the above objectives under section 14 of the Children Act 2004, are as follows: 1(a) developing policies and procedures for safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children in the area of the authority, including policies and procedures in relation to: (i) the action to be taken where there are concerns about a child’s safety or welfare, including thresholds for intervention; (ii) training of persons who work with children or in services affecting the safety and welfare of children; (iii) recruitment and supervision of persons who work with children; (iv) investigation of allegations concerning persons who work with children; (v) safety and welfare of children who are privately fostered;

6

http://www.workingtogetheronline.co.uk/chapters/chapter_three.html

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/working-together-to-safeguard-children

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/working-together-to-safeguard-children

mailto:[email protected]


(vi) cooperation with neighbouring children’s services authorities and their Board partners; (b) communicating to persons and bodies in the area of the authority the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children, raising their awareness of how this can best be done and encouraging them to do so; (c) monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of what is done by the authority and their Board partners individually and collectively to safeguard and promote the welfare of children and advising them on ways to improve; (d) participating in the planning of services for children in the area of the authority; and (e) undertaking reviews of serious cases and advising the authority and their Board partners on lessons to be learned. Regulation 5 (2) which relates to the LSCB Serious Case Reviews function and regulation 6 which relates to the LSCB Child Death functions are covered in chapter 4 of this guidance. Regulation 5 (3) provides that an LSCB may also engage in any other activity that facilitates, or is conducive to, the achievement of its objectives.

If you access Appendix 1 you will find:-

- Membership of the Board (Appendix 1 )- The organisations they represent (Appendix 1)- How the Board structures itself through its Business Group and Sub-Committees

(Appendix 3)

The Board formally met 6 times in the year and you can see the level of commitment that partner organisations were able to achieve in (appendix 2)If you follow this link you will be able to view the current Business Plan: NSCB Business Plan

We hope that the following will help you to better understand about Safeguarding Children Boards.

The Safeguarding Children Board is a partnership, some of the organisations who sit around the table are required to be there and others choose to take part.

Some Board members represent organisations and the interests of those who have a direct responsibility for setting local priorities about the use of resources and services; these are set by other strategic partnerships such as the Health and Wellbeing Board and the Families and Children’s Trust.

The Safeguarding Board is not directly responsible for the provision and delivery of services, but does seek to make sure that protecting children is a common priority amongst agencies who work with children.

The Safeguarding Board oversees and expects agencies who work with children to ensure their staff know how to respond whenever there is a concern for the safety of a child or young person.

The Safeguarding Board is also expected to know how well this is working and know when it is not.

If you have any questions about what is in this report, require information or help with accessing the report in a different format or language or if you have any other suggestions about how we could do better as a Safeguarding Board let us know by contacting us at: [email protected]

7




mailto:[email protected]

http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=10601#collapse3


If there is a serious or critical incident or when a child dies and there is reason to believe that people were not working together as they should, the Safeguarding Board has a responsibility to consider and when necessary carry out a review of those circumstances

The Safeguarding Board on the basis of collaboration and cooperation set standards, provides guidance and training and scrutinises whether agencies who work with children are doing what they said they would.

The safeguarding board also has to check its own effectiveness in order that we can be assured that the risks of children being harmed are minimised

In a nutshell the LSCB leads the way to help prevent children from being harmed, neglected or abused. It promotes the ways in which people have agreed to achieve this. To achieve this Board members work together to look, listen, learn and advise on the basis of a wide range of information about performance, quality and the effect this has for children

5. About this Report

What we said we would do;In our last Annual report, and the subsequent review by members, we reset the following priorities:

1. Improving working together at a time of change 2. Achieving a focus on children, young people and their journey 3. Early Intervention and Early Help 4. Vulnerable children who live in high need households 5. Vulnerable Adolescents

We also said we would focus on the following groups of vulnerable children and what we needed to better understand and do to make sure they were protected

- Children who are at risk of or who are sexually exploited - Children who self harm/attempt or at risk of suicide- Children who live in high need households and where there are lots of

professionals involved.

We also said that we would find improved ways of using the resources that were available to meet our statutory responsibilities. We concluded that partners were under a lot of pressure and that the level of financial contributions made by some partners to the Board had not changed and was low in comparison to other similar Boards.

We also said we would:

Develop our relationships internally and externally especially with changes around the way needs and priorities are set in the local strategic governance arrangements

This report seeks to help you to better understand what the Board is and has done over the year in order that you can form your own judgement about what was achieved during the year.

8


Further develop and test out in the 3rd year of our revised Board structure, the way in which we strike the right balance between challenge and cooperation, scrutiny and self-assessment/assurance, Early help and statutory interventions to protect children, raising general awareness and making sure that key people have the right knowledge and skills, developing new ways of reviewing practice and cases, especially when children die or there is a significant incident.

Make more progress with the main implications of Working Together 2013 especially in respect of the frameworks around Performance Management and Quality Assurance, and Learning and Improvement.

Make sure that the “thresholds for intervention” reflect the changes taking place and the standard we expect.

Deliver the annual Section 11 audit/self-assessment exercise in a new way so that we can widen involvement and promote a change in culture.

Find and settle on the best way of ensuring that the Board reflects and involves the views and wishes of children and young people.

Make sure that we are able to communicate with and engage all professionals and other people involved with children and young people to help them understand what we do and what is expected from them.

Finalise how as a Board we will support and evaluate the effectiveness of arrangements for Early Help.

6. Being a child and young person in Northumberland

Before we consider what the Board achieved and how well this went, we will take a moment to consider some of what we know about what it is like to be a child or young person in Northumberland and what they might expect as they grow up.

Northumberland is geographically the sixth largest county (5013 km2) in England but with a population of approximately 313,000 people is the least densely populated (63 per km2 compared with 302/406 (NE/England). Children and young people aged 0 to 19 years constitute 21.5% of the total population and 4.7% of school age children are from a minority ethnic group.

The 11 largest towns are Ashington, Bedlington, Berwick, Blyth, Cramlington, Hexham, Morpeth and Alnwick which are set within extensive rural areas and uplands; 16 areas of the county are ranked amongst the 10% most deprived in England with 18.6% children aged below 16 years defined as living in poverty. Although this level is similar to the national average it masks the high level of poverty and deprivation in some defined areas of the county where almost two out of every three children live in households that are dependent on worklessness benefits.

The latest local child poverty measure in 2011 (defined as the proportion of children living in families in receipt of out of work benefits or in receipt of tax credits where their income is less than 60% of median income) for Northumberland is 17.4%, which is the lowest rate of all local authorities in the North East. For the same period, the North East region had a figure of 23.7% and England 20.1%.

9


As at May 2012, Northumberland had 11,070 children living in 6,040 out-of-work benefit households. Of these, 34% were aged 0-4, 32% aged 5-10, 245 aged 11-15 and 11% aged 16-18.

The proportion of pupils eligible for free school meals is 14.07%; (Source: School Census Jan 2013).

At the last census in 2011 it was estimated that 99% of the total population were of White British origin. However, there has been subsequent inward migration from European Union Accession countries to areas such as Berwick and Alnwick and children and young people from Black and Minority Ethnic groups now constitute approximately 5.5%(Source: School Census Jan 2013) of the entire pupil population. There are currently 64 heritage languages spoken by children in all schools. (Source: School Census Jan 2013). Gypsy, Roma, Irish Traveller and Traveller pupils constitute 0.14% of the total pupil population.(Source: School Census Jan 2013).

The health and wellbeing of children in Northumberland is mixed compared with the England average. Infant and child mortality rates are similar to the England average.

9.2% of children aged 4-5 years and 17.2% of children aged 10-11 years are classified as obese.

The teenage pregnancy rate is similar to the England average. In 2012/13, 61 teenage girls gave birth. This represents 2.1% of women giving birth which is worse than the England average.

The percentage of babies being born with a low birth weight is lower than the England average

In comparison with the 2005/06-2007/08 period, the rate of young people under 18 who are admitted to hospital because they have a condition wholly related to alcohol such as alcohol overdose is lower in the 2010/11-2012/13 period. The admission rate in the 2010/11-2012/13 period is similar to the England average.

In comparison with the 2007/08-2009/10 period, the rate of young people aged 10 to 24 years who are admitted to hospital as a result of self-harm is similar in the 2010/11- 2012/13 period. The admission rate in the 2010/11- 2012/13 period is higher than the England average*. Nationally, levels of self-harm are higher among young women than young men.

link to Child Health Profile 2014.

There are a wide range of ways in which children and young people can be involved in the services that adults are responsible such as YPiN (Young People in Northumberland) and we know that many Board partners have their own arrangements for involving children. Young People in Northumberland

For more information about places, circumstances and conditions that children and their families in Northumberland experience the “Northumberland Knowledge” is a place where you can find lots of detail, and that helps partners to understand needs – click on this link The number of children who become looked after is historically at a lower number than the national average though this did rise in the year. This reflects the efforts the Local Authority and its key partners make to ensure both stability in terms of placement and access to other forms of help as an alternative.

10

http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/Default.aspx?page=15711




http://www.chimat.org.uk/resource/item.aspx?RID=192101


There were 326 children and young people who were looked after by Northumberland at the year end. This works out as 53 per 10,000 of the under 18 population. This profile has been relatively stable over the course of the year and is significantly lower than the regional average. 80% of LAC live with foster carers in the community, a further 9% are in residential placements and 8% are in adoptive placements.

Over 46,900 pupils attend 181 schools: 124 first/primary, 31 middle (including 2 academies), 14 high (including three academies), 2 all age academies and 10 special schools including the Pupil Referral Unit (PRU) and Kyloe House. In addition to the high schools and the all age academies, Post-16 education is also provided by one further education college which is based in Ashington. School size varies across the county with the smallest school having 3 pupils on roll and the largest schools/academies having over 2000 pupils on roll. There are 30 schools that have less than 50 pupils on roll (January 2012).

Northumberland has 20 designated children’s centres organised in 4 locality areas or clusters. These locality areas are aligned with other local health and social care provision in the North, West, Central and South East areas of the County.

Northumberland offers different types of childcare ranging from full day care provision to sessional pre-schools, which are dominated by private and voluntary settings. The local childcare market is made up of:

318 registered Childminders 60 full day care settings 66 sessional day care settings 62 Out of school settings 14 Creche

These childcare providers are supported by locality teams based within 4 cluster Children’s Centre areas: Central; South East; North and West.

7. Making sure that children, young people and their families get the help that they need and are protected

The Council and its partners are responsible for making sure that everyone in Northumberland is able to take part in, benefit from and influence the services and opportunities that are available.

For children, young people and their families the plan that is produced is called the Children and Young Persons plan (This ends in 2014 and preparations are under way for a new plan to be agreed.)

The Health and Wellbeing Board also provides the wider strategic context for partnership working and priorities.

The Safeguarding Board works within these plans and these arrangements, but is independent of them in order to inform and advise, on the basis of evaluation and advise as to whether or not children are being safeguarded and the extent to which wider arrangements, priorities and partnerships are reflecting and responding to this.

During the year there have been some significant changes and developments to these arrangements.

11





8. 2013 -2014 The important questions and answers

The Board met bi-monthly, as planned, and in addition held one development session for members as well as a number of consultation events. Meetings were well planned with agenda’s published in advance and a rolling programme of planned items and reports. Full minutes were kept and circulated – they can be accessed by clicking this link

During the year there were over 70 meetings of Sub-Committees and Case Review Sub-Committees, Panels and Report Author Groups. This reflects the commitment made by members and their representatives (though as we will note later there was an emerging issue about sustainability). Members also had the opportunity to attend Multi-agency Front line Practitioner Learning Events, and some Board members were able to do this.

Who the Board members were in the year and the organisations they represented can be found along with their record of attendance in (Appendix 2 NSCB Attendance)

In addition to the time that partners contribute, some organisations are required to contribute financially. Working Together 2013 requires that the Board should not be overly dependent on contributions from one partner, in 2013 – 14 the distribution of funding as a percentage was as follows

Description Forecast/Confirmed/TBC Amount

Independent Chair £35,000

Independent Author (2 reports) £15,000

CDOP Co-ordinator (NofTyne) £15,000

Tri-X maintenance £3,200

Campaigns/Publicity (inc. Case Review leaflets) £5,000

NSCB meetings £900

NSCB officer Time (approx) £47,000

NSCB Training – AL/venue (approx) £30,000

TOTAL EXPENDITURE £151,100

Q1: Did the Safeguarding Board meet regularly, was it well attended and were the meetings effective?

12



Partner Contributions Confirmed/anticipated/TBC

Northumbria Health Care Trust £5,000 (3.3%)

Northumbria Police £5,000 (3.3%)

PCT/CCG £10,000 (6.6%)

CAFCASS £550 (0.36%)

Probation £500 (0.36%)

Children's Services (covers the LA Officer time) £77,000 (51%/79%*)

Public Health £10,000 (6.6%)

TOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS £108,050

Shortfall - £43,050

The increasing expectations placed on LSCB’s together with an increased pressure on partners to manage with less has been a challenge in the year. Board members have sought throughout the year to identify ways of addressing these pressures. In the year the NSCB was overly reliant on the Local Authority in terms of the shortfall between income and expenditure, as their % contribution rises from an indicative 51% to an actual contribution of 79%. During the year the Board began to address the desirability and sustainability of this position and in addition to an increased focus on managing risk at a Board level there was continued resolution to work towards a better position in the longer term.

The Board through discussion identified that the present position was not desirable, and there were a series of negotiations which did not produce a measurably different outcome. As a result going forward into 2014 – 15 the following was resolved by the Board;

The Board should set a budget and regularly review spend The Board should as a result of setting a budget manage any projected overspend

or under spend The Board accepts the principle that financial contributions should be equitable

across partners and that any deficit should not fall by default to anyone partner (as set out in WT 2013, Chapter 3: Local Safeguarding Children Board)

The tables summarise attendance by Board members at Board meetings and if you look at appendices you can see a more detailed analysis and a breakdown of attendance at the Sub-Committees, Appendix 3

13

http://www.workingtogetheronline.co.uk/chapters/chapter_three.html


Presently the Board does not have a clear formula for determining a clear benchmark, but has in the year been developing a set of benchmarks and standards around internal governance. (These are likely to go before the Board before the end of 2014.)

Overall the attendance rate was 77% over the year, with 9 partner organisations achieving 100%, a further 7 partners met a 50% + threshold and the remaining 6 less than 50%.

This is the second year we have published attendance by organisation and member. In comparison with 2012/13 Board member attendance the overall attendance rate and patterns appear consistent.

Members will use this data as a part of the review process that follows this report to do 3 things;

To agree a clear standard and benchmark for attendance To provide further challenge to members who struggle to meet this To agree an escalation procedure

The 2012/13 Annual Report and the endorsement of the priority that addresses maintaining standards/improving working together during a time of change, has required the Board to focus on risk and the measures it can put in place to support member organisations to maintain their commitment.

During the year there was escalation that led to formal correspondence and meetings with regard to the low level of attendance in regard to CAFCASS this produced an improvement from 33% in 2012/13 to 50% in 2013/14.

Despite an assurance from Action for Children that they would maintain their membership, their attendance reduced from 17% in 12/13 to no attendances in 13/14. This is presently being escalated.

Attendance by lay members who were only in place for a number of meetings in 12/13 attended 50% of meetings in 13/14, although in the period one of the lay members had difficulty in maintaining attendance due to personal circumstances.

Attendance by the Designated Doctor and Designated Nurse in 12/13 was 67%/100% respectively. In 13/14 it was 83% by both.

As a statutory partner Northumbria Police play an important and leading role not just in Board governance but also in joint working arrangements to protect children. However in 13/14 they were the only statutory Board member not to achieve 100% attendance, as they had done in 12/13 – attendance was 83%.

Voices, who hold a seat on the Board, are a voluntary sector organisation who play a significant role in seeking to promote safeguarding across communities and the many small often non-commissioned groups that work with children. In 13/14 they maintained a 100% attendance.

Attendance is only a partial measure of contribution, but it is a significant one, and you will see from the appendix 2 that the matrix also addresses key factors such as the members role within their organisation and how many time deputies were used.

14


The records of the Board meetings provide evidence of what was addressed, the contribution made by members, how the work undertaken by the Sub-Committee was pulled in and how this resulted in decisions. The remainder of this report will provide evidence of this in more detail, as would a consideration of these minutes which can be viewed by following this link: NSCB Minutes (under the heading of Meeting dates)

You will see that, through the year, we have maintained an approach to our minutes that seeks to ensure that we do not just record actions. We seek to capture and evidence what was discussed and why, showing how members challenge information and each other and engage with the issues. We also pay particular attention to following through and allowing issues and perspectives time to develop across meetings. Although this way of recording can result in long minutes, we introduced in the year an action and challenge summary. Our minutes provide members and others with a running record and the opportunity to have an insight into context, they also form an integral part of how we review and plan for our meetings. We also sought to maintain detailed minutes of the sub committees and this has been particularly important in the case review process, where it is important to capture a high level of detail.

This year we have also shared as a part of this report the commitment members were able to make and maintain in respect of each of the Sub-Committees. The Sub-Committees are themed to reflect the core responsibilities of the Board as well as its priorities and the Business Group coordinates this work.

If you follow this link you will find a brief summary of the objectives and work plan for each of the Sub-CommitteesNSCB Sub-Committee end of Year Reports (Sub-Committee Reports are located under the heading of Business Plan & Annual Reports)

Although attendance is one measure of contribution, as we shall see the majority of the sub committees have made a substantial and consistent contribution to the functioning of the Board in meeting its responsibilities and priorities over the year.

This report has to note the varying pattern of attendance in respect of some of the sub committees.

Board members identify people from their organisations to attend and contribute, often providing the chair. Preliminary analysis for the purpose of this report has to some extent confirmed the risk factors identified in the last report and within Board priorities. There appear to be a number of factors which are currently subject to ongoing analysis;

Increased demand in terms of the Board meeting expectations and requirements Resource limitations in terms of core board infrastructure and staffing which in turn

highlights a reliance on further contribution of time from members, who are also managing competing demands from a finite resource base

One off factors such as the transition of the Probation service into a new configuration and arrangements in the period, more frequent changes in personnel in some agencies and the need to identify alternative arrangements due to the long term sickness of the designated nurse (NB Boards traditionally rely on dedicated roles who provide high levels of expertise and continuity)

To sum up

15




Records of the Board and Sub-Committee meetings show that the Board followed a clear and very full agenda, dividing its time between development of capacity, strategic and operationally focused activity.

Attendance, although not the only criteria, remained at a comparable level to 12/13 with the majority of statutory members maintaining a high level of commitment through the same board member. There is no doubt that for all partners the impact of change and financial constraint has further tested their commitment. We have noted the particular circumstances that affected some partners and the steps taken.

The involvement of lay members and members from other areas of provision has also been good although there were clearly some difficulties in drawing them in, and there is evidence that they have made a more confident and significant contribution in the year.

The variability of attendance, and therefore contribution and continuity within the Sub-Committees has seen a deterioration in the year, to the point where this must now be seen as a major point of concern, as it may impact on the capacity of the LSCB to meet its statutory responsibilities at the required standard.

The Board and its Chair in the year were aware of risks and pressure points and monitored these carefully, and there was an ongoing focus on contribution, the level of dedicated capacity as well as the need to progress different ways of doing things.

There was strong evidence in the year that the Board as a whole and members individually were responsive and proactive, and were minded to ensure that the Board should not become too dependent on any one partner.

The Board agendas, minutes, reports and end of year reports from sub committees outline a proactive and inclusive approach to reporting, scrutiny, analysis, reflection and challenge to maintain and improve joint working arrangements.

The following link shows the relationships between the Safeguarding Board and other Boards/partnerships. NSCB (under the heading of: The relationship between Northumberland's Families And Children's Trust Board and Northumberland Safeguarding Children board) which is an information sheet.

During the year the last Annual Report was formerly presented to the FACT Board (The Children’s Trust), the Council’s Scrutiny Committee and Health and Wellbeing Board; the Annual Report was widely circulated with the offer of presentations. Board members undertook to promote and present the Annual Report within their own organisations and governance arrangements.

Board members who sit on other strategic bodies and partnerships were tasked to promote and ensure that both safeguarding and the roles of the Board were considered and were influential.

