Agenda item

The Chair outlined that the Committee was undertaking a review into persistent absenteeism. The purpose of this session was to discover how young people were protected and safeguarded, especially if they were not attending school regularly.

Officers started the discussion by emphasising the importance of education as a safeguarding element, as school was likely the safest place to be for young people. This was because as well as education there would be the child’s support network, friends, tutors and teachers. Officers highlighted the importance of consistent relationships in schools and the role of teachers and mentors. They also noted the importance of giving children a voice in their child protection plans, reviews and conferences. The child’s input formed part of the plan. There were various mechanisms of engagement, for example if a child was non-verbal. Children were also offered the opportunity to speak to the conference Chair and have the opportunity for an advocate to speak at the conference on their behalf. This applied to children with child protection plans and those with looked after plans.

Officers worked very closely with their colleagues from the Virtual School, which provided intensive support for children who were looked after and enhanced support for every child who had a social worker. They also worked closely with the child protection advisors who Chair the conferences. There was a focus on the safeguarding element of school attendance and how this can strengthen a child’s support network.

Officers discussed the collaboration with Designated Safeguarding Leads in schools and officers who managed and arranged the cluster groups. They have attended two cluster group sessions so far and would be attending one in September with a focus on addressing absenteeism among children on a child protection plan. The cluster groups had been positive and had helped implement strategies and understand the different perspectives between children’s social care and schools. There was good collaboration between social care and schools and the Virtual School played an important role in bridging the gap between the two.

Officers emphasised the importance of education as a safeguarding element and the role of consistent relationships in schools. During school holidays a designated lead would be available for child protection conferences in order to contribute to the education plan. This ensured consistency in approach.

Members noted the close work with Designated Safeguarding Leads in schools and asked about their receptiveness and involvement. Officers noted that the safeguarding leads had been appreciative and receptive. They asked questions about addressing school attendance and what they needed to be aware of when attending conferences. They also discussed the incentives provided to children for good attendance. Presentations were also uploaded to the LEAP website. Officers added that the child protection forums and cluster groups had been well established and run by the local authority. They provided training and address recurring issues like school exclusion and absenteeism.

The role of safeguarding in schools was recognised by the Safeguarding Children’s Partnership Board.

Members noted that this review may be the most comprehensive and difficult review that had ever been done as there were so many strands to bring together, and there was the challenge of synthesising all the information. Members asked for recommendation examples from the professionals.

Officers commended the AXIS programme for collating valuable information.

Officers commended good collaboration among multi-agency partnerships. Young people and their families were an important part of this partnership.

Officers highlighted that there was a good joined-up approach between social care, the Virtual School and SEND, bringing together all of their expertise.

When asked about things that had not worked well, officers noted that everything that officers were doing was addressing a need. Officers noted the scoping report of the review, which referred to poverty, mental health, domestic abuse, violence and COVID. All strategies, such as the contextual safeguarding strategy, were to address a need.

Officers were rolling out trauma-informed practise across the social care. For example, the impact of COVID was long-lasting and so trauma-informed practice was important. There was a good learning and development programme to provide training across partners. The LEAP website had a lot of information and so did the safeguarding partnership website.

One of the priorities of the Board was around contextual safeguarding. This included consideration of engagement in crime or gangs. Also considered was safeguarding in education. There was a sub-group that reported to the Safeguarding Partnership Board that looked at how schools, police, health, social care and youth justice all worked together to address issues and how schools, parents and young people can be supported. This linked to the contextual safeguarding strategy which was published on the website.

Whenever there were discussions around strategies, working together plans, joint plans, child protection plans, schools were always involved. DSLs were seeking officer support where necessary.

Officers discussed the strategies in place, focusing on the importance of relationships and trust and noted the use of trauma-informed practice across social care.

Members asked for more information on trauma-informed practice. Officers agreed to send more information on trauma-informed practice. This had only recently been rolled out and was a project that would cover a year and a half. It was noted that building relationships was important. If children could not attend the conferences, officers would send them a letter to explain what had happened at the conference and they would be encouraged to attend the next time.

