Agenda and minutes

Apologies had been received from Councillor Wilkinson, Councillor Lowndes and Alistair Kingsley, Parent Governor Representative.

At this point Members must declare whether they have an interest, whether personal or prejudicial, in any of the items on the agenda. Members must also declare if they are subject to their party group whip in relation to any items under consideration.

There were no declarations of interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on 21 June 2010 were approved as an accurate record.

The decision notice for each decision will bear the date on which it is published and will specify that the decision may then be implemented on the expiry of 3 working days after the publication of the decision (not including the date of publication), unless a request for call-in of the decision is received from any two Members of a Scrutiny Committee or Scrutiny Commission.  If a request for call-in of a decision is received, implementation of the decision remains suspended for consideration by the relevant Scrutiny Committee or Commission.

There were no requests for Call-in to consider.

The Executive Director of Children’s Services introduced the Associate Director for Health Improvement and advised the Committee that her role was important in integrating Health Services and Children’s Services.  She had a key responsibility for ensuring health outcomes for young people.

The report provided the Committee with detail on the Be Healthy Partnership element of the Children’s Trust.  Included in the report was a list of the National Indicators which showed the current performance for the Be Healthy outcome.  The key areas of focus for 2010/11 were:

• Emotional wellbeing of children and young people (including child and adolescent mental health services)
• Reduction of teenage conceptions and Sexual Health
• Healthy weight
• Drug and alcohol misuse

As part of the presentation two Youth Inspectors talked to the Committee about the Youth Inspector Programme and their recent inspection of the NHS Walk in Centre.  The Youth Inspector Programme aimed to give young people the chance to look at services available in their area and feedback their views from a young person’s perspective.  The Youth Inspectors remit for the inspection was to answer five questions:

1.      Was the service accessible?

2.      Was the service welcoming?

3.      Was it clear what the service did?

4.      How satisfied were young people with the service?

5.      How were young people involved in the service?

Based on their findings from the inspection recommendations were made to the service provider.

The Committee asked the Youth Inspectors questions about their recent inspection.

·         Why was an inspection of the Walk-in Service undertaken?  They responded that it was because some of their friends had used it but a lot of young people had not and they were hoping to find out why.

·         Why was one of the recommendations that there should be more services for males?  They responded that the services offered seemed to be mainly targeted at women and they felt that there should be similar services offered to men e.g. advice on Chlamydia.

·         What research methods were used during the inspection?  They responded that it was mainly by talking to the people who ran the services and the service users.

·         Did the inspectors feel that the recommendations will make a difference?  They responded that they had given the service a six month target to take action on their recommendations.  They would then go back to in six months to see what impact the recommendations had made.

·         How were people advised about the Youth Inspection Programme?  They responded that they had produced a newsletter called ‘Inspectorated’ which went out to young people and service areas.  The Children’s Trust sponsored the Youth Inspection programme and ensured that the work being done was communicated across the services.

·         What other services had been inspected and what services would the inspectors like investigate?  They responded that they had inspected the Central Library and would like to inspect Peterborough Time Stop, the Police and housing services.

The Committee thanked the Youth Inspectors for their excellent presentation and wished them success with the Youth Inspectors  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Executive Director of Children’s Services introduced Andrew Brunt the new permanent Assistant Director for Safeguarding, Families and Communities who had joined the Council in July.  The Committee were advised that the report format had changed since the last report and showed the current performance and direction of travel of each of the Ofsted notices to improve. 

Observations and questions were raised and discussed including:

·         Members noted that the Social Care vacancy rate was still high and wanted to know what the challenges were in recruiting social workers.   Members were informed that there was a national shortage of social workers but it was hoped that in time Peterborough would become the local authority of choice.  Most of the vacant posts were being covered by agency staff and there was also a rolling programme in place which helped with succession planning.  Peterborough had already started to build a good reputation with the grow your own bursary and trainee schemes and there were currently 19 newly qualified social workers.  The recruitment programme was highly structured and would be moving to an assessment centre model to ensure ongoing recruitment activity. Reactivating a talent pool on the PCC website was also under consideration to enable people to register their interest in becoming a social worker. The aim was to move to the point where there were 5 permanent staff and 7 agency staff in place so that there was 12 full time staff. 

·         What was the gender and racial balance of the team?  Members were advised that social work was traditionally a female profession with less men training to be social workers. 

·         Was Peterborough on target to recruit 19 newly qualified social workers by November?  The social workers had already been enrolled.

·         What had been done in terms of notifying people in care about the complaints policy?  Members were advised that people in care were notified through their social workers and when they had their review.   Advice on how to complain was also available in an information pack which was given to new children coming into care.

·         Why had the figure fallen for the percentage of children with a disability allocated to a worker and was this a symptom of resource shortages?   Members were advised that it was an issue that changed depending on the number of children coming into the system and the nature of their disabilities.  The officer was not aware of a capacity issue within the team and therefore all children would be allocated to existing workers.  In some cases there would be shared arrangements between specialist workers.

·         The report indicated that performance with regard to children who were subject to a child protection plan for a second time had worsened and was this something that we should be concerned about?   Members were advised that this tended to be about children who were under a child protection plan from early in their life and then came off the register but then were put back on the register later in their life.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The report provided the Committee with information regarding the outcomes of the Scrutiny Big Debate held on 4 February at the City College Peterborough.

The Scrutiny Big Debate involved an investigation by the four Scrutiny Committees in to how the economic downturn had affected the City in terms of its aspirations for growth, levels of crime, requirements to support vulnerable people and its credentials for environmental sustainability with particular reference to transport. It was a pioneering piece of work that had been designed and delivered in consultation with the Centre for Public Scrutiny.

The scope of the review for the Creating Opportunities and Tackling Inequalities Scrutiny Committee had been to look at how vulnerable adults and children were being supported in light of the economic climate and finite resources.

The event involved a panel of guest speakers from various organisations who gave their point of view on areas that had been affected by the downturn in economy.  Four young people also attended who were classed as 16 to 18 year olds not in education, training or employment (NEET) to give their point of view of how they had been affected by the economic downturn.  The audience were invited to challenge the panel on their points of view and this provoked lots of discussion. The Committee were now asked to delegate to the Group Representatives consideration of which items should be added to the Committee’s work programme.

ACTION AGREED

(i)                   To note the outcomes from the Scrutiny Big Debate.

(ii)                  To delegate to the Group Representatives consideration of which items should be added to the Committee’s work programme.

(iii)                To receive an update on the progress of the outcomes at a future meeting.

To consider the latest version of the Forward Plan.

The Committee received the latest version of the Council’s Forward Plan, containing key decisions that the Leader of the Council anticipated the Cabinet or individual Cabinet Members would make during the course of the following four months.  Members were invited to comment on the Plan and, where appropriate, identify any relevant areas for inclusion in the Committee’s work programme.

            ACTION AGREED

The Committee noted the Forward Plan and agreed that there were no items to bring to the Committee.

To agree the current work programme and discuss future items.

Members considered the Committee’s Work Programme for 2010/2011 and discussed possible items for inclusion.

ACTION AGREED

To confirm the work programme for 2010/11 and the Scrutiny Officer to make any amendments as discussed during the meeting.