Q2: Did the Safeguarding Board make sure that it was involved with, and in, other important strategic partnerships in Northumberland so that safeguarding is a shared priority?

16



Board members also exercised the standing item on the agenda to share issues relating to strategic partnership working.

The Director of Children’s Services (DCS) played a leading role in ensuring close links between the Board and the FACT/Children and Young People’s plan and the gradual adjustment to the development of the Health and Wellbeing Board. Members also brought forward more reports around how within their own organisations safeguarding was being treated as a priority and the Board regularly focused on the development around the CCG and NHS England.

During the year the Council undertook a restructure which resulted in the formation of a new corporate structure and the Director of Children’s Services role was amalgamated with the Director of Adult Services role and this department was given a broader remit.

Elsewhere in this report we will see examples of how key policies and procedures were updated to reflect some of these changes and how work was commissioned to further strengthen the role and contribution of the Board within these arrangements.

The Safeguarding Board relied on key board members to ensure that safeguarding was understood to be a priority across the wider strategic partnerships, on the basis of the assurance and challenge the Board identified. During the year there was some progress in starting to identify how these arrangements would work as wider changes started to impact.

All the key partnerships and leaders of partners were formally notified of the outcome of the last Annual Report and updated through Board members.

During the year it became clear that the emphasis placed on the role of the Children’s Trust was changing and there were significant changes within the political arrangements in the Council. This has resulted in the need to seek clarification as to what this might mean for how the Safeguarding Board helps all to ensure that safeguarding children and young people on the basis of effective joint working is taken forward.

One of the important things the Board is responsible for is the development, agreement and implementation of policies, procedures, protocols and best practice guidance for joint working. This means that all agencies, professionals (wherever they work) and people who come into contact with children, young people and their families are able to refer to and use policies and procedures that clearly explain how things should work and what they are required to do.

The Board has maintained a full set of policies and the Sub-Committees have contributed to review and the development of new ones during the year.

Childhood Neglect

To sum up

Q3: Did we make sure that Policies, Procedures and Protocols for joint working were up to date, accessible and useful/used?

17


Guidance for Bruising and Rough Handling Child Sexual Exploitation (update to current version) Concealment & Denial of Pregnancy (update to current version) Shared Best Practice Guide for Children & Adult Services working with Children &

their Families Northumberland Assessment Framework Resolution Process

All of the above are available on NSCB Webpage: NSCB Multi-agency Procedures

As a result of learning from a Management Review, the Board became aware that the level of awareness of established policies and procedures in certain instances, may not be as good as was hoped. As a result, three things happened;

Board members were asked to ensure that at both Board and front line practice level everyone was aware of these

The review programme would be given greater emphasis, especially in the light of the introduction of Working Together 2013, which would mean further changes.

It was agreed that the Learning and Development Sub-Committee would make sure that multi-agency training further highlighted the policy and procedure aspect.

A further significant step in the year was the development of the Section 11 Audit/self assessment process which places a particular focus on this.

During the year Board newsletters and learning events arising from reviews were used to further remind people of how to access and use joint working policies. The Multi Agency Training programme continues to ensure that policies and procedures are a key element of all delivery and the Training and Development Sub Committee is tasked with oversight of the policies and procedures. The Board also moved into a more formal process for agreeing new or amended policies and procedures.

During the year the Board has maintained a full set of multi-agency procedures which are available to all staff who work in the Children’s workforce. The Board has endorsed some new procedures and amended others following the identification issues following reviews undertaken by the Board.

During the year in part as a result of the Board engaging with the consultation and then the introduction of the new Working Together, and as a result of its ongoing commitment to effectiveness, it was confirmed that this activity should remain as a priority.

Learning resulted in the review of a number of polices, work on the development of new ones, and steps to increase awareness at Board member level and therefore within each organisation and directly with front line practitioners. The development of Working Together frameworks for how the Board approach, Performance Management, Quality Assurance, Learning and Improvement, provided the Board the opportunity to start in the year a review of how we would exercise this responsibility in the future.

To sum up

18

http://northumberlandlscb.proceduresonline.com/index.htm


The setting of standards helps everyone not just to assess their performance but also the quality and effectiveness of joint working as judged by the impact it has on outcomes for children and young people.

One of the difficulties partnerships such as the LSCB face is that each organisation and area of professional practice is likely to have its own standards and ways of finding out how successful these are. During the year the Board made a number of key decisions to address this;

The revision and extension of the Section 11 Audit (this is a self-assessment that statutory partners are required to undertake, against a number of key standards).

The Board decided that we should widen the reach of the audit, as well as the need to reflect the significant changes that were taking place in the governance and commissioning of services across education and the health sector in particular.

This was done in partnership with North Tyneside LSCB, as for a number of partners their remit extends across the geographical boundaries.

To develop the frameworks advised in Working Together so that as a Board we approach establishing the performance and quality of what we do and how we do it to protect children is clear.

To improve the way people (whoever they are or whatever role they hold), understand the LSCB and therefore what they can expect from it and what we expect from them.

During the year steady progress was made, however this scale of development placed a pressure on the Board, its dedicated staff and the subgroups. As a result progress in some areas was slower than hoped, in part because as a Board we continue to place an emphasis on the Board member role in providing ownership and leadership.

The results and learning from the Section 11 audit, which for the first time provided individual schools and educational establishments, as well as front line primary care providers, such as GP surgeries with the opportunity to take part, is at the time of writing still being collated and analysed. Provisional indications are that completed returns indicate that;

Organisations are finding the approach useful, complimentary to their own standards and external inspection requirements.

That there remain challenges to ensuring that the audit, its rationale, process and need to be able to “interpret and exercise” internal judgements as to the meaning of language is better understood.

That there is connection between how helpful it is and the internal capacity to act on and embed within local governance arrangements, and the nature of these arrangements.

A move into self assessment and accountability has raised issues for the Board in terms of the criteria it uses to scrutinise, assess, quality assure and share the results, which require the capacity to further test out responses, especially when an assessment indicates a need to improve.

As a result in the present year the Board is further refining its approach and capacity for the next audit that will commence in January of 2015.

Q4: Did we make sure that everyone who works with children and young people knew about the standards to use to work together?

19


In 2013/14 returns were received from;

Children’s Social Care Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust Newcastle, Northumberland, Tyne & Wear Trust Northumberland Clinical Commissioning Group Voluntary & Community Sector Northumberland Fire & Rescue Service Northumberland Public Health Northumberland County Council Housing Services Barnardo’s North East CAFCASS Schools & Educational Establishments GP Surgeries Adult Services

The following agencies did not make a return: Northumbria Probation Trust and Northumbria Police.

In order to reflect the changes occurring in the education sector, during the year a task and finish group met to look at how the LSCB could better engage with schools and other providers of education. One of the outcomes of this was to request all schools to undertake a Section 11 audit and to consider this within their own governance arrangements. As this was the first year that this requirement has been extended the result was largely positive.

The table below shows the number of schools (including academies) who have completed the audit.

no. completed

total no of schools %

First 95 106 90%Middle & Primary 43 54 80%

High 14 16 88%Special 7 8 88%TOTAL 159 184 86%

In 14/15 as the analysis of the audit and the findings are completed, engagement is taking place with those schools who did not complete, to better understand this and to achieve 100% completion in the present year.

The Local Authority Schools Improvement Service has been supportive and proactive in working with the Board to take forward the Section 11 agenda and is actively looking at ways it can strengthen this.

During the year there was an increased focus on standards in order to support the Board’s role in measuring and evaluating contributions to joint working and to support the increasing number of different governance and accountability arrangements.

To sum up

20


During the year the Board and its members made some significant steps in addressing the implications of the Munro report and the revised Working Together guidance.

This involved addressing some of the core internal processes around how we assess performance, quality of practice and case review, and embarking on a radical refocusing of expectations and capacity around supporting organisations and their internal governance to approach and evidence how they prioritise safeguarding and joint working within a self assessment and improvement framework.

Given that the Board relies on achieving consensus and collaboration, within limited resources these developments are long term and ambitious. Therefore the judgement must be as to the significance of the steps taken and how these will be assessed in future years. From the evidence and analysis available at this pojnt there are positive indications that the majority of organisations who took part are in a position to demonstrate a serious approach to maintaining and improving safeguarding across all of their activities and governance arrangements.

It is of concern that 1 ‘statutory’ partner did not complete the self assessment as they were required to do, and that another partner submitted their response outside of the timescale.

If you would like to see more information about standards and Section 11, please follow these links: Working Together 2013Section 11 of the Children’s Act 2004

During the year we learned that the different forms in which standards are communicated and how they are set, as well as how these are evaluated and by who, assumed a greater significance as the role of the Board develops. The investment in Section, alongside internal governance development and improvements in scrutiny will we are confident strengthen all partners in being clear about the standards we set and follow to ensure that joint working arrangements to protect children are effective.

In the year we maintained our regular and targeted in depth look at key indicators of performance. This was led by the Performance and Quality Assurance Sub Committee. To be reminded of our sub committees please follow this link NSCB Sub-Committee Structure

During the year we strengthened what we look at and where we get information and data from. As a board we regularly looked at;

Local Authority key indicators about numbers of contacts and referrals, who these were from, why they were made and what happened as a result, for example the convening of Section 46 enquiries, Initial Child Protection Conferences, the numbers of children looked after and who became looked after, the numbers of Common Assessment Frameworks undertaken (CAF)

We followed up on this by looking at comparisons with past figures and trends, and to break this down especially where partners were involved, so

Q5: Did we make sure that we considered how effectively members and their organisations were doing what they said they would to ensure that children and young people got help and were protected?

21

http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=10601#collapse1

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/31/contents

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/281368/Working_together_to_safeguard_children.pdf


that we could see what influence the decisions and actions taken by different professionals and organisations was having.

We also as a result commissioned further enquiry and analysis and followed this up, as well as making sure that we looked in more detail at other aspects of how this was working through multi-agency case file audits and in some cases management reviews.

Board members also shared their own internal reporting and analysis.

Specifically in the year we decided that we needed to explore and better understand the following and this resulted in some further actions;

In the year the Board focused on attendance and participation by members at the important point in the child’s journey when people come together to decide how best to ensure a child is protected when there is a concern that they are not safe. These are called Initial Child Protection Conferences and there are clear standards and expectations around who needs to attend and what they need to contribute.

