Agenda item

a)         Report of the Independent Chair  Durham Local Safeguarding Children’s   Board

b)         Presentation by Jacqui Doherty, Business Manager, Local Safeguarding    Children’s Board.

The Committee received a report of the Independent Chair  Durham Local Safeguarding Children Board that provided information on the processes involved in the Local Safeguarding Children Board Serious Case Review (SCR) (for copy see file of Minutes).

The LSCB Business Manager gave a presentation that highlighted the following:-

·         Serious Case Review Criteria

·         Additional Criteria

·         Who can refer a case

·         Notifications to Government and Regulatory Bodies

·         Aims of a Serious Case Review

·         Learning and Improvement

·         How reviews are conducted

·         Published Findings

·         Monitoring and Learning

·         Current Published SCR

·         Learning from published SCR

·         What happens next

·         Actions Taken by the LSCB

·         Additional Actions Taken by the LSCB

Councillor Maddison referred to the last slide of the presentation regarding working together and asked the LSCB Business Manager to expand on the barriers.  She advised that the main barriers were about people understanding the thresholds, for example the health professionals giving a level 2 or 3 for a case in terms of need but that another professional would give a different level.  A Task and Finish Group had been set up to address that.  She also advised that there was a communication and information sharing barrier when the practitioner was not known or there were no contact numbers.  A third barrier was systems as all services used different systems and the board was looking at how to reduce this barrier.

Referring to an outcome where a child was not brought to an appointment, Councillor Brookes asked if the LSCB had the authority to ensure that this was followed up.  The LSCB Business Manager said that the NHS had an action for that and that work was ongoing with GPs and dental practitioners to identify the people involved.  She added that the LSCB could escalate a case higher if it was not being addressed locally. The LSCB Business Manager in response to a further question from Councillor Brookes in relation to organisations implementing recommendations advised that the LSCB in terms of working together can escalate if no action against recommendations.

Councillor Brookes went on to ask if the figures for serious case reviews were published. He was interested in benchmark data suggesting serious case reviews per 1,000 population might be a useful measure for comparing with other local authorities  He was informed that they would be included in the published annual report.

Councillor Kennedy was concerned when the whole family was not looked at when a problem with an elder sibling was known.  The LSCB Business Manager said that risks to a baby were not always assessed when looking at another child in the family but due to the findings of the serious case review this learning was being shared that families as a whole should be assessed..

With reference to the Adoption Panel, Councillor Jewell pointed out that problems were identified pre-birth and flagged up quickly through a very rigorous process.  The LSCB Business Manager said that in adoption cases there was involvement from the local authority but in this situation where the family was not known to statutory services issues were identified.

Councillor Blakey picked up on the point that communication was a barrier and said that over the last nine years of being on this committee the non-communication or lack of communication between all agencies was still being reported as a problem.  She was informed that this was a national issue but would improve with sharing protocols in place.

The Strategic Manager Children’s Services explained that the service carry out a large assessment of cases and that information sharing comes up as an issue time and time again.  The service were getting things right for so many people and families.  She added that in future even when no previous involvement with the family was known a team around the family would look at all aspects of family life.  For example, when a child had poor school attendance a health visitor and midwife would be involved.  The SCR allowed the service to revisit the findings with all of the practitioners.

The LSCB Business Manager explained that there were flags used on systems where one practitioner had safeguarding concerns, further to a question from Councillor Bainbridge.  She added that the Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH) worked with a number of agencies in the same office with access to the same information.

Councillor Maddison referred to access to information and asked if there was a limit to those people who had authorised access.  With early intervention she asked if a midwife would be able to access any flags on the system about safeguarding concerns with a family.  The LSCB Business Manager explained that all individual agencies had their own systems and that it did become more difficult when sharing information across all agencies.  This was now being addressed and each partner was looking into it.  She added that the LSCB had promoted clearer information sharing and further guidance from the Government for 2018 was currently being consulted upon.

The Chairman thanked the LSCB Business Manager for her presentation.

Resolved:

That the report and presentation be noted.