Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Avey and Royle, Tina Lovey (Headteacher), Luke Morgan (Medway Youth Parliament) and Alex Tear (Church of England representative).

To approve the record of the meeting held on 6 December 2016.

The record of the meeting held on 6 December 2016 was agreed and signed by the Chairman as correct.

There were none.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other interests

Peter Martin (Medway Governors Association representative) declared an interest in item 7 (CALL-IN: Future Integrated Youth Support Service Delivery) as he was the Independent Chairman of the Medway Youth Trust.

This report sets out the progress made within the areas covered by the Portfolio for Adult Services, which fall within the remit of this Committee (Independent Reviewing Officer Service only).

Discussion:

The Committee considered the report from the Portfolio Holder for Adult Services which detailed an update on performance within the Independent Safeguarding and Reviewing Service.  It was emphasised that the numbers of children who are looked after or who are subject to a Child Protection Plan had both reduced.  The Portfolio Holder introduced the Principle Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) to the Committee and confirmed that since his last report to the Committee he had met with the team and continues to do so on a regular basis.

Members then raised the following comments and questions:

·           Relationships with the Children in Care Council and Healthwatch Medway CIC – the Medway Healthwatch CIC representative confirmed that the IROs had a good relationship with the Children in Care Council and Healthwatch Medway CIC were looking forward to working with the team also.

·           Delays due to interpreting services availability – concern was raised in terms of the delays caused by interpreter availability.  The Portfolio Holder confirmed this was an issue and work was being done to address this and keep delays to a minimum, whilst ensuring that there was not an unreasonable reliance on children or family members to interpret.

Decision:

The Portfolio Holder for Adult Services was thanked for his attendance.

This report advises the Committee of a notice of call-in of the Cabinet’s decision (149 – 151/2016) to agree option 1 (the South East (SE) Regional option) and the two year associated funding for the future delivery of the Duke of Edinburgh (DofE) Award Scheme and the related decisions to delegate authority to grant a lease of the DofE premises at the Strand, as set out in the Cabinet report attached at Annex A.  This report also provides details relating to a petition that has been received by the Council in relation to the future of the Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme in Medway.

           The Committee must consider the Cabinet decisions and decide either to take no further action, to refer the decisions back to Cabinet for reconsideration or to refer the matter to full Council.

Discussion:

Members considered a report regarding a call-in received from six Members of the Council of Cabinet’s decisions (149/2016 – 151/2016 – 20 December 2016) in relation to the future of Medway’s Duke of Edinburgh (DofE) Award programme. The report also informed the Committee of a petition against the transitioning of the Medway DofE Programme, which had been received by the Council.  The officer’s response to this petition had been attached to the report at Annex B and the petitioner had decided to refer the petition to the Committee for consideration.  The Committee was requested to consider the Cabinet decisions and decide either to take no further action, refer the decisions back to Cabinet or to refer the decisions to Council for reconsideration.

Councillor Price, the Lead Member for the call-in, explained the reasons for the call-in as outlined in paragraph 2.2 of the report. In particular, he made the following points to the Committee:

·           It was believed that there were originally three options that were considered regarding the future of the DofE Award in Medway but only two options were reported to Cabinet;

·           There was a lack of clarity in relation to the activity required by the DofE South East Region, who it was proposed would take over the management of the DofE Award in Medway;

·           Concern regarding the future management of volunteers;

·           Concern the proposed model would lead to making participation of disadvantaged young people more difficult.

Leonie King, Co-Chair of the Medway Youth Panel, then spoke on behalf of the petitioners.  She explained that the Youth Panel were not in support of the proposed model and reiterated that 1109 young people had signed the petition against the transition.  It was considered that the views of the Youth Panel had not been taken into account.  Petitioners felt there was too much uncertainty about the future of the programme under the proposal and that the highly successful programme should continue to be run by the local authority as it was considered that this would be the best option to keep the scheme accessible to all young people and to maintain its performance.

Officers confirmed that the option relating to the DofE delivery being managed by the regional DofE had not been available when discussions on Medway DofE’s future first took place earlier in 2016.  Officers also confirmed that the DofE Award had charitable status and was not a private company and that the option to transition delivery to the regional DofE Award provided the best solution in terms of resilience and lowering risk to the programmes future, given the ongoing financial pressures the local authority faced.

Members then raised a number of questions and comments, which included: -

·           Pre-decision scrutiny – in response to a question about why the proposals had not been brought to the Committee as pre-decision scrutiny, it was confirmed that the Committee had not requested the item to be added to the work programme when considering items on the Cabinet’s Forward Plan.

·           Support  ...  view the full minutes text for item 627.

This report advises the Committee of a notice of call-in received from six Members of the Council of the Cabinet’s decision (147 and 148/2016) to retain the youth service and the Youth offending Team within Children’s Services and to extend the contract with Medway Youth Trust to August 2019 on the basis set out in the Cabinet report (attached at Appendix A).

           The Committee must consider the Cabinet decisions and decide either to take no further action, to refer the decisions back to Cabinet for reconsideration or to refer the matter to full Council.

Discussion:

Members considered a report regarding a call-in received from six Members of the Council of Cabinet’s decisions (147/2016 – 148/2016 – 20 December 2016) in relation to the future Integrated Youth Support Service delivery. The Committee was requested to consider the Cabinet decisions and decide either to take no further action, refer the decisions back to Cabinet or to refer the decisions to Council for reconsideration.