This has identified some key issues around how as a Board we develop our monitoring of performance, in that it was necessary, at board member request, to clarify what was expected, the accuracy of the process and the information, the extent to which judgement could be exercised and the collective sharing and ownership of performance within a judgement of whether this is good/good enough/not good enough. This tested relationships at times but during the year the board has shown tenacity and openness in moving forward on this issue.

At the end of the year and ongoing attendance is now closely monitored and reviewed, with board members exercising their accountability for their own organisations contribution.

The Board also decided to commission a separate report from the LA Independent reviewing Service so as to better understand and assess the oversight of this process and meetings, especially from the point of view in ensuring that children and their families were fully involved.

Overall the Board’s judgement has been that these meetings and the level of contribution and involvement, as well as outcomes do not give a cause for concern.

The ongoing process of holding to account and being able to openly consider has resulted in proposals to clarify standards and expectations, as well as how the Board will own and deal with either any renegotiation of these or a failure to meet them.

The Board also discussed whether we were too reliant on Local Authority information and also the local authority capacity to produce this. The Board agreed to look at ways this could be developed so that our process and the information we use more fully reflects the multi agency perspective. A special workshop was convened and a result some progress has been made in the year.

22


As a result of this process we became more aware of what we did not know and what we might need to know and why. For example in the year when the Board took a report about the use of restraint in the LA residential and fostering provision, the Board agreed that information should be collected and coordinated from all relevant partners so as to make sure of ongoing scrutiny and annual reporting that addresses all types of placement where restraint may be used.

The new requirement to evaluate the effectiveness of Early Help arrangements has been led by the Early Help and Early Intervention sub committee, which undertook mapping, consultation and analysis throughout the year. This has been a good example of the considered and systematic approach the Board takes and both the Local Authority, the CCG and Northumberland NHS Health Care trust have taken a shared and an active lead in this. It also became clear in the year that the Board needed to assess the extent to which it would provide leadership in the setting of multi agency strategy and therefore priorities for service development and commissioning.

We should reference and link to an appendix the performance report for the year that Alan is sending today

As a board we expect each partner to be able to know about and account for the impact of the services they provide, and to be able to share this information within the Boards emerging framework .

This is without doubt a complex and long term task, as it is not just about sharing information but also about being prepared to share information knowing that it will be subject to scrutiny by partners. It also requires the establishment of a clear understanding and context for this in terms of the Board’s purpose, role and function.

During the year we have been able to maintain our focus on key parts of the child’s journey, and have observed a degree of stability in terms of patterns and trends. In Northumberland whilst there is increasing evidence of awareness of need and risk (in part due to the continued sponsoring by the Board of “Signs of Safety” across all partners and points in the child’s journey. The early recognition of concerns and statutory interventions has remained focused on the role of social care. This means that during the year professionals have continued to rely on social work led interventions to help them assure that risks and needs are identified and responded to. This on the basis of our analysis appears to be positive from the point of view of making sure that the key judgments around risk and need are professionally informed, multi-agency and take place in a well regulated process, so that we can reasonably conclude that children are being protected. However this clearly places a pressure on those agencies who are formally committed to this level and stage of joint working and has raised the question as to how best to promote more effective early help arrangements.

During the year the Board through the work of its Early help and intervention sub committee has looked carefully at what has worked well in the past in order to support the development of new approaches to early help.

From the evidence it is possible to conclude that although at times there was a level of frustration and sometimes tension about the pace at which we have been able to progress

To sum up

23


how we collect, collate and analyse information and the level of challenges this involves. The Board has been able to both maintain and develop this critical function alongside the other forms of review and learning it undertakes. Members have been prepared to account for and be accountable for specific areas of joint working where the need to ask questions has arisen from regular scrutiny. As a result at the end of the year significant steps had been taken in broadening the scope of the sharing and use of performance information so that partners could account for and challenge their contribution to joint working.

At the end of the year we can conclude that we have a tried and tested a model for the analysis and scrutiny of data, which is now targeted at key points in the child’s journey on the basis of multi-agency information where appropriate and that we are improving this capacity within available resources.

We continue to develop our capacity as Board members to challenge and be challenged on the basis of a transparent approach, this has been captured in our challenge log and is a an area that we review annually.

During the year members exercised their responsibilities to make sure they were in touch with front line practice within their own organisations and the Board focused on;

Undertaking thematic and targeted multi-agency case file audit Gathering the experience of front line professionals through the multi-agency

training (this is explained in the next section) Improving the way we explain to and connect with practice

The following multi-agency case and case file audits were undertaken and what this resulted in;

The Case Review Sub-Committee monitored the learning from the 5 injured baby Case File Audits that were undertaken during 2013;

A Case Review ‘systems approach’ was used in October 2013, whereby all relevant practitioners were invited to attend this all day learning event to discuss the case on a front line basis; this event resulted in the agreement of an action plan for each of the single agencies involved, which has proceeded to disseminate and embed the identified learning through practice.

Early Help & Early Intervention took part in a Case File Audit day in March 2014, four cases were reviewed, which identified some learning, set out below.

Case File Audits undertaken by the Early Help, Early Intervention Sub-Committee

An objective of the Early Help, Early Intervention Sub-Committee is to evaluate the provision of early help in Northumberland.

In support of this performance data is regularly reviewed to inform the Sub-Committee of the uptake of the early help assessment and co-ordinated care provision. The subcommittee is reviewing this data and considering how it can be strengthened to provide an improved

Q6: Did we look at on a regular basis how professionals worked together with families to see how well this was working and what effect it was having?

24


picture of the offer for children and families, demonstrating effectiveness and reach of services. Quality assurance of these plans has been undertaken within Children’s Services and again the Sub-Committee is reviewing how agencies can have a shared understanding and responsibility for the quality and outcomes of early help.

As well as reviewing performance data, the Sub-Committee wished to ensure that the voice of children and families was heard within the perspective and work of the Committee and that the child’s story informed and influenced the drive to improve outcomes for Northumberland children. It was agreed that as an initial step a case review approach would be used to provide real time learning.

In recognition of the Ages of Concern report, learning from local Serious Case Reviews and a peak in numbers of injuries to babies the sub-committee agreed that children who were at risk from self-harm and those who were vulnerable as they were young and dependent would be the focus for the case audit. Therefore four multi agency audits were undertaken, two from adolescents who had self-harmed and two from children under two. The audit was designed to provide an exploration of the child’s journey through services and therefore provide an experiential account of the quality of provision. It was recognised that these children could be in receipt of specialist support and therefore out with early intervention, however the audits reflected their early experiences of emerging need.

The case file audit explored each child’s journey using information provided by agencies. It was not intended to be a ‘learning event’ for the practitioners involved in the child’s care and therefore did not bring the staff in as part of the process. However staff received feedback and each agency lead ensured that where issues may have been identified as a result of the overview of the case file audit, these were addressed and safety confirmed.All the children presented with complex issues within their lives including those that may feature within neglect or with parents who are vulnerable in their own lives.

Key themes of best practice emerged from the audits.

Information sharing and co-ordinated planning with agencies and families is essential.

It was apparent that in the cases considered there had been some planning, however this could be patchy. A lack of joint systems and shared data bases were barriers to a comprehensive approach.

Consideration of the whole family including the wider and extended family.

The vulnerability of parents including substance misuse, domestic violence and deprivation impacted upon keeping the child safe. For these families an on-going focus on providing safe care within services and an overview of outcomes for the child were beneficial. Attendance at nursery and school was critical. Practitioners were aware of the risks resulting from the impact of the parents own needs.

A child focused approach remains central to the care provided.

It was evident that practitioners provided care in the best interest of the child whilst recognising the impact of parental vulnerabilities. A joined up approach which considers the child in the context of the family including siblings was not as apparent. Recognition of

25


themes and patterns in sibling presentations would support a team around the family approach.

Communication that is consistent and recognised as contributing to the child’s plan.

There was evidence of good communication however it was noted that on occasions when a practitioner did not attend a meeting, it is good practice to provide an update to keep all informed.

Thresholds for unborn children

The implementation of the Maternity Assessment Framework (MAF) has been a critical factor to address emerging and apparent risk for the unborn child. Embedding this as the renamed Early help assessment for unborn children is strengthening good practice further. Where an early help assessment for unborn is considered it is also essential that any older children are not lost in the process and an early help assessment for the family is encouraged.

Understand the cause of challenging behaviour.

The adolescents and some older siblings of the younger children presented with challenging and risk taking behaviour. The value of at least one person linking in with the child and exploring the cause of these behaviours was evident and demonstrated good practice.

Health promotion and access to health services

Taking the opportunities to openly discuss sexual or substance misuse issues with adolescents and parents allowed for needs to be addressed and possible future concerns to be avoided or minimised.

The case file audit was viewed by participants to have been a valuable exercise. It provided assurance of good practice albeit with some areas which could be strengthened to provide consistency. The themes of good practice identified demonstrate that the Early Help Strategy is providing the right way forward to embed and consolidate good practice for children in Northumberland. Outcomes for the children were difficult to quantify as all were at different stages of development.

The learning from the case file audit as well as guidance from the Children’s Commissioner report ‘It takes a lot to build trust’ (2014) has been shared with the 283 participants of the workshops to launch the Early Help, Early Intervention strategy.

Connecting with front line practice has remained an important part of the Board’s activity during the year and the minutes of the respective sub committees reflect the attention to detail.

In addition to the single agency audits and case file audits that were reported into the Board, we were able to undertake case file audits on a multi agency basis, the volume and

To sum up

26


frequency of this was less than in the previous year for 2 reasons; The long term absence of key participants in this process and the decision to focus on the sharing of and engagement with front line professionals in looking at the learning from cases subject to management reviews. (see Case Review Workshops Q7 below)

This meant that we were able to confirm from having looked at a number of cases from a detailed multi agency perspective that many of the themes we have previously identified remain important and as such we have ensured that for example the development of the Early Help response and review of Signs of Safety reflect efforts to build in the capacity to improve outcomes in these areas. This has also contributed to the ongoing adjustment of multi agency training in respect of both the programme and course content.

We have recognised that in the coming year assuming we can identify the capacity that we need to return multi agency case file audits to the level of previous years alongside the efforts to bring together partners at the front line to review and learn from cases.

The Board commissioned, delivered and evaluated a comprehensive programme of multi-agency training during the year. The review and evaluation of the previous year, and the revision of Board priorities informed this.

The Learning and Development sub-committee also took on the review of policies and procedures, and started to explore the setting of longer term and wider objectives relating to workforce profiling and development as well as an increased level of integration between the multi and single agency, training and development opportunities.

The sub committee also did some important work in exploring what a “learning and improvement culture” as recommended in Working Together” would look like and this travelled into the present year and the introduction of the Learning and improvement Framework. Some of the key aspects of this were;

Case Review Workshops:Carousel-style Case Review Workshops were developed and delivered across the County. Feedback was extremely positive and applications rose significantly as a result of delegates recommending the events to colleagues. This created a waiting list for places and the provision of an additional 2 workshops in response to this increased demand. These reached in excess of 600 professionals from primary care through to statutory services.

Development and delivery of new courses:Sexual Exploitation training by an ‘in-house’ training team - Decision Making in Child Protection - Fabricated and Induced Illness - MARAC * - Awareness of Safeguarding Children and Vulnerable Adults*(*Courses jointly developed with Safeguarding Adults Board)

Support for implementation of Early Help Contributing to the development and delivery of 4 Early Help Locality Events attended by 300 delegates - Introduction of Outcome Star training delivered by 8

Q7: Did we make sure that there was training available for all the different professionals who work together to safeguard children?

27


practitioners who have been licensed as trainers - Delivery of Training for Trainers: Introduction to Attachment for North Tyneside LSCB – sharing of best practice.

During the year 2013-2014, 73 learning events have taken place, with 1,476 attendees from NSCB organisations. In addition, several single agency and specifically commissioned training has taken place; with a particular emphasis on Early Help. A conference on Domestic Abuse was held in August 2013, that had 180 delegates and six workshops were held to disseminate the learning from case reviews to 360 professionals who work with children in Northumberland. A new sexual exploitation-training package has been developed and delivered by a local multi-agency professional team.

The Training Evaluation Strategy has been completed and agreed by the NSCB. During 2013-2014 99.6 % of evaluations rated training events as satisfactory, good or very good. 97% of evaluations rated training events as good or very good

This year in addition to delivering the core programme of multi-agency training through a dedicated training officer, the Sub-Committee under its new chair provided clear leadership and was able to further develop how we assess the impact of training and learning opportunities on practice. We were also able to develop new case review workshops (bringing together front line practitioners to look at examples of practice and share their own experiences and skills), new programmes of training, review policies and procedures and provide a strategic steer regarding the development of the Learning and Improvement Framework. Steps were also taken to start to look at the wider and longer terms opportunities for integrating single and multi-agency training and learning. The sub committee also reflected the priority placed by the Board to ensure that workforces were equipped to respond to Child Sexual Exploitation.

As a result we have begun to identify how we can better integrate and rationalise how single and multi-agency training and development can be developed, and to further to develop the proven model we have for testing our how attending “training” can make a difference to practice and impacts for children and young people. We also anticipate as we develop our Section 11 strategy this will generate new objectives for helping to provide and evidence how multi agency training and development can reach more community based services, which as we develop the early help response may become more important.

As you will have seen there are various ways in which we look at what people do and the effect it has. We try to keep a balance between knowing what works well and making sure people are aware of this and making sure we learn from in order to improve when things do not go as well.

The Board has a statutory responsibility to undertake formal reviews under certain circumstances and you can find out more about this by following this link Working Together To Safeguard Children 2013

To sum up

Q8: Did we make sure that we considered in detail practice where things went well and also where they did not go so well, so that we could identify learning to improve joint working arrangements and practice?

28




The Board also has a statutory responsibility to review all child deaths in Northumberland and this is delegated to a Panel called the Child Death Overview Panel, which is independently chaired and shared with Newcastle and North Tyneside LSCB’s. The Panel reports directly into each Board and the Boards Case Review Sub-Committee. This link explains more about this responsibility Working Together To Safeguard Children 2013

In the year we; Completed 3 Management Reviews Commissioned a Serious Case Review Continued to implement learning and recommendations from previous reviews Undertook a research and development phase in respect of the application of

different ways of undertaking case reviews as contained in Working Together. We also disseminated learning from reviews regionally and nationally through the

multi-agency training, the publication and wide scale distribution of summary leaflets and through specific learning events.

Supported a shared approach to Child Death Overview with 2 other LSCB’s

During the year the Board formally considered and accepted 3 Management overview reports and their recommendations

Matthew 31.5.13 Nathan 26.7.13 John 22.11.13

If you follow this link you can read summaries of the learning from each of these reviews in leaflet form NSCB Webpage: Information for Professionals (accessible under the heading of Case Reviews)

Although the judgement was that these 3 reviews did not at the time meet the requirements for a Serious Case Review, in undertaking such reviews we apply similar principles and standards. Each review provided some important lessons and has resulted in significant changes in some agencies and contributed to further developments in joint working arrangements

On the 10.4.13 The Independent Chair commissioned a Serious Case Review which is ongoing. This review is likely to be concluded and published in the autumn of 2014.

The recommendations from the 3 reviews have been considered both on a specific and a thematic basis, alongside wider learning from case reviews elsewhere, and has been disseminated as described elsewhere in the report.

During the year the Board through the Sub-Committee sought to improve its management and oversight of the implementation of recommendations.

Case review is a significant, serious and sensitive responsibility and function of the Board. It deals with tragic and difficult events and seeks to establish as far as is possible accuracy about what happened, who did what and why in order that learning and lessons can be identified to reduce the chance of such events happening again.

To sum up

29




This requires both a forensic and a human approach, focusing on the family and seeking to achieve conditions whereby individuals and organisations can account for and better understand what took place in as open and transparent way as possible.

Nevertheless it is inevitable and often appropriate that judgements will be formed, and that these may indicate that errors occurred. During the year developments nationally helped to clarify the changing expectations around the case review process, requiring all concerned to re-examine the way in which this is undertaken.

During the year as a Board we took some careful and considered steps to try out different ways of undertaking review, seeking to learn from the experience of others in order to arrive at a clear position as to how, on what basis we will approach proportionate case review in the future.

It is fair to observe that alongside the wider direction of travel regarding the expectations placed on case review processes such as Domestic Homicide reviews, and the guidance contained in Working Together, that this has placed a strain on the capacity of partners to contribute and on the commissioning and management of reviews. This with the commitment to change and improve review process has accounted for the need to take more time.

During the year as a Board we have also become aware that this will require us in addition to being clearer about commissioning, choice of proportionate review and the model/methodologies we use, that we will also need a strategy for identifying resources and capability.

We have been able to maintain a thorough and considered approach to case review, we have been able to demonstrate challenge and a commitment to clear outcomes. We have also recognised the challenges this presents in terms of capacity, capability and transparency.

We have managed the risk of becoming preoccupied with process change and improvement, and have been able to increase the opportunities for front line practitioners and their managers to engage with learning, and board members have been encouraged to take forward this learning strategically and organisationally.

We were able to ensure that the learning from completed reviews locally as well as nationally was shared across the children’s workforce and through Board members. As other parts of this report show this also influenced the provision and content of training and other forms of guidance.

We know that as a result this will be an ongoing priority and challenge for the Board and its partners. If we are to maintain and improve our capacity to undertake the different forms of review including proportionate Serious Case Reviews and how we make sure that these produce a level of assurance and trust. In order that partners and professionals can be relied upon to do their best and be able to demonstrate what has worked well and when things have not worked as well as they could, that this will result in immediate and longer term improvements. Board members recognise that increasingly people look to the LSCB to ensure, assure and evidence this.

Q9: Did we ensure that whenever a child or young person dies in Northumberland this was reviewed to make sure that we were sure that everything that could and should be done to prevent this was? 30


In the year as a Board we maintained our commitment to the Panel shared with North Tyneside and Newcastle Safeguarding Children Boards. This is sensible as the way in which health services are organised and located means that children and their families will often experience services based in or run from other areas.

North Tyneside Clinical Commissioning Group has played a central role in supporting and providing a significant element of funding, alongside contributions from each of the Boards to ensure the panel was well resourced and independently chaired.

However there were some challenges due to one of the posts being vacant, which contributed to some delays in the process. This is a complicated process which requires a system for making sure that all child deaths are notified and them subject to review so as to identify whether or not there were any factors that could have been modified which may have meant the death was avoidable then or in the future.

The Child Death Overview Panel works alongside the Boards Case Review Sub Committee to ensure that the Board meets its responsibilities to ensure all child deaths are reviewed, significant incidents are considered for review and Serious Case Reviews are commissioned when appropriate. This is intended to ensure that we do not miss any failings or unnoticed incidents in the ways in which systems and people are working together. It is also intended to make sure that what we learn from review (which can also be examples of good practice and strong systems) and that as a result where deaths and serious incidents are avoidable this is the case.

2013/14 Annual CDOP report provides a clear account of how the Panel has responded to problems around staffing, whilst ensuring that targets are met and identifying ways in which the CDOP process can be developed in the future.

During the year the Panel considered 45 cases from across the 3 LA areas and this was 2 more than the year before. In Northumberland the number dropped from 15 to 12.

There were some important general themes identified, although on 6 of the 45 cases identified what are “modifiable” factors (things that the panel considered that might have made a difference and if these were addressed might make a difference in the future, modifiable factors are things that relate to circumstances e.g a dangerous road junction, changes to procedures, other factors such as mistakes are addressed by orgnisational/professionals and the LSCB Serious Case Review processes as well as civil and criminal law and HM Coroners.

There were 3 areas that came out these were;

children who die as a result of co sleeping and the need to ensure that safe sleeping awareness was widely recognised

The contribution that alcohol, drugs and smoking can play The rise in deaths were what is called “consanguinity “ has been identified as being

a common factor ( This is where close family members have children)

31


Over the last 3 years Northumberland has always had a higher number of modifiable factors compared with the other 2 areas, and this was the case this year. The Board will continue to focus on how it ensures that this learning is shared and reflected in how partners respond.

During the year the Board closely examined how these arrangements were working, in part because it was concerned that reviews should be timely and the process more accessible. This resulted in a level of challenge and a renewed commitment to further develop the review process and how as a Board we acted on the learning.

