Agenda item

To receive the annual report from the Independent Chair of the Local Safeguarding Partnership.

The Committee heard an overview of the Telford & Wrekin Safeguarding Partnership Annual Report from the Independent Chair of the Local Safeguarding Partnership. They heard that this was the last time that the report was to be presented in this format and the Committee would receive a dedicated Adult Safeguarding report moving forwards. This was due to the decision to create a separate Children and Adults Board. It was noted that it had been a challenging year but that partners had continued to provide effective safeguarding as indicated by the positive results of assurance exercises.

Members heard that they received equal funding from Health, the Local Authority and the police which was also reflected in their executive. The Independent Chair cited the success of the Adult Criminal Exploitation Sub-Group which worked with those who didn't meet the threshold but still required help. This alongside a recently set up perpetrators group provided key early intervention. They commended the work of the Adult Social Care team who were found to be exceptional as part of ADAS peer review. There was also more that could be done, but the Independent Chair highlighted that they had strong partnership working.

Members asked a number of questions:

Where there any weaknesses that they had identified or areas where the Health Scrutiny Committee could add value?

Capacity was always an issue. They had focused on children's mental health issues as SaTH had prevented access to services due to oversubscription. This had only be worsened by the pandemic. The Independent Chair sought the Committee's assistance in assuring that the right communication was going out to adults regarding accessing the correct services. Members of the Committee concurred that mental health was a concern and would be subject to further scrutiny.

There were also concerns about the level of influence they would have once the Clinical Care Group moved to an Integrated Care System.

In the report it was indicated that the number of children subject to child protection was lower than at the same point in 2020. However, the Borough's number of looked after children rose. How were the two related as they appeared contradictory?

The numbers reported throughout the pandemic were not necessarily accurate, with some things being hidden. The Independent Chair noted that it was doubtful that there was a dramatic reduction in the number of referrals but with school closures during the pandemic they were not being referred through that route. He stated that this was not a challenge that was going away but Family Safeguarding did work very hard to prevent children going into care.

There were case studies cited in the report. What was support was offered in these cases and what was the monitoring process?

Whilst the Independent Chair was unable to provide the outcomes of individual cases but the priority was always to prevent children going into care so ongoing support to the family to prevent that. In the instances where it could not be presented, ongoing support was provided. Recommendations made as a result of those cases would have been implemented and monitored through a sub-group, with the Independent Chair stating that they would be happy to ask someone to provide a more detailed answer on the specifics.

What support was provided to adults and children following incidents involving the Police?

They received ongoing support. Members heard that there was a process named encompass which meant that after an incidence is reported to the police where a child was involved, the school is notified the next day in order for them to observe their behaviour and provide additional support where needed.

What was being done to identify those children who had not returned to education following school closures? 

The Independent Chair was unable to provide number but explained that each school had their own process for this situation but did believe that the rules around home schooling required review nationally. They did carry out an exercise during the pandemic on children that had been highlighted as a concern. They found all were receiving regular contact to ensure they were not in danger. The Independent Chair did ensure members that it was an area that they would look at a future board meeting.

The residents of some of the most deprived areas in Telford & Wrekin were facing high pressures which at times resulted in them taking it out on their loved ones. Did they have the capacity to deal with that?

The safeguarding systems within schools were tried and tested and all designated safeguarding leads were well trained.

The number of completed concerns which progressed to S42 had decreased in comparison to 2019/2020. This drop coincided with a change in how it was recorded, but was the benchmarking the same?

The Independent Chair was not able to confirm if the benchmarking was the same but noted that it was difficult to compare when things had changed externally. Will request that it is looked into and that the Committee is updated. They added that a high number of referrals were raised out of concern and were often not substantiated.

The Annual Report related to last year. Was it possible for the Committee to be updated more regularly?

The Independent Chair stated that they would be happy to look at more ways of communicating more regularly and agreed to liaise with the Council's partnership team in order to facilitate this. They wanted to ensure that they were responding to concerns quickly and whilst they were still relevant.

The Committee thank the Independent Chair for their report.