Issue - items at meetings - Ofsted unannounced inspection of Contact, Referral and Assessment arrangements within Brighton & Hove

33.1         Nigel Hancock- Operational Social Work Service Manager introduced the unannounced inspection of contact, referral and assessment arrangements. Ofsted had completed a 10 day inspection 18 months ago which showed 11 areas of strengths, 9 areas of satisfaction and 3 areas of development. The unannounced inspection on the 22 and 23 November was a follow up on the last inspection.

33.2         Members raised a number of points including:

1.      How was the service going to work through the areas of development identified in the report? Members were informed that that a Service Improvement Plan had been completed which had actions, milestones and deadlines. This plan connected up with all areas of the service. The Plan was monitored by Managers.

2.      Members agreed that further clarification was needed on each of the development areas highlighted in the report. The committee noted that this was the only document that the authority received and there was no further information available from Ofsted.  Additionally, the service had gone through a restructure from 3 points of entry to1 point of entry. The unannounced inspection took place 2 weeks after these changes. There was no supervision evidence available, as managers were supervising new teams.

3.      CYPOSC had previously heard that the thresholds were at the correct level however this report identified that thresholds were inconsistent. Members were told that the inspection results were saying to deliver more carefully in a more structured way through the children in need plan rather than a child protection plan.

Although the thresholds were correct it meant working differently. There could be a decrease in child protection numbers if cases were to be processed through the children in need pathway rather than the child protection one as previously operated.

The Officer suggested that it maybe useful for CYPOSC to see the Service Improvement Plan and the 9 areas of development that had been achieved from the previous announced inspection

4.      The CAF had insufficient focus and was central to two areas of development in the last inspection. Ofsted had reported back that the CAF was a worthwhile process and it did not raise criticism other than to increase the frequency of these.

Additionally there were 2 tiers of the common assessment framework (CAF) which included the team around the family (TAF). Both processes involved various professionals including adult services. Both processes worked together with a good use of resources. Other authorities did not have this two tier approach.

5.      A Youth Council representative questioned why there was such a delay between the date of inspection and the awarding of the rating to children’s services? Members noted that the process was long, from the inspection taking 2 to 3 days. A verbal response would first be given back to the children’s services. The Ofsted adjudicator would check the draft report to ensure it was written to the right standard; with comparisons being made to other reports. The draft report would then be sent to the authority for it to be checked for accuracy and to give the authority a chance to appeal. The final report would then be sent out after.

6.      Why the individual needs as defined by race, culture, language and religion were not identified and considered in casework practice or planning in all cases. Members were informed that the teams would collate this information if they noticed a difference in culture or race. For families or children from another city this information was not collated.

7.      A youth council representative asked how the process could be more efficient for complex cases, members noted that managers we assessing how effectively cases were being processed and whether there were sufficient triggers.

33.3         The Officer was thanked for presenting the report and answering questions.

33.4         RESOLVED-

(1) The committee requested a concise report on the Service Improvement Plan, highlighting which actions had been completed and which were outstanding.