The shared approach continued to offer both a local and a wider insight about child deaths so as to ensure that the Board meets its statutory responsibility. The Board was proactive in its support for and challenge to these arrangements during the year. Collecting information and ensuring that it is subject to a thorough consideration is a complex activity and it has a wider focus across the widest aspects of the safeguarding agenda.

The Board is assured that the CDOP panel has undertaken its function and despite some short term resourcing matters, has ensured a level of performance that is both effective and evidencing improvement. Critically there has been a focus on in a sympathetic way what might be learned from each death as well as whether there is any cause for concern.

The annual report highlights a series of recommended improvements that will be considered by the Board shortly, and this in turn will ensure that there is a clear focus at Board level in ensuring that the CDOP process is supported and that Board members are able to act on reports and learning in the coming year(s) as they have done in previous years.

During the year we took as a Board a formal review and report from the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) who is responsible for ensuring that any allegation made against an adult working with children is subject to a clear process and investigation that considers the need to protect children, supports the employer to safely manage and allows the police to consider whether a law has been broken.

The Board also though the Section 11 Audit process supports and checks out that each organisation had safe recruitment practices and clearly designates safeguarding lead role within its management and governance arrangements.

In addition the Board makes available advice and support to all organisations and also receives formal reports from many partners as to how they are promoting safer recruitment.

Summary

To sum up

Q10: Did we make sure that organisations were recruiting safely and that all allegations against adults who work with children were looked into effectively?

To sum up

32


There is clear evidence of a robust and consistent process in place in Northumberland for managing allegations throughout the children’s workforce. Referrals have shown a marked increase over the past three years and it is anticipated that this increase will continue as more agencies become aware of their duty to report any allegations about people who work with children. The high level of referrals demonstrates that organisations in Northumberland are working together in preventing unsuitable people from working with children and young people. Whilst a growing number of referrals do come from the private and voluntary sector, the numbers are relatively low. The LADO Annual Report 2013/2014 is available via the website.

The LADO will continue to review the service and implement any necessary changes according to identified needs and trends.

As explained earlier we divide our efforts and resources between concentrating on our statutory responsibilities and making sure we focus on the most vulnerable groups of children. We have found that getting the former to work well helps us with the latter.

Our objectives around Early Help and the need to make sure we keep the “Thresholds for Intervention up to date link closely to our desire to focus on vulnerable groups as well as individual children who are vulnerable. Some of the work done in the year through the Sub-Committee that is shared with the Adult Safeguarding Board has focused on a “Think Family” Approach. This along with the different ways in which we have started to look at the “child’s journey” gave us cause to re visit and start to re think how we have approached the key incidences and factors that can make children vulnerable such as;

Substance misuse Domestic Violence and Abuse Mental ill health Neglect Self harming and suicidal behaviours

During the year Northumberland was chosen to take part in a “Thematic” Ofsted review looking at neglect. This was a useful experience and for partners there were many good examples of how they are responding to neglect, and 2 of these were cited in the report when it was published. You can look at this by following this link Professional response to Neglect

This report (In the Child’s time – professional response to Neglect) also helped the Board to consider whether or not its previous approach around integrating responses to neglect in all aspects of policy and activity remained a valid one. As a result the Board decided that children and their families would benefit if the Board developed a more visible approach to how we understand and respond to neglect as a significant predictor of harm or lack of well-being.

In the year the Board commissioned the development of a Neglect Strategy for publication in 2014/15- click this link to open the Neglect Strategy. There is also Neglect Practice Guidance which can be accessed here.

Q11: Did we make sure that everyone was doing all they could to make sure children or young people who we knew were or felt might be especially vulnerable were known about and that there was an effective joint working response?

33

http://northumberlandlscb.proceduresonline.com/chapters/p_childhood_neg.html

http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/idoc.ashx?docid=2c29c6da-6d43-4ce2-a43f-5b5445917dda&version=1

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/childs-time-professional-responses-neglect




During the year as a Board we supported a major conference looking at current issues and local capacity for response around domestic violence and abuse. This coincided with changes made to the age at which children/and young people should be considered as being at risk of harm from domestic violence. This was a powerful and well attended event.

Further evidence to support integrated working :- Domestic Abuse and MARAC training is now included on the NSCB training

timetable to raise the profile of this hidden harm, with particular emphasis on the impact on children and child safeguarding

As part of GP statutory safeguarding training provided every three years the sessions currently being delivered to all 46 practices in Northumberland is a joint training session discussing child safeguarding and the impact of domestic abuse on the whole family

Domestic Abuse and Sexual Violence Champions Network is being established to improve access to contacts within the workplace and raise knowledge of the available referral pathways and services – a key gap identified in many Serious case reviews/ Domestic Homicide Reviews

Domestic Abuse Champions Network is being established in Northumberland and there are currently 70 trained Champions from various agencies, including children’s services. The purpose of the Champions Network is to provide support and focus on our staff and their families to reassure our workforce that our priority is to protect children and families across the board in the public domain and / or within our own organisations.

Due to the close links with services in Northumberland and working in a more integrated way Northumberland Local Authority was successful in being part of a National 2 year Pilot , ‘Department for Education and Victim Support Relationship Abuse Project (DVRAP).

This programme worked with children’s services front line staff and other agencies/services to identify children living in abusive family relationships. The input was working on a one to one basis with 350 children and engaging with 2000 children in an educational setting to raise awareness of the impact of domestic abuse and vulnerability on children, to facilitate knowledge, routes of referral and mid to longer term confidence in reporting/ preventing abuse. This pilot is due to conclude in March 2015. It is hoped the information from the four pilot sites will inform the DfE and Government on improving responses to children. A series of booklets ’Effective Support for Children Affected by Domestic Violence and Relationship Abuse ‘ have been written and will be presented to the Business sub Committee of the NSCB for further discussion and appropriate action

Northumbria Police and the Local Authority put in place dedicated arrangements to respond to children who go missing and then to develop with the Board a multi-agency response to Child Sexual Exploitation. During the year the Board took reports from and was advised by the dedicated specialist worker (seconded from Barnardos) from the Local Authority and the Vulnerable Adolescents Sub-Committee developed and implemented a multi-agency action plan. As the year developed the Board furthered its role in this by embedding in its PMQA arrangements key indicators and supported the further review with Northumbria Police of the strategy and the regular undertaking of a problem profile, so as to better understand prevalence and the risks children and young people face. The Communications and Engagement Sub Committee also made sure that all schools were able to access and information and understanding about CSE.

34


In relation to ensuring that disabled children were effectively safeguarded, this had been a previous priority and past reports reflect the work done in this area by the Board. In the year the Board decided in part as a matter of strategy and in part to match resources to demand that the cross agency standing group should stand alone from the Board. This decision was not without challenge from members, who wanted to be assured that as a Board we would be able to monitor and ensure that disabled children were effectively protected through the arrangements in place. It was agreed to ensure that the multi-agency indicators and all key reports into the Board should make specific reference to how disabled children were safeguarded.

We have been able to focus firmly and regularly on Children at Risk of Sexual Exploitation, scrutinising and learning from the strong inter agency embedded response to children who go missing. In the year agencies took significant steps to develop a wider strategic approach, and this included seeking to better understand the scope and scale of CSE, in order to identify what may need to change in terms of joint working arrangements around information sharing, early intervention and the response of statutory services. The challenge for the present year will be to maintain this momentum and develop systems and strategy.

This has also meant that we have had to ensure that we continue to focus on other groups of vulnerable children and we have done this in a number of ways;

the work on neglect focusing on the use of restraint in residential settings board challenge around safeguarding of disabled children

The challenge was encountered by the Early Help and Early Intervention sub committee as it tried to find practical boundaries for where the Board could target its contribution and what it can expect from services and practitioners in adopting preventative approaches that also made sure that children who were at risk were effectively protected in a timely way, emerged as a significant theme during the year.

By the end of the year significant progress had been made in making sure that the connection between things that impact on children and their families and can increase the chances of them being harmed was clearer and resulted in the Board increasing its efforts to sure this is widely understood and shared, and that the thresholds for intervention provide all with safe guidance.

This important learning was also reflected in the lessons identified in local management reviews, and has served to challenge and add impetus to the efforts being made to ensure that joint working prior to or after statutory intervention meets the same standards.

As a result of our last annual report and subsequent Board review day, we concluded that this was an area we needed to work on.

To sum up

Q12: We know that being child focused and focused on positive outcomes is important to effective safeguarding, how did we progress this?

35


We have maintained our practice as a Board of making sure we hear from professionals who work on the front line and during the year a number of reports were presented by operational staff from different agencies. Our revisions to the Section 11 audit also reflected the need to focus more on impact and outcomes from the point of view of children and young people as well as their parents.

A particularly clear message from a management review was how easy it was for professionals and organisations to lose sight of the child when the families’ needs were so complex and challenging.

The Communications and Engagement Sub-Committee covered a wide range of key lines of enquiry regarding how we become more child and outcome focused and this resulted in several campaigns directed at children with engagement from various groups and organisations that promote the involvement and participation of children and young people in services. Although this did not lead to a conclusive position during the year, in part a direct reflection of the resources available to the board, at the end of the year progress had been made and an action plan to progress this.

We also said that we would become more effective in terms of how we promote and apply equality and diversity principles so that these were more in evidence in terms of how the Board discharges its responsibilities and sets an example. Progress in this area has been limited to revision of the multi agency training content and more attention to the way in which we communicate.

It is fair to conclude that the progress we made in respect of demonstrating more of a focus on and understanding of the child’s perspective and how as a Board we set the example and standards for equality and diversity, was disappointing.

That is not to say we did not make some progress, but this largely reflected our strength as a board to focus on a considered approach to understanding what is the best way to handle things we find a challenge. It may also be reflection on the pressures we have all experienced in terms of capacity and resources.

This means that in the coming year Board members will need to consider and address how to improve and ensure that there is a supportive framework for evaluating and supporting how all partners and the Board are more outcome focused and that these outcomes include the “child’s voice, journey and perspective”.

