Minutes:
The Chair highlighted that she had requested a
RAG rated action plan report be brought to this Committee meeting,
and requested that a written report, with the RAG plan included, be
brought to February’s Committee meeting.
The Independent Chair and Scrutineer Thurrock LSCP
introduced the report and stated that she had recently been chosen
for the role, and would be focussing on the future of scrutiny and
safeguarding in terms of children. She stated that Sir Alan Wood
had carried out a national review of Local Safeguarding Childrens
Boards four years ago, and from this LSCPs had been developed, and
had been enshrined in legislation in 2017. She explained that this
legislation made the local authority, the Clinical Commissioning
Group (CCG), and the police equally responsible for child
safeguarding, and the LSCP had an overarching role to co-ordinate
safeguarding in the area and implement learning from serious case
reviews. She added that Thurrock’s LSCP had a constitution
that enshrined these principles, and helped to hold partners to
account. She stated that Thurrock’s LSCP were currently
working on: early identification of vulnerability; increased
learning within the partnerships to ensure learning was embedded
and changes could be made when required; and ensuring information
was shared effectively.
She explained that Thurrock’s peer review last year had
highlighted the need for scrutiny and governance, which was why she
had been appointed into the role. She stated that she would be
reviewing the arrangements for broader scrutiny aiming for it to be
objective and a critical friend. She explained that the peer review
had driven actions to support Thurrock’s scrutiny,
particularly through the increased use of Key Performance
Indications (KPIs) and improved multi-agency partnerships, such as
with the police, health colleagues, and schools. She added that
additional quality assurance had been implemented, such as
multi-agency audits from the LSCP. She summarised and stated that
the LSCP could provide safeguarding assurance information to
Committee Members, and a report would be brought to Committee next
year which would outline their upcoming priorities.
The Safeguarding and Children’s Manager stated that there
were four reviews and one peer review action plan currently
underway. She stated that these were:
1. Frankie – 14 actions identified (11 blue and 3
amber)
2. Sam and Kyle – 18 actions identified (16 blue and 2
amber)
3. Leo – 14 actions identified (1 blue, 4 green, and 9
amber)
4. Shay and Ashley – learning published but not yet ratified
through governance processes.
She explained that blue actions meant the work had been embedded
into the service; green meant complete but not yet embedded; and
amber meant work had been started but not yet completed. She added
that the peer review had identified 26 actions, 23 of which were
now blue and 3 of which were amber.
The Safeguarding and Children’s Manager added that the
reviews had identified four overarching themes of: information
sharing; professional curiosity; thresholds and escalations; and
working with resistance. She stated that lots of work was ongoing
on these actions and data was being collected via the LSCP Dataset
to form the basis of the 20222-2024 LSCO delivery plan.
Councillor Anderson questioned if the amber actions were on course
for completion, and if they had deadlines. The Safeguarding and
Children’s Manager replied that all amber actions were on
course for completion. She mentioned that the team had been holding
numerous awareness sessions, and were trying to deliver these on a
more spread-out timescale to ensure maximum attendance.
The Safeguarding and Children’s Manager, and the
Independent Chairperson and Scrutineer Thurrock LSCP left the
meeting at 7.45pm