Members asked how individualised work for each child was ensured with limited resources. Officers emphasised the importance of individualised plans, empowering children and families, and ensuring they were part of the conversation. Individualised work was important to ensure it was relevant to the child. In addition to this there were patterns and trends at the strategic level. Every child protection plan was written by the social workers and Child Protection Chair and was individualised. The conference looked at that child's needs; looked at that family situation; and looked at the context in which the child lives and grows and develops.

It was noted that some concerns were similar such as mental health, domestic abuse, drug and alcohol, housing issues and isolation. Despite this, children’s experiences of these were individual.

Child protection plans were family plans in that the child and family were involved in contributing to the plan. This empowered families and children to know that their input was important.

Members asked about key safeguarding indicators for new persistent absenteeism. Officers noted that for them it was the other way round. They will see safeguarding concerns and then attendance may be a contributing factor. There were two levels of need, one was under section 17 of the Children’s Act and referred to a child in need of support where a need was not being met. The Local Authority try to intervene as a statutory service to support a family and to meet that need. The next level was a child in need of protection. This related to section 47 of the Children’s Act and the child is in need of protection because they are at risk of significant harm. This is where everything has a clear legal definition. Quite often for children who are at risk of significant harm and therefore require a child protection plan, education, absence and exclusions are a factor in their lives and this was why schools play a vital role. Sometimes social workers or schools will pick up patterns, for example if a child was late to school every Monday. There was a programme called Operation Encompass in partnership with the police. If the police were contacted overnight or at the weekend for a domestic abuse incident, they will notify the school of the child. There was a domestic abuse advisor to schools within the service who would support the school with this. There were currently roughly four schools in the borough who were not part of Operation Encompass and this was credit to the Domestic Abuse Education Officer for getting schools onboard. If schools started to pick up patterns they could contact social care. This could lead to a statutory intervention which could lead to an assessment. This assessment may say that the child is in need of support via section 17. There would be a plan put in place to support the family. A strategy discussion, attended by police, health, education and social care, may suggest that a section 47 investigation is needed. If the risk of harm was confirmed then there would be a child protection conference.

Members asked about parental barriers and how to break down any resistance. Officers noted that a lot of parents that were brought to their attention did struggle in regard to education. There may be a language barrier. Sometimes there may not be an understanding that school can be a safe place and can be a positive experience for their children. There may be families for whom education was not the priority and were more concerned about getting food on the table or ensuring that children were not exposed to a violent partner. There were also parents who were very keen to get their children into school but the children are not keen.

Members asked about the use of technology to monitor and address absenteeism and allow remote learning for children who are absent for legitimate reasons. Officers discussed the use of technology to monitor attendance patterns and noted that technology is used for virtual meetings and training. Schools did have a good system in relation to using technology to monitoring attendance and trends and having follow ups with parents. Since the COVID pandemic, schools were more aware of providing flexible learning for those children who are not able to attend school, via apps for example. Schools were quite open to work with officers in providing laptops for children so that they can attend school. Schools were coming a long way in providing flexible learning and using technology. There were children who may be anxious as a result of COVID and so being in a large classroom was a struggle and technology could help with this.

There were three child protection suites at the Civic Centre fitted with audio-visual equipment. The Virtual School was conducting weekly virtual sessions where professionals like social workers or DSLs can attend to speak to a virtual school specialist about school attendance; about how to encourage parents; how to support children.

Members asked if there was a one stop hub for good practise to be shared with partners. Officers noted that there were various websites where best practise and training were published on, for example, how to engage with children, how to work on absence, how to prevent exclusions. Communication with schools was done via the LEAP website. Officers worked well with DSLs and with headteachers. There was a lot of information about the safeguarding partnership. It was noted that this may be a question for education colleagues. Members noted that this could be a recommendation of the review.

Members asked about parents’ attendance, especially younger parents and links to their children’s attendance. It was possible to track parents’ attendance if parents were previously looked after children. This could be tracked within the Virtual School. Parents could access this information via the Oracle system. Schools may also hold historical data if parents were known to the school, which can be a good source of information for social workers to consider when they were doing assessments. Health colleagues may also have historical information. Historical data can help to predict current situations.

Officers noted that when individual assessments of children were undertaken, the wider family circumstance was considered. This may be the reason that children cannot attend school. It was important to have the right support in place to empower families and help them to meet the needs of the child.

RESOLVED: That the Children, Families and Education Select Committee met with officers and asked questions pertaining to the review