Members of the Board and the organisations they represent have maintained a consistent focus on all statutory responsibilities the Board is required to achieve. The Board has developed its capacity to lead, challenge and makes sense of the broad area of influence and complexity of the changing landscape. This report also demonstrates that there are areas of performance where we know we need to do better, it also demonstrates that members continue to welcome challenge and have developed a Board led approach to managing risk.

To sum up

Q13: What does this Annual Report tell us about how effective the Safeguarding Board was and how effective the joint working arrangements to protect children and promote their welfare were during the year?

36


Given the Board had previously highlighted risk areas in terms of the pressure on partners, the limited resource base of the Board, the need for partners to resolve and identify more equitably shared resourcing and the fact that the expectations placed on the Board were increasing, this report indicates the following;

That the Board maintained steady progress against each of its statutory responsibilities and the priorities it set following the last annual report. The introduction of Working Together 2013 has also meant the Board has had to identify and respond to the implications of this

Over the year it became clear that these are potentially more significant and far reaching that at first was thought. Having undertaken this on a considered and an incremental basis and it is important that this is finalised in the coming year, so that adjustments for joint working can bed in.

That there are some areas of concern in terms of the impact of change and the dependence on a relatively low level of core resource and the designated roles. This is noted in respect of certain agencies and also the viability of attendance at some of the sub committees.

Through improved information sharing and monitoring within a strengthening frameworks of standards and key measures, then variance is now seen at an earlier stage, whether in terms of Board effectiveness or the effectiveness of joint working arrangements, this further tests both the matching of resources to priorities and the strength of relationships at Board level.

Despite this the Board was able to make significant progress in the year in respect of engaging with the implications of the new Working Together and this has laid a strong foundation for 2014/15.

The Board was able to maintain and improve the ways in which it received and commissioned reports from partners and in particular the key responsibilities exercised by the Local Authority.

The Board maintained but arguably was not able to progress its influence and relationships with other key strategic partnerships, which were subject to significant change. The formulation of the new Children and Young Peoples Plan in 2014/15 parallels with the Board’s need to establish a new 3-year business plan, and this will provide a significant opportunity.

Throughout the year the Board and its members have kept a close eye on what happens to children when there is a concern for their safety and/or wellbeing, and has judged both by an analysis of the figures and trends, as well as through a number of case file audits that joint working arrangements continue to be effective.

However this is not to suggest that there is scope for improvement alongside the examples cited in this report where as a result of scrutiny, analysis and challenge members have embraced the need to be clearer about the standards they set and how these are maintained. The Boards agreement to invest in a new 3 year approach to Section 11 is one important expression of this.

37


During the year the Board made significant steps to set out a strategy for the development of Early Help as well as on what basis members would need to agree to evaluate this. This was an important step for the board in that it recognised that as a partnership it would have to carefully monitor and support a more effective early response to risk and need and the impact this might have on the current approach that relies quite heavily on statutory intervention to achieve this.

This resonated with the learning from management reviews as well as national case reviews which were actively shared during the year, in the need to make sure that at every point in a child’s journey, the pathways are clear, multi-agency roles are understood and people are able to work together within shared policies, procedures and priorities drawing on common knowledge and skills as well as utilising the specialist knowledge many professionals have.

The report acknowledges the progress made in promoting awareness and responding to a number of specific issues and vulnerable children. This is clear evidence that the Board sought to be responsive on a number of fronts. The report also evidences a level of tenacity and continuity as well as a developing capacity as a Board to improve both focus and resilience, this it is in felt due in part to the way in which board members approach their role and responsibilities.

As with previous reports the report does not give any cause for complacency and highlights areas where further learning and improvement is required.

The report does however suggest an increasing level of risk as other factors and pressures continue to impact on partner organisations in different ways and to different degrees

The statutory guidance requires the LSCB to assess whether partners are fulfilling their statutory obligations under Chapter 2 of Working Together 2013 will remain and is the basis of the judgement formed by the recently introduced Ofsted review/inspection of LSCB’s.

This report does conclude on the basis of the evidence that Northumberland Safeguarding Children Board and the partnership this represents maintained a constructive, consistent and purposeful approach in meeting its statutory responsibilities.

This in turn provides the evidence and the level of assurance children, their families, professionals, leaders and elected members should consider when reading this report

It is the judgement of this report, that in knowing our strengths and weaknesses as a Board we have been able to address these in an open way. That we have ensured a strong focus on the key parts of the child’s journey and making sure that front line professionals have been able to access high quality training that has a real impact on what they do.

A significant development was the promotion of direct learning experiences about what we have learnt from case review. We have continued updating and promotion of the policies, procedures and guidance intended to help with this and further developed a rigorous approach to looking at a range of indicators and evidence

38


about performance and quality that has focused on key points where working together is critical.

It is clear that all of the organisations who form the Board have maintained and in many instances developed their contribution to and involvement in the Board.

There is clear evidence of improved communication within respective agencies over the last year or more, in this age of limited and reducing resources, the Board has recognised the need for greater integration of services. Public Protection (Community Safety), Safeguarding Adult Board, Health in particular are now represented on Board sub-groups and structures to provide greater continuity in approach and understanding of the Safeguarding agenda (whole family).

It is of note that arrangements are now in place to enable members to challenge and be challenged when either the level of their commitment or the expectations set comes into question.

This suggests that making sure that joint working arrangements to protect children are effective, matters and that the wider significance and fit with strategic partnership and governance arrangements in Northumberland is recognised.

The initial evidence from the Section 11 self-assessment and the fact that the Board has agreed that this will have a greater strategic significance, in terms of assurance and in supporting local accountability within the changing landscape of provision and services, indicates that commitment to and attention to making sure that detailed and understood arrangements for responding to concerns about children at risk is robust.

The case review function and the lessons identified and how these are acted upon is another key measure and indicator of assurance. These clearly demonstrate a capacity for and a willingness by partners to critically examine their practice and arrangements. There are encouraging signs during the year that the reconfigured systems around health provision are setting a new standard for this.

The lessons identified from the management reviews shared during the period serve to remind us all that working together effectively requires all partners to afford this the highest priority and to ensure that at all levels what people have agreed to is fully implemented and understood.

This has also served to remind the Board that the promotion of clarity, ownership and the effective testing out of and making sure that “we are doing what we said we would and that we are able to respond to make things work even better” is even more important now, especially given the pressures that partner face.

The Local Authority and in particular its social care function continues to provide leadership strategically and operationally, and as such the significant changes it has made in relation to

Q14: Should we be and are we assured that the joint working arrangements to protect children and promote their welfare in Northumberland are “sufficient,” that is adequate for the purpose and legally satisfactory?

39


its own governance during the latter part of the year creates opportunities and challenges for the present year.

The continued focus by the Board on the scrutiny of performance in relation to statutory interventions to protect children, how children who are looked after are safeguarded and what happens as a result of these interventions, has meant that robust joint working arrangements to protect children have been maintained.

The Board has supported and increasingly influenced in the year, a cautious and an incremental approach to looking at how more effective joint working to intervene earlier to manage risk and meet needs without the recourse to formal and often intrusive statutory interventions should be developed. The Board has also been mindful of the need to ensure that there is capacity and understanding to do this at an earlier point in the child’s journey in ways that ensure a timely and effective response whenever a child is being harmed or it is felt that they might be.

The Northumberland Safeguarding Children Board therefore on the basis of its activity in the past year and its own assessment of its effectiveness as a partnership is assured that overall people continue to work together to protect children in a committed and effective way.

The report highlights the continued and new risks and challenges that may impact on this, as well as recognising that reducing the chance of error and mistakes, whilst promoting confidence and capacity at all levels means that partners will need to continue to support safeguarding as a priority.

8. Conclusion:

We should note in conclusion that, the Independent Chair must publish an annual report on the effectiveness of child safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children in the local

area.32

The annual report should be published in relation to the preceding financial year and should fit with local agencies’ planning, commissioning and budget cycles…” Page 63 Working Together 2013. (32 statutory requirement under section 14 A of the Children Act 2004.

The report concludes that in the year 2013 -14 the Board and its partners have fulfilled all areas of statutory responsibilities and are committed to “continuous learning and improvement” in order to strengthen the effectiveness of how it does this in the future.

It is not the purpose of this report to make any claim that there will not be occasions when children will not be harmed or suffer from neglect, or that the multi agency response will always run smoothly. The report does evidence that the Board is strengthening both its monitoring and scrutiny roles, and that as a Board members are committed to taking responsibility for making sure that those on the frontline who have to make difficult judgements and decisions are informed and supported to know what to do and how to do it and who else to involve in this.

The report also presents evidence that the Board is slowly negotiating and achieving improved levels of clarity, commitment and understanding about what is expected and why, from members. In order that they ensure that their organisations are able to play their part

40


in both prioritising safeguarding and being able to be assured and to assure partners, children, young people, their families and the public, that arrangements are effective.

The report also highlights some of the risks that may impact on this continued level of effectiveness and further improvement, as well as the areas where achievements have exceeded and fallen short of expectations.

These clarify the challenge for members and partners as the Board moves into review and preparation of its new business plan for 2014 -17.

