Agenda item

Purpose: To consider the findings of the Inspectors' report and agree future topics of scrutiny assessing the effectivness of Children's Services functions.

The Commission considered a report concerning the progress of Children’s Services subsequent to their Ofsted grading of ‘inadequate’ issued in May 2015. Mac Heath (Head of Children and Families Services) introduced himself to the Commission, stating that he had been in post since June 2015.

Six months had passed since the grading was published and in that time a lot of work had been undertaken – which was highlighted within the report.  The key point to note was that the Improvement Action Plan had been developed in response to the Ofsted report and clearly set out the vision for children, young people and families.

The Improvement Plan showed how the Improvement Commitments linked to Ofsted’s recommendations and showed what would be measured, monitored, observed or established to demonstrate that the service met their commitments. Each section of the plan contained SMART actions with target dates and a lead officer who had responsibility for completing them.

Mac Heath explained that the Secretary of State showed confidence in the Council’s ability to improve the service with minimal intervention; the plan had been accepted as a constructive tool to track the improvement journey. Since the plan was publically accepted, in August 2015, it had been confirmed that the Improvement Partners to work alongside the service would be an organisation called Exploring Choices.

Mac Heath wanted to emphasise that the plan showed a number of red statuses and these indicated that the plan was ambitious. However, the service still recognised the need to complete the items so deadlines had been rescheduled.

Members heard that concerns had been raised regarding the leadership and culture within the service. Mac Heath advised that a number of management roles had secured permanent staff (from previously temp/ contracted posts). Mac Heath explained how it would help to demonstrate that the service was committed to its staff which in turn would help to shape an improved culture.

He concluded by stating that he would use every available opportunity to provide updates (Local Safeguarding Children’s Board, Overview & Scrutiny Management Commission and Children’s Improvement Board) to ensure the service was transparent in its improvement journey – he wanted to ensure the plan received robust challenge in various forums.

Councillor Alan Macro was disappointed to see that a review of Test of Assurance on the Director post had been postponed. Councillor Lynne Doherty advised that the review was postponed in order to allow time to consider the best way forward. The service was committed to conducting a review and this would take place in due course.

Members proceeded to focus their discussions around the items which had been reported as either ‘amber’ or ‘red’. The Commission heard that, in many cases, an item would be deliberately categorised as ‘amber’ although the action had been completed. This was to allow sufficient time for the action to be embedded within the service. Lynne Doherty stressed that numerous changes required cultural improvements and it was recognised that this would take time to embed.

Councillor Emma Webster asked whether the service had an overall deadline for the delivery of commitments stated within the plan. Lynne Doherty suggested that 15 months would be a reasonable final deadline but the main focus was around making sure the actions were sufficiently embedded.

Members discussed the process of selecting services from Ofsted. Mac Heath advised that the package offered by Ofsted was not entirely fit for the needs of West Berkshire Children’s Services. So they would undergo negotiations to select certain elements of the package which would offer benefits to the overall improvement programme.

Councillor David Goff asked how the service envisaged that they would meet the ‘Good standard’. Mac Heath stated  he had first-hand experience of this process so understood that Ofsted could provide interval checks in order to gauge the direction of the service but this was not a formal review. An assessment of improvement could only be judged when a full review took place.

Members were informed that the Improvement Plan would be assessed by the Commission to ensure it continued to receive robust challenge. It was agreed that Members would receive another update in 3 months time – December 2015.

Resolved that:

(1)      Members would receive an update report in 3 months time – December 2015.

(2)       The report was noted.