The LSCP Business Manager introduced the
report and stated that it provided an update on the work of the
LSCP and the progress that had been made on action plans. She
stated that the Partnership were currently working on updating the
service’s priorities. She commented that the current
priorities included neglect, participation and engagement, and
violence and vulnerability. She explained that this work included
consulting with frontline practitioners regarding their emerging
concerns, and she hoped the new priorities would be agreed by the
end of March 2022. She explained that a roundtable meeting had been
held in December 2021 regarding the new priorities, and a frontline
practitioner questionnaire had been circulated, which would close
on Friday 18 February. She explained that once the feedback had
been analysed, the Partnership would then choose the new priorities
based on this and other factors, and would work with the Health and
Wellbeing Board and Community Safety Partnership to ensure the new
priorities would support their ongoing work. She stated that
identified priorities for 2022-24 would need to be processed via
the LSCP governance processes, but that the Partnership had been
working with the Safeguarding Adults Board, the Health and
Wellbeing Board, and the Community Safety Partnership to devise and
agree a shared priorities document. She explained that the document
would be dynamic so that it could be updated as boards and
partnerships updated their priorities.
The LSCP Business Manager added that in October 2021 a Children’s Social Care conference entitled ‘Building Better Connections’ had taken place, during which 140 people, including frontline practitioners and Councillors, had discussed the emerging theme of extra-familial harm. She added that the Partnership were also undertaking audits as per their annual audit schedule during which deep dives were conducted into randomly selected cases to ensure the Partnership was performing well, highlighting areas of good practice, and identifying areas that needed additional work. She explained that if certain areas were identified as needing additional work, a re-audit may be undertaken later on in the year to closely monitor the Partnerships progress. She added that the LSCP Business team were collating the Safeguarding in Education audits. She commented that a report was currently being written and any learning would be shared directly with schools and via learning and development events.
The LSCP Business Manager moved on and stated that the LSCP also commissioned a detailed Thematic Review of Serious Youth Violence and Gang Related Violence, which was a result of an incident between two young people. She explained that the LSCP worked with an external reviewer to see what areas had worked well and what lessons could be learnt. She stated that the report regarding this thematic review would be published at the end of February or early March, and multi-agency meetings would be called to discuss the recommendations from this review. She added that the LSCP had also formed a Neglect Sub-Group, which was a multi-agency partnership group to reduce neglect in Thurrock and ensure that a framework was in place to meet this aim. She commented that due to the detailed work of the group, this priority and Sub-Group might be rolled over into the next municipal year.
The LSCP Business Manager stated that the report included RAG rated appendices outlining the work undertaken on case reviews. She explained that the Sam and Kyle Case Review had identified eighteen actions, sixteen of which were now green or blue, and two of which were amber. She stated that the two amber recommendations were currently progressing and the recommended reflective practice sessions had been developed and would run in February, April and June 2022. She stated that these sessions would bring multi-agency practitioners together to discuss complex cases. She moved on and explained that the Frankie Case Review from 2020 had recommended fourteen actions, all of which were green or blue, barring one which was amber. She stated that the team were working on the amber recommendation which related to children whose parents had received custodial sentences, and the team were currently looking at best practice and how they could do things differently. She stated that the Peer Review was now complete and the Leo Case Review published in February 2021 had eleven completed recommendations and three amber recommendations, which still had ongoing work. She stated that one amber recommendation from this Case Review was to ensure that the Think Families approach was being followed, and Thurrock’s LSCP were working with Essex County Council and Southend Borough Council to ensure it was embedded throughout the county. She added that all three authorities had been working together to produce a podcast and additional resources for frontline practitioners, which was available on the LSCP website. She mentioned that Southend, Essex and Thurrock Councils would also be holding a Think Family Summit in the Spring/Summer 2022, and survey with schools was being undertaken in relation to recommendation 1.2 to find out what information they receive. The LSCP Business Manager summarised and stated that the Shae and Ashley Case Review was currently being signed-off through the LSCP governance processes.
The Independent Chairperson and Scrutineer Thurrock LSCP stated that the action plans would be embedded and supported in schools through the ongoing thematic reviews. She added that multi-agency partners would also be looking at all of the relevant records from Serious Case Reviews to ensure a strong framework was implemented. The Chair thanked officers for their report and felt that it had been easy to see the information and had been easy to scrutinise. She queried the timeframe for recommendations from Case Reviews to be implemented. The LSCP Business Manager replied that the development of the recommendations could take time due to data collection, but this differed on a case by case basis. She added that a rapid review was completed immediately after the incident, but the standard turnaround time for a full Case Review was approximately one year. The Corporate Director Children’s Services added that the turnaround time for Case Reviews could be delayed due to external processes, for example coroner’s investigations and police enquiries, as these had to finish before LSCP Case Reviews could be published. The Independent Chairperson and Scrutineer Thurrock LSCP added that actions would be adopted as soon as possible following an incident, and although it might take time for the final report to be published, recommendations may have been put into place and embedded before publication. The Chair thanked officers for this clarification and asked that all Serious Case Reviews come before the Committee, as it was a standing item on the agenda.
Councillor Anderson felt pleased to see that frontline workers would be included as part of the consultation regarding identifying LSCP priorities for 2022-24, and asked what the target participation levels would be. The LSCP Business Manager replied that the team usually aimed for approximately 50% frontline worker participation.
RESOLVED: That the Committee:
1. Noted the update on the work of the LSCP and the progress made on Action Plans to date.
The LSCP Business Manager, and Independent Chairperson and Scrutineer Thurrock LSCP left the meeting at 7.31pm.