Return to Agenda

ITEM EX6

EXECUTIVE – 1 OCTOBER 2002

CORPORATE PARENTING

Report by Executive Member for Children & Young People

Background

  1. The concept of corporate parenting was introduced with the Government’s Quality Protects initiative in 1997. It is a responsibility placed corporately on all councillors, with regard to children in care, and in particular for optimising the life chances for those children.

  2. Although identified Quality Protects funding comes to an end in April 2004 there is no sign that the notion of corporate parenting will cease with it.

  3. Until November 2001 this duty was held to be discharged by the Children’s & Young People’s Sub-Committee. Since then there has been a vacuum. This has been the case everywhere. Some authorities have been quicker than we have to do something about it but many have not. The report from the inspectors of our children’s services in March mentioned corporate parenting as something to be developed. By reshaping it now we will be in the middle of the pack, ahead if anything.

    4. The Current Proposal

  4. The proposal is for a 9-member panel (3 from each group), consisting of the 3 members (1 from each group) who serve on the Council’s Adoption & Fostering panels and six others who would ideally be chosen by the respective groups with some degree of discussion to ensure that they include members with an interest in education and in community safety.

  5. Officer members would be the Director for Social & Health Care and the Acting Chief Education Officer/Director for Learning & Culture, the Assistant Director, Children’s Services, the Service Manager, Children Looked After, the Principal Education Officer, Pupil Services and the Children’s Rights Commissioner. The Chief Executive of the lead PCT on children’s health (currently the City) and a representative of Connexions would also be invited to be permanent members. Other relevant Council officers would attend as necessary to present reports and officers from other agencies would be invited regularly.

  6. The Panel would meet three times a year and would report once a year to the Executive.

  7. The Children’s Panel would require terms of reference. Its raison d’être would be to ensure that the Council is fulfilling its responsibilities for the children in its care, and its principal functions would be as follows:-

    1. to participate in the Regulation 33 inspections of Children’ Homes;

    2. to invite the committee of the local Association of Foster Carers to one meeting a year to listen to and discuss their concerns;

    3. to invite young people in care, or care leavers, to meetings as appropriate in order to listen to and discuss their concerns;

    4. to receive regular reports (perhaps twice yearly for each) on the following issues relating to children in care and care leavers:-

      1. the numbers of children in care and movements in and out of care;

      2. the numbers of children awaiting placements;

      3. the number and nature of complaints received from young people about their care, and the action taken as a result;

      4. the numbers of placement reviews not carried out on time;

      5. the functioning of the system for a specific liaison officer for children in care in each school;

      6. the educational attainment of children in care (at key stage levels as well as GCSE and A level);

      7. the numbers and age of children in care excluded from school and the provision of behavioural support services and home tuition;

      8. waiting lists for child and adolescent mental health services;

      9. cautions and convictions; diversion measures.

  8. The Panel would expect to discuss such reports constructively and in depth, and to have the authority to make suggestions for improvement of existing systems that would be taken back to the relevant departments and acted upon. Major recommendations would be the subject of a report to the Executive, or might lead to a Scrutiny review.

  9. It is not envisaged that the Panel would become a general forum for all children’s issues. This would dilute the focus on children in care and could conflict with the Scrutiny/Executive system.

  10. The occasion could arise where the existence of this Panel and its monitoring reports are the Council’s defence against a charge of councillors ‘not knowing’ about our services for children in care and the procedures for implementing them, or when workloads or other pressures mean that required standards may not be met. It would need formal minuting, and for its reports and its minutes to be kept for a decent period. It is therefore proposed that the Panel is serviced from the centre. Because senior staff room external agencies would be regularly invited to attend it would be important that the dates of its meetings appear in the common diary.

  11. The Panel would have no budgetary requirements. A standard folded A4 leaflet outlining the existence of the Panel would be appropriate at some point.

    12. RECOMMENDATION

  12. The Executive is asked to agree to the establishment of a Children’s Panel in accordance with paragraphs 5 to 11 of the report.

COUNCILLOR JANET GODDEN
Executive Member, Children & Young People

September 2002

Return to TOP