Agenda item

To receive information about the contribution of Independent Reviewing Officers (IROs) to the quality assurance and improvement of services for children who are looked after.

The Committee received a report from Sabine Kadhaya (Service Manager, Safeguarding and Reviewing, Brent Council) providing information on the activity of IROs to the quality assuring and improvement of services for looked after children across the 2025-26 reporting period. In introducing the report, she highlighted the following key points:

• The IRO report had received positive external validation via feedback from Ofsted.
• In relation to priority one – to make Looked After Child (LAC) reviews more child-led and encourage participation, the minutes of reviews were now written in the form of a therapeutic letter to the child which formed part of life story work, and there was high participation in reviews with LAC able to choose how their review was done in creative ways.
• A Practice Manager was now in post, directly managing four permanent IROs, but the service was still reliant on external agency staff to support that. There were discussions as to whether to bring another IRO in-house.
• A new performance management dashboard had been established, particularly to drive improvements in the timely completion of reviews.
• The average caseload of an IRO was 55, which was manageable.
• A significant increase in the use of Coram Voice for advocacy for older young people was being seen.
• Priorities for the current year were to increase the timely completion of LAC reviews, formalise the escalation process, improve transition planning post-18, and continue to improve child-centred practice.

The Chair thanked Sabine Kadhaya for her introduction and invited contributions from those present, with the following points raised:

The Committee asked what the statutory timescales for review were. Sabine Kadhaya explained that the first review upon a child entering care should take place within 3 months, and then reviews should happen every 6 months. If the child entering care was a baby then they had more regular reviews. Part of her role was to ensure those reviews happened within the statutory timeframes required and were reported to the DfE. She was under separate line management from the Head of LAC and Permanency to ensure there was some independence if there was a need to escalate issues.

In response to a query regarding the top areas that IROs felt needed further focus, Sabine Kadhaya advised IROs reported that children placed out of borough made completing reviews more difficult if there was a need to spend a long period of time travelling to complete the assessment. In addition, ensuring documentation for the child was ready before a review took place needed improvement.

Acknowledging the response that out of borough reviews were challenging, the Committee asked what percentage of children were placed out of borough. Nigel Chapman (Corporate Director Children, Young People and Community Development, Brent Council) confirmed that 80% of children lived within 20 miles of Brent, with some children and young people having specific needs which could only be provided out of borough.

In response to how the service tracked the issues raised by IROs, Sabine Kadhaya explained that there was an escalation process on the system allowing tracking of that issue. This also enabled the service to identify themes and trends. It was agreed that the Committee could be provided that data in future reports. In terms of the levers in place to influence service improvements, Kelli Eboji (Head of LAC and Permanency, Brent Council) advised that the IRO would raise any issues they had identified in reviews with the Social Work Team Manager responsible for that child. If the issue did not resolve it was then escalated to Service Manager level, and subsequently to the Head of Service if the issue remained unresolved. Discussions with the team responsible for that child would take place to ensure the issue was understood and addressed. Palvinder Kudhail (Director of Social Care and Early Help, Brent Council) agreed that aspects of the escalation data could be shared with the Committee for future reports.

Noting the budget allocation for this service, the Committee asked what plans there were to bring more IROs in house. Officers confirmed that the service was looking to move one IRO from external agency to in-house to reduce external agency spend and increase oversight and supervision.

As no further issues were raised, the Committee resolved to note the report.