Minutes for Children & Young People Scrutiny Commission meeting, Jul 6 2009, 7.00PM official page

Cllr Bell, Cllr Kelly, Cllr Landau, Mary Ludlow, Ralf Bergmann, Edith Akinnawonu, Alan Wood

There were no urgent items and the order of business was as laid out in the agenda

There were none

The minutes of the Children and Young People’s Commission meeting on 6^th July 2009 were agreed as a true and accurate record.

Cllr Siddiqui commented that as Scrutiny agenda’s are public documents information laid out should be clear and easy to understand. He raised a technical issue with the layout of page one of the minutes. He suggested having a clear line of division between members in attendance and those who have given their apologies and Co-optees who are present and those who have also given their apologies.

The Chair conveyed Alan Woodsapologies to the Commission and invited Sophie Humphreys to give the commission a brief update.

Sophie Humphreys, Head of Safeguarding said that the purpose of the report was in response to a requirement of all DCS to satisfy themselves about their safeguarding procedures. The overall findings are positive and the work that Hackney has done against the JAR recommendation is very good.

Questions and Answers 

Regarding JAR recommendations number 6 the Chair stated that the document does not give information on what the Lead member’s accountability or position is. The Chair also asked about what type of training is available for members as suggested by the ‘additional non-mandatory recommendations’

The Officer replied that the report does outline the role and position of the lead member, this information can be found on page 15. Pertaining to the second question, the Head of Safeguarding said that the training will be coming from central government, and could be rolled out in September.

Cllr Taylor commended the DCS for its work and foresight on the ‘Reclaiming Social Work’ approach but raised concern that measuring the quality of meetings does not focus on the quality of safeguarding procedures.

The Head of Safeguarding said that audits that look at quality in specific areas are carried out within the department. The reclaiming social work module is currently the subject of an external scrutiny by the LSE, and this is focusing on the quality of work being done.

Cllr Taylor suggested that close supervision can allow closer scrutiny of work. He raised concern on how the LSE will be able to measure quality of work.

The Head of Safeguarding replied that what is unique about the Unit module is that every case is discussed by the ‘unit’ with views coming from clinicians, social workers and practitioners. This method gives more opportunity for closer scrutiny of cases, whereas one to one supervision has its limitation.

The Chair asked where the Children Trust Board (CTB) fits within the Safeguarding board structure.

Elaine Peers, Head of Policy & Programming replied that the Children Safeguarding Board is an independent board but must have a relationship with the Children trust arrangements. This is achieved by the Chair of the safeguarding board being a member of the CTB. The Chair of the safeguarding board holds the CTB to account to ensure it is having appropriate discussions about safeguarding and is meeting its own responsibility. In addition, under the new arrangement, the Safeguarding board is going to be required to report annually to the CTB, setting out progress and challenges it faces in going forward.

Mr Sills – a member of the public asked how referrals are recognise as being serious as appose to being routine cases.

The Officer said that it is dependant on the level of details provided. The more information available on a case, the easier it is to make a decision, otherwise further details may be sought. The skills of the professional to recognise a potential high  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Chair welcomed Sara Gibbs, from the East London Foundation Trust and Dr Maitra and Dr Erickson. The Chair also welcomed Sherbanu Sacoor from the Primary Care Trust.  The Chair invited the officers to give their presentations.

Sherbanu Sacoor, Head of Service, PCT CAMHS gave her presentation based on First Steps, which was previously known as Chimes. The presentation is a response to the draft CAMHS report, and particularly to highlight some of the work CAMHS are doing with the different ethnic group in Hackney.

We were set up to promote mental and psychological well being for children and young people and to provide a high quality multidisciplinary mental health services to ensure effective assessment, treatment and support for children and their families.  And from the National Service Framework it was important to look at earlier intervention, as the earlier in life a child’s problem is identified and intervention starts the more likely it is to be effective.  School based community programmes are more likely to be successful than programmes that focus on the child alone.  Effective programmes have the following features: comprehensive, systemic orientation, early commencement, relatively high intensity and long duration. 

First Steps was established to: 

• Provide early access to help for mild to moderate mental health problems for children 0-19years.

• Develop projects which support and empower parents, community groups and frontline workers

• To improve the mental well being of children & young people by providing timely or early intervention and preventative mental health provision within a range of settings based in geographical clusters.

We are building links with the Vietnamese community with programmes such as:

• Families need Fathers; Ante-natal group for Fathers; Fathers group with the NE London Muslim Community
• Support for Turkish advocates re: Child Mental Health
• Parenting groups for Muslim mothers linking religious beliefs with euro-centric approaches to parenting
• Black boys’ project: service provision for black boys in late primary school/early secondary school who may be identified as under-achieving or/and mental health difficulties – work in progress
• Training; Consultation; Supervision for OJ voluntary  Sector staff
• Joint working with DERMAN to identify Turkish adolescents at risk for mental health problems

For years 08/09 we accessed the following BME groups:

• African Caribbean/Black African 18%
• Turkish Kurdish  14%
• Asian/Bangladeshi/Pakistani 10%
• Mixed race 14%
• White 29%
• Other 15%

Up until 2007 the workforce was 95% white. There has now been a shift. The result is as follows:

• Black African 5%
• Bangladeshi 5%
• Indian 10%
• Other Asian 5%
• Turkish 5%
• White 70%

We work towards meeting the diverse needs of the community and do not have a one size fits all. As highlighted in the report, recruiting child mental health specialist from the BME community has been our greatest challenge. We do provide a number of programmes, i.e. our work with communities training to front line staff; particularly because we are based in GP’s practices and children centres we are right at the access point where we can provide consultation, training and supervision. 