41


Appendix 1 Board Membership12103Name Job Title Agency

Alex Bennett Chief Fire OfficerNorthumberland Fire & Rescue Service

Anne Moore Group Nurse Director Northumberland, Tyne & Wear, NHS Foundation Trust

Carol Southam Director VoiCeS

Carole Goodwin Service Manager CAFCASSCounsellor Robert Arckless

Executive Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services

Northumberland County Council

Daljit Lally(from December 2013)

Executive Director, Community Health Services Children’s & Adult Services

Debbie Reape Deputy Director of Nursing Northumbria Health Care NHS Foundation Trust

Fiona Wardlaw Lay Member

Dr Gill Turner Designated Doctor,Child Protection

Northumberland Clinical Commissioning Group

Graham Cook Lay Member

Jane Bowie Head of Commissioning, Planning and Strategy Children’s & Adult Services

John Douglas Detective Chief Inspector Northumbria Police

John Egan Group Manager, Children’s Services Action for Children

John Whittle Head Teacher Haydon Bridge High School

Julie YoungHousing Services Manager - Homelessness and Vulnerable People

Northumberland County Council

Karen Herne Manager Public HealthLinda Lincoln(Jan Hemingway from October 2013)

Designated Nurse Child Protection Northumberland Clinical Commissioning Group

Liz Kelly Director of Offender Management Northumbria Rehabilitation Company

Mark Douglas Head of Children’s Social Care Children’s ServicesPaul Moffat(until November 2013)

Director Children’s Services

Peter Tilson Principal Solicitor Children’s Services

Phillip Soderquest Head of Public Protection Northumberland County Council

Richard Burrows NSCB Independent Chair,Impartial Outcomes

www.impartialoutcomes.co.uk

Roger Edwardson Head of Service Northumberland County

42

http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/

http://www.impartialoutcomes.co.uk/






http://www.northumbriacrc.co.uk/

http://www.northumbriacrc.co.uk/

http://www.northumberlandccg.nhs.uk/





http://www.haydonbridgehigh.co.uk/cms5

http://www.actionforchildren.org.uk/

http://www.northumbria.police.uk/




https://www.northumbria.nhs.uk/

https://www.northumbria.nhs.uk/




http://www.cafcass.gov.uk/

http://www.voices-northumberland.org.uk/

http://www.ntw.nhs.uk/

http://www.ntw.nhs.uk/




(from November 2013) Council

Saira Park NSCB Development Officer Children’s Services

Sharon Dunbar Senior Manager Barnardos North East

Steve Day Safeguarding Standards and Quality Assurance Manager Children’s Services

Tony Mays(until August 2013) Head of Early Years & Schools Children’s Services

Vivienne Braithwaite Senior Nurse Northumberland Clinical Commissioning Group

43





http://www.barnardos.org.uk/what_we_do/barnardos_today/northeast.htm




Appendix 2 NSCB AttendanceBoard Meeting Dates and Agency Attendance, between the reporting period of 31.03.2013 to 01.04.2014:

Northumberland Safeguarding Children Board met 6 times during the reporting period. Meeting dates are as follows: 31st May 2013, 26th July 2013, 28th

September 2013, 22nd November 2013, 31st January 2014 & 28th March 2014Partner Agency attendance is indicated below:

Agency (alphabetically)

NSCB Member May Jul Sept Nov Jan Mar

Total %

Action for Children Group Manager 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

Adult SafeguardingStrategic Safeguarding Manager

1

1Deputy sent:Janice O’Hare

1Deputy sent:

John Young1 1 1 6 100

%

Barnardos Director 0 1 0 1 0 1 3 50%

CAFCASS Service Manager 1 1 0 1 0 1 4 67%

Children's ServicesCorporate Director of Children's Services

1

1Deputy sent:Mark

Douglas

1 0

1Deputy sent:Mark

Douglas

1 5 83%

Children's Services Strategic Safeguarding Manager

1 1 1Deputy sent:

Patrick

1 1 1Deputy sent:

Audrey

6 100%




Total %

Boyle Johnson

Children's ServicesHead of Children's Social Care

1 1 1

1Deputy sent:

Audrey Johnson

1 1 6 100%

Children’s ServicesBusiness Support Officer to NSCB(from Sept)

N/A N/A 1 1 1 1 4 67%

Children's Services - Education

Head of Education 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 33%

Children's Services - Legal

Principal Solicitor 1 1 1

1Deputy sent:Faye

Stewart

1 1 6 100%

Children's Services - Schools

(from Jan 2013) Headteacher

0 1 1 0 0 0 2 33%

Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG)

Head of Commissioning 1 0

1Deputy sent:Lynn

Brydon

1 0 1 4 67%

Independent Chair Richard Burrows 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 100

%Lay Member 1 1 1 1 0 1 5 83%Newcastle, Tyne & Wear Trust (NTW)

Mental Health Lead

1Deputy sent:

1Deputy sent:

1 1 0 1 5 83%

45




Total %

Dave CookNHS England (from January) N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 1 2 33%

Public Health Head of Public Health 1 0 0 1 1 1 4 67%


Designated Doctor 1 1 1 1 0 1 5 83%


Designated Nurse 1 1 0

1Deputy sent:Sheila Moore

1Deputy sent:Jan

Hemingway

1 5 83%

Northumberland County Council Elected Member

(particpant observer) - Elected Member

1 0 0 0 1 0 2 33%

Northumberland Fire & Rescue Service

Chief Fire Officer

1Deputy sent:Steve

Richards

1 1 11

Deputy sent:

Helen Guy1 6 100

%

Northumberland Housing

Senior Vulnerable Persons Housing Officer

1Deputy sent:

Andy Clarke1 1 1 1 1 6 100

%

Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust

Deputy Director of Nursing/General Manager

1 11

Deputy sent:Linda

1 1 1 6 100%

46




Total %

Children's Services Parmley

Northumbria Police Detective Chief Inspector 1 1 0 1 1 1 5 83%

Northumbria Probation

Head of Offender Management

0 0 1 1 1 0 3 50%

Public Protection Head of Public Protection

1Deputy sent:Phil

Soderquest

1Deputy sent:Phil

Soderquest

1Deputy sent:Phil

Soderquest

0 0 0 3 50%

Voluntary & Community Sector (VCS)

Director (Voices) 1 1 1 1

1Deputy sent:

Eleanor Phillips

1Deputy sent:

Eleanor Phillips

6 100%

NSCB Attendance 2013/14:

47


Barnardos

C'Services/HOS

C'Services - Ed

CCG

NTW

Des Dr

NFRS

N/Police

VCS

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%

Series1

Age

ncy

NSCB Attendance 2012/13:

Action for Children

CAFCASS

Children's Services

Children's Services - Schools

Lay Member

Northumberland Care Trust & Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG)

Northumberland Fire & Rescue Service

Northumbria Police

Public Protection

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%

Chart Title

Series1

48


Appendix 3 Sub-Committee Attendance from March 2013 to April 2014:

C Serv

ices

NTWNHCT

Probati

on

Barnar

do'sCCG

Police

NCC Public H

ealth VCS

0

6

12

Business Sub-Committee Attendance Mar 2013 to Apr 2014

Agency

Total No of Meet-ings: 12

C Services NTW NHCT YOS T Pregnancy CCG Police Education0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Vulnerable Adolescents Sub-Committee Attendance Mar 2013 to April 2014

AgencyTotal Meetings: 3


C Serv

ices

NTWNHCT

Probati

on

NCC Tra

inin

gCCG

Police

N Youth

E Years

VCS 0

102030405060

Learnining & Development Sub-Committee Attenadnce Mar 2013 to Apr 2014

Agency

Total No of Meetings: 5

C Serv

ices

NHCT

HWBB

Police

Pub Hea

lthDAAT

Escap

e

NCC Trg FRP

0102030405060

Think Family Sub-Committee Attendance Mar 2013 to Apr 2014

Agency


*3 were cancelled

C Serv

ices

NTWNHCT

NCC Public H

ealth CCG

Police

Barnar

dos

Probati

on0

10

20

30

Performance & Quality Assurance Sub-Committee At-tendance Mar 2013 to Apr 2014

Agency


*2 were cancelled

50


C Serv

ices

Comm

sNHCT

CCG

Barnar

do's

NCC Fire &

Res

cue

Police

Educatio

nVM

CP Pro

t0

10

20

30

Communication & Engagement Sub-Committee At-tendance Mar 2013 to Apr 2014

Series1

Agency


*3 were cancelled

C Serv

ices

NTWNHCT

CCG

Schools

Educatio

n

E Years

HWBB

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Early Help, Early Intervention Sub-Committee At-tendance Mar 2013 to Apr 2014

Agency


51


Appendix 4 Summary of performance data from March 2013 to April 2014:Below is an overview of what the data that has been presented to the Board consistently over the period 13-14 is saying. To provide context, we have used regional benchmarking beneath the table along with a brief summary of how Northumberland’s stats compare.

Darlington Durham Gateshead Hartlepool Middlesbrough New castle North Tyneside

Northumberland Redcar and Cleveland

South Tyneside

Stockton Sunderland VCSN Average

Number of CAFs 13-14 363 947 375 437 434 906 517 409 777 566 2606 1573 9910

Rate of CAF per populati on 13-14 150.1 94.5 92.8 215.3 137.2 167.2 128.2 66.5 282.3 190.6 616.4 287.6 195.6

Number of referrals 13-14 1478 7163 2434 1246 2393 2808 2203 5636 1673 1858 2968 3378 35238

Rate of referrals 13-14 611.2 714.6 602.5 613.8 756.4 518.1 546.2 916.5 607.9 625.6 702.0 617.7 668.7

Number of CP plans 2014 141 455 276 128 238 374 157 357 217 172 296 305 3116

Rate of CP Plans 2013 26.1 40.7 42.1 67.1 86 57.7 31.4 47.3 56.1 37.8 87.2 49.9 51.1

Rate of CP Plans 2014 58.3 45.4 68.3 63.1 75.2 69.0 38.9 58.1 78.8 57.9 70.0 55.8 59.1

% change from 2013 123.4% 11.5% 62.3% -6.0% -12.5% 19.6% 24.0% 22.7% 40.5% 53.2% -19.7% 11.8% 15.7%

Number of children in need 2014 897 3053 1602 891 2197 2446 1565 3681 1170 1393 2073 2663 23631Rate of CIN 2013 370.4 .. 388.7 548.6 785.3 412.2 382.1 516.1 499.1 484.5 544.3 433.3 452.2Rate of CIN 2014 371.0 304.6 396.5 438.9 694.4 451.3 388.0 598.6 425.1 469.0 490.3 486.9 448.4

National 2013 332.2 332.2 332.2 332.2 332.2 332.2 332.2 332.2 332.2 332.2 332.2 332.2 332.2

Northumberland's rate of CAFs or EHAs compared to its referral rate show that the former is relatively low and the latter very high. The referral rate is the highest in the region and has been the subject of discussion at the Board and the PQA sub group. Discussions with regional neighbours show that their CAF numbers are not reported on a consistent basis, e.g. Stockton's are not as high as they seem here.

The rate of children subject to CP plans has increased and is now almost on a par with the regional average, which is high compared to the national average. Under 1s play a large part in this increase.

Northumberland has a relatively high rate of CIN and this is consistent across the last few years. Whilst the rate regionally is lower and has decreased, Northumberland's has increased in 2014.


53

Date post:	15-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Northumberland€¦ · Web viewKeeping Children and Young People Safe from Harm, Abuse and Neglect....

Documents