Agenda item
POST PEMBROKESHIRE SAFEGUARDING ACTION PLAN
- Meeting of Partnerships Scrutiny Committee, Thursday, 8 November 2012 9.30 am (Item 7.)
- View the background to item 7.
To consider a joint report by the Corporate Director: Modernisation and Wellbeing and Corporate Director: Customers (copy attached) which outlined the Post Pembrokeshire Action Plan.
10.55 a.m.
Minutes:
A
copy of a joint report by the Corporate Director: Modernisation and Wellbeing and Corporate Director:
Customers, which outlined the Post Pembrokeshire
Action Plan, had been circulated with the papers for the meeting.
The Corporate
Director: Customers referred to the issue of safeguarding children and the
significant publicity relating to the Jimmy Savile
and Bryn Estyn cases.
He introduced the report which outlined the findings of the joint investigation by the CSSIW
and Estyn in respect of the handling and management
of allegations of professional abuse and the arrangements for safeguarding and
protecting children in education services in Pembrokeshire. The report identified significant failings by
the Authority in safeguarding children and put in place a series of
requirements. A Joint Review had been
undertaken to consider progress and make further recommendations. These reports
identified shortcomings and made recommendations in the following areas:-
Recruitment
Record keeping
Processes, policies and
procedures
Training
Reporting and scrutiny
Further specific issues had been highlighted subsequently which
related to the use of “time-out” rooms in Pembrokeshire
schools, and it was explained that Denbighshire had a common policy across all
secondary schools on ‘use of Reasonable Force and Restrictive Physical
Intervention’. In response to concerns
raised by Councillor E.A. Jones, the Corporate
Director: Customers explained that the policy had been circulated to all
secondary schools with the objective that the policy, or an acceptable version,
be adopted by all secondary school governing bodies by Easter 2013. He confirmed that it would be the
responsibility of the respective schools to ensure they had an acceptable
agreed version of the policy in place.
The Corporate Director provided an outline of the purpose and use of “time out”
rooms in Denbighshire schools and provided an assurance that pupils were supervised when utilising the “time out” rooms
facility.
Practice in Denbighshire and
other Authorities in
The report detailed the actions
taken by Denbighshire in response to the Inspectorates’ findings in Pembrokeshire and provided information on the
implementation of actions in the Corporate Safeguarding Action Plan to monitor
progress. It appraised the scrutiny
arrangements of the Conwy and Denbighshire Local
Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB) and addressed more general practice issues
as well as policy and procedural points.
It was explained that some issues raised in the Safeguarding Action Plan
would be best addressed by the LSCB, and the structures for scrutinising
safeguarding arrangements had been outlined.
Denbighshire’s Safeguarding
Action Plan had been developed as further issues had surfaced or been raised
nationally with progress being driven through the Social Services and Education
Management Team. The arrangements had
not superseded those of the LSCB, but had been designed to ensure an
appropriate focus on Denbighshire as a complex multi-functional corporate organisation.
A
number of key points and areas had been highlighted in the report which related
to:-
·
CRB Checks/References and HR Policies plus
Safeguarding and Third Sector organisations.
·
Safeguarding Policies and Procedures.
·
Employment actions.
·
School Governors.
·
Reporting to the LSCB.
·
School Safeguarding Audit Checklist.
·
School Governor with responsibility for
safeguarding.
·
Restrictive Interventions / Time Outs
Rooms in Schools/ Establishments.
With
regard to CRB Checks, References and HR Policies plus Safeguarding and Third
Sector organisations.
It was confirmed that CRB checks on staff were consistently undertaken by Denbighshire,
including volunteers working directly with children, and detailed progress
against this work had been included in the Action Plan. Reference was made to the impact of the Protection
of Freedoms Act 2012, which specified changes to the CRB checking process with the CRB’s unwillingness to undertake
checks on certain individuals. The
Corporate Director confirmed that the introduction of the Act would make the
future process of undertaking CRB checks very challenging. The Head of Strategic Human Resources
provided details of CRB checks undertaken in respect of the recruitment of
staff within the Authority, and confirmed that all information had been
included on the TRENT System, with references being audited annually.
In
reply to concerns raised by Councillor J.A. Davies
regarding the need to recognise and address problems
encountered by young carers, the Corporate Director:
Customers confirmed that efforts were being made, through the Young Carers Strategy, to heighten awareness in schools of
problems which could arise for young carers. He confirmed that training was provided for
staff to assist them in recognising and addressing
problems encountered by young carers.
In
response to a question from Councillor J.
Butterfield, the Head of Children and Family Services provided details of the
Membership of the LSCB, which was a multi agency statutory partnership. The officers agreed that copies of the report relating
to the ‘Use of Reasonable Force and Restrictive
Physical Intervention’ could be circulated to Members of the Committee for information
purposes.
Following a brief discussion,
it was:-
RESOLVED – that the Partnerships Scrutiny
Committee:-
(a) receives and notes the contents of the report and progress in
implementing the Safeguarding Action Plan.
(b) notes the role and scrutiny
function of the LSCB in monitoring safeguarding activity across Conwy and Denbighshire, and
(c) requests that copies of the ‘Use of Reasonable Force and
Restrictive Physical Intervention’ policy be
circulated to Members of the Committee.
Councillor J. Butterfield requested that her concerns be
noted that some elected Members had been afforded more time than others to
express their views during consideration of business items. The Chair explained that he had made every
effort to be fair and impartial when allocating time for Members to speak.
Supporting documents: