Leicester City Council Quarter 3 October December 2018 Childrens - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Leicester City Council

Quarter 3 October – December 2018 Children’s Social Care and Early Help Division Quality Assurance Report

Quality Assurance framework: Children’s Early Help and Social Care

Quality Assurance Framework

Case file audits/ audits’ moderations Observation of practice Independent CP Chairs and IROs

• versight

Children & Young People’s participation User feedback/Complaints Performance Book

LCSB Multi-Agency case file audits Feedback from partners CYP Scrutiny Commission Regional Peer Challenge Ofsted DfE

Single Agency

Triangulation of Activity and Quality Assurance

Multi-Agency Challenge

Review of Q2 Next Steps

Assessment training to be rolled out focusing on the areas for improvement – focus on identity & diversity, analysis of family history and risks/needs; New supervision template (based on SofS model) introduced in Q3 to support management oversight and evidence case progression; Targeted QA activity to support auditors understanding of what good looks like via moderations, audit events, QA Surgeries; Additional methods to secure feedback from the families, including children and young people. (Pilot Advocacy for initial meetings); Targeted activities by CIN Service around genograms and chronologies External review/ challenge of QA Framework scheduled in Q3

External Review of the Performance Management and QA Framework November 2018 – Chris Batty

• The Performance Management and Quality Assurance Framework is enabling the

council to know itself well.

• Senior management have maintained a strong and visible focus on ensuring that

compliance and timescales are maintained and quality of practice is improved.

• The Framework is generally being well implemented and becoming more

integrated into the work of the department at all levels

• Generally the right balance between consistency and flexibility to allow for specific

service needs but one or two areas where this could be improved.

• Two aspects – independent visits to children’s homes and reviews of foster carers –

which do not meet regulatory requirements

Audits across the Division

There were 112 audits across the division in Q3

• 31 in Early Help
• 63 in social care
• 18 in YOS

Audit Analysis

.

Evidence of the use

• f Signs of Safety

Audit Analysis

Strengths Areas for improvement

• Good evidence of partner agencies

input into assessments

• Good evidence of management
• versight
• Good focus on the child/young person
• evidence of increase engagement

(direct work/visiting) - Resulting in child/young person’s wishes and feelings being recorded

• Assessment of parenting capacity
• The appropriateness of placements

and contact arrangements

• Auditors need to identify areas, where

practice can be improved

• Auditors need to ensure that

discussions take place with workers

Practice Observations across the Division

There were 92 P.O.s across the division in Q3

• 24 in Early Help
• 65 in social care
• 3 in YOS

MST/MST CAN/FFT-CW

Adherence data

(as reported by 157 families)

Days between referral and start

(Target <10 days)

2 4 6 8 10 12 Oct Nov Dec 0% 50% 100% Target 61% Actual 80%

MST

1 2 3 4 5 Target Score End of Year 1: 3 Actual Score 3 Months from Start: 3

FFT

QA through Independent Chairs

97% 3%

LAC reviews

88% 8% 4%

CP Conferences

Legend: Escalations

No concerns

Strengths Areas for Development ▪ Good engagement with children resulting in incorporating their wishes into plans ▪ good understanding of what life is like for the child allowing informed multi-agency decisions to be made

• Planning and preparation for conference
• Consistent footprint of the chair driving the

effectiveness of the plan

• Embedding Signs of Safety practice

Commendations

Participation – Advocacy Pilot

Advocacy was offered for children attending ICPC or newly LAC age 10-15 years. Advocacy provided by De Montfort university youth work students.

• Advocacy – Initial Child Protection Conference – 27 referrals (6 progressed to

advocacy support at conference.

• Advocacy for Children Looked After – 13 Referrals (9 progressed to advocacy

support) I can actually speak, and people listen when the advocate is here. People at the meeting could actually hear what I think – I have been heard. I found it easier to write down my feelings and have my advocate say it for me at the meeting Recommendations

• The pilot will continue – age restrictions will be removed
• Leicester City Boundaries will be removed

Feedback

Feedback from Families 26 complaints (7 upheld or partially upheld) and 31 compliments. Feedback from Partner Agencies 4 compliments were received from partner agencies Clear plan drawn up addressing all concerns. All professionals consulted throughout, and their views listened to and taken into consideration. Considerable differences in the meeting – chair managed the meeting well Ensured parents and professional views were heard and respected

• throughout. Good, clear and thorough

Chairperson was fair and inclusive, and she challenged everyone involved to justify their comments and suggestions. feel that getting the safety plan a bit before has been a positive way today. What went well……The plans to be made to keep baby safe in future and supported

Q4 – Next Steps

• Further guidance to be provided to the auditors regarding the importance
• f warm feedback to the practitioners and link between areas of

development and actions – March 2019;

• Continue to increase support to individual auditors via QA surgeries and 1-

2-1 support from QA manager – overview to be provided in Q4

• New provisions in place to ensure statutory compliance with Reg 44 visits

and foster carers’ reviews

• Assessments continue to be variable – focused training to be provided to

front line practitioners via weekly lunch and learn and further Signs of Safety training

• Independent review of Leaving Care Services – January 2019