Councillor Price, the Lead Member for the call-in, explained the reasons for the call-in as outlined in paragraph 2.2 of the report. In particular, he raised concerns regarding a lack of clarity in relation to the future model of the youth service and how it would operate with a reduced budget.  He also raised concern about the ongoing use and support of volunteers.

Officers confirmed that the budget envelope was the same as it had been when the local authority were considering outsourcing the youth service earlier in 2016, therefore this has not changed.  It was also explained that officers had been working to develop a model that recognised the reduced budget while minimising the impact to the service and it was considered that this was best achieved by integrating the Youth Service with the broader children’s services, for example, Early Help.  There had been no firm decision on the structure as yet but there was an intention to retain a service at Youth Centres and then to direct targeted services to safeguarding priorities to complement Early Help support.  Officers also confirmed that supporting and using volunteers was an area that would be developed, particularly in relation to youth services.

Members then raised a number of comments and questions which included:

·           Diversity Impact Assessment(DIA) – a Member raised concern regarding some of the potential adverse impact highlighted within the DIA (at page 54 of the agenda).  Officers confirmed that with a reduced budget this was a risk but that the integration of the service with Early Help would minimise the risk of any impact.

·           Timeline of finalising the new model – officers confirmed that once there was a confirmed decision in relation to the future Integrated Youth Support Service delivery they would continue their work in developing the model with a view to finalising this as soon as possible.

·           Lack of clarity of future model – A Member reiterated their concerns about the lack of clarity around the proposed model and officers undertook to provide an update report at the appropriate time to keep Members informed.

·           Medway Youth Parliament (MYP) engagement – The MYP representative explained that MYP had experienced very positive dialogue with the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services (Lead Member), the Leader and the Chief Executive about the proposals but added that some members of MYP were still very disappointed in the change from outsourcing to keeping the service in house because of the amount of time MYP had given to working with officers on the outsourcing of the Youth Service.  There was also discontent within MYP about the amount  ...  view the full minutes text for item 628.

This report outlines the Medway Youth Justice Plan for 2016-17, which has been developed following discussions and consultations with partner agencies. It also reflects the requirements of the Youth Offending Team (YOT) to submit a costed plan in respect of their Youth Justice Board grant 2016-17.

Discussion:

The Interim Deputy Director, Children and Adult Services and the Head of Integrated Family Support Services introduced the report which provided the Committee with the proposed Medway Youth Justice Plan for 2016-17.  It was explained that the plan was at its final phase and a new plan would be created for 2017/18 which would reflect the Youth Offending Team (YOT) becoming more integrated with other children’s services in the future.

Members then raised comments and questions, which included: -

·           Looked after children (LAC) and reduction in offending – A Member referred to a reference on page 17 of the plan and asked whether this could be looked at in more depth either via a task group or via the Corporate Parenting Board.  The Deputy Director confirmed that there was an intention for the Corporate Parenting Board to start working in a themed meeting approach and welcomed this topic to be used for one of those meetings to look at the issue in-depth.

·           Gang culture – A Member asked whether this was an imminent issue for Medway and one that should be planned for.  Officers explained that the Home Office had reviewed the risk for Medway and had reported its findings to the Community Safety Partnership.  It was found that Medway was not at high risk of gang culture but it had recommended approximately 12 actions which would be built into the Community Safety Plan and the Youth Justice Plan.  Officers undertook to provide the details of these recommendations.

Decision:

The Committee

1)    recommended the Youth Offending Team Strategic Plan 2016-17 to the Cabinet, as attached at Appendix A.

2)    recommended that Looked After Children and reduction in offending should be the topic of one of the future themed meetings of the Corporate Parenting Board.

To provide theChildren and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee with an update regarding the Adoption Agency’s activity from September 2015 to September 2016.

This report will also provide the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee with a brief update regarding the progress of the proposal to develop a Regional Adoption Agency (RAA) in line with Government expectations for adoption services.

Discussion:

The Interim Deputy Director, Children and Adult Services and the Head of Provider Services introduced the report which provided the Committee with an update regarding the progress of the proposal to develop a Regional Adoption Agency (RAA).  It was explained that Medway was leading in terms of agreeing the governance arrangements and that a bid had been made to the Department for Education, on behalf of the RAA, to create a Centre of Excellence for Adoption Services.  If successful, the £982,000 would support families across the region (Medway, Kent and Bexley) going through the adoption service and support families who have already adopted and need some extra support.

Members then raised a number of comments and questions, which included:

·           Recognition of good performance – Members praised officers for the high performance, the hard work and the commitment shown by staff within Adoption Services.

·           Opportunities to meet staff from other local authorities within the RAA – a Members asked if there would be an opportunity to meet with staff from the other authorities within the RAA (Kent and Bexley).  In response officers confirmed that this could be arranged but would need to be later in the year when the RAA had developed further.

·           Coffee evening event – Members referred to a coffee evening event that had been held to enable Members to meet with adoptive and prospective adoptive parents.  A Member commented on the positive feedback parents had given him that evening and he hoped to see this event re run in the future.

Decision:

The Committee noted the report.

Decision:

The Committee agreed the work programme as set out at Appendix 1 to the report.