In terms of the common assessment framework (CAF)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The Chair welcomed Elaine Peers, The Head of Policy and Programming from the Learning Trust and asked her to give the commission a brief introduction on Child Poverty. This is an area the Commission has decided to look into as an in-depth review. 

The Head of Policy and Programming said that child poverty is both a national and a local priority. Nationally, the Child Poverty Bill has just been introduced in parliament. One of the key aspect of the National Child Poverty Bill is that there is going to be a requirement of the Government to produce a UK wide child poverty strategy and also a requirement for Local Authorities to produce its own joint (partnership wide) Child poverty strategy. The issue of poverty is identified in our community strategy as a long term priority and child poverty is also one of our local area agreement indicators and is a theme which cuts across all of the 8 priorities of Hackney’s CYP Plan.

There are two ways that we are intending to address issues around child poverty. Firstly, to look specifically at supporting sustainable employment and raising the income levels of families. The other way is to address the inequality of opportunity and narrowing the gap across the five ECM outcomes; particular improving education attainment in children, improving children’s physical and mental health also focusing on raising aspiration in young people. It’s a twin track approach towards meeting reduction in child poverty across Hackney.

There are two cross cutting reviews taking place. One specifically is on worklessness and looking at sustainable employment and the other is focusing on Child poverty which is likely to focus on equality of opportunities around ECM. Currently the cross cutting task group will report to the Performance Intelligent Equalities group and then feed back to the Team Hackney board. They are at the stage of formulating areas of interest. This will also inform how the CYP Scrutiny review can add value and how the two can work together. The scoping of the cross cutting review should be completed by the end of July with the intention of beginning the review in September. It is expected to be completed in the following spring.

The Chair asked Members to recommend areas of focus for the CYP review. 

Questions and Answers

The Chair asked the officer what indicators where in place to measure child poverty and whether Hackney had a child poverty co-ordinator

The Head of Policy and Programming did not have the full details at the meeting and stated that she will provide the commission with the required details. Due to the cross cutting nature of the topic, there is not a single person dedicated to oversee the issue of child poverty. However there are a number of specialist that deal with it. The council has a Children’s services policy adviser, Pamela Baldwin who is greatly involved in scoping ideas for the review.

Lisa Neidich was concern that if the Commission came up with a topic ahead  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The Chair welcomed Carl Blakey to the commission and asked him to give a brief introduction.

Carl Blakey, Head of Commissioning, picked out 3 themes of the report to focus upon. The first is the need to have quality training for young people. Secondly to ensure that the right people are involved in making decisions for young people; and thirdly to ensure that young people are themselves involved in decisions that affect them. These are the three pillars which this strategy is built around. There is a factual error in the report on page 61. The development in Homerton will not be at Pedro Club but at Concorde in partnership with the Hackney Marsh Partnership.

The Chair made reference to a booklet she read which listed the various activities across the borough. She asked the officer about the different ways Hackney advertises to young people.

The Head of Joint Commissioning replied that a marketing strategy is currently being developed to deal with this issue. A new young people’s website is being created, but there is a feeling that the best form of communication for young people is by word of mouth. In the interim leaflets, booklets and Hackney Today are being used to advertise activities for young people. 

Lisa Neidich said that a good percentage of young people in Hackney attend out of borough schools and raised concerns that those individuals would not be in a position to know what is going on. She asked how this group would get the necessary information.

The Head of Joint Commissioning stated that there is an awareness of the main out of borough schools that Hackney students are attending. At present the main marketing is done via Hackney today newspaper. Each edition has a section on activities for young people, and there is a section written by young people giving ideas of what is out there. 

Lisa Neidich stated that not many young people actually read Hackney today.

Cllr Icoz asked the officer whether the youth parliament or children centres have been consulted over future plans.

The Head of Joint Commissioning replied that involving young people in decisions that affects them is the best way to get the message across.

Cllr Shaikh raised concerns over the prices of youth venues and activities, as this can prevent them engaging.

The Head of Joint Commissioning said that ensuring that young people can access activities at a low cost is one way of mitigating poverty. A lot is being done to ensure that youth activities are not expensive. 

Cllr Unluer talked about a Hackney social event he attended where 60% of attendees were young people.  Many organisations were represented but none from the council. He asked why the council or its partners were not present to promote the various youth activities. He asked the Commission if it can recommend that the Council makes it a priority to attend social events.

Cllr Plouviez suggested that it may be a good idea to look at how current  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Cllr Taylor informed the Commission about the ‘Living in Hackney Scrutiny Commission’s overcrowding review, which is at its final stages. The review takes account of how overcrowding affects the achievement of children in schools.

There were no other business