Agenda item
Fostering Service Quarterly Report (January 2017 - March 2017)
The purpose of this report is to provide information to the Council’s Corporate Parenting Committee about the general management of the in-house fostering service and how it is achieving good outcomes for children. This is in accordance with standard 25.7 of the Fostering National Minimum Standards (2011). The report covers the fourth quarter of this reporting year.
Minutes:
Onder Beter (Head of LAC and Permanency) introduced the Fostering Service Quarterly report for the period January 2017 to March 2017. Members were provided with an overview of the LAC population including overall numbers and placement types. The decline of the LAC population by 6.2 percent was explained with reasons including LAC turning eighteen years old and leaving care and children being supported back into the care of their parents. The role of the Entry to Care Panel was also outlined. This panel scrutinised the plans of every child proposed to be Looked After to ensure that this was the last option utilised and that where safe to do so children be supported to remain with their families. It was noted that the numbers of Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children (UASC) had stabilised since the last reporting period and a good number of these children had been placed within fostering settings both with Brent Foster Carers and Independent Foster Carers. Members’ attention was drawn to the details provided on Foster Carer recruitment and specifically to the slight reduction in initial enquiries received and in conversion rates between enquiry and approval. Overcrowding was considered to be a particular issue contributing to the later of these.
Onder Beter concluded his introduction to the report by detailing future developments for the service including the recruitment of a Social Pedagogy Development Worker due to join the team in May 2017. The focus of this post would be to support the development of social pedagogical thinking and practice and to undertake direct work with Brent fostering households and Looked after Children. It was hoped that this work would improvement placement stability and help children and families cope with a range of social, emotional and behaviour issues.
With reference to a report from Coram Voice analysing the results of the wellbeing survey of Brent’s LAC, a member queried whether this work would be used as an ongoing feedback mechanism. A member questioned how the success of the social pedagogy programme would be measured. It was queried whether the stabilisation of the UASC numbers was a result in improvements in the number of offers from other local authorities. The committee sought details of when the Entry to Care Panel had been established and questions were raised in relation to recommendations of the Fostering Panel.
In response, Onder Beter advised that the Coram Voice report was a one-off academic exercise conducted in partnership with London Universities, with each participating local authority receiving a bespoke report at the end of the process. Feedback on this report would be provided once available. The success of the social pedagogy programme would be measured using performance indicators on placement stability, as well as feedback from staff, LAC and Foster Carers and internal quality assurance checks. It was confirmed to the committee that analysis of the impact of the programme would be included in the following year’s Annual LAC Report.
Nigel Chapman (Operational Director Integration and Improved Outcomes) advised that there had been a general reduction in the number of UASC arriving in the country and a slight improvement in the Home Office dispersal system. Some of those young people had also now turned eighteen and were no longer LAC. Members were further informed that the Entry Care Panel had been in place since 1 February 2017, though had existed in a different iteration previously. With reference to a decision by the Fostering Panel to dissent from the recommendation of the social worker, Onder Beter advised that the Panel had on balance of the information provided not agreed with the recommendation and in turn, the Panel’s recommendation had been ratified by the Agency Decision Maker.
RESOLVED: that the report be noted.
Supporting documents: