Councillor Helal Uddin and Mr Neil Cunningham, Parent Governor gave apologies for absence.

Mr Ahmed Hussain, Parent Governor gave apologies for an early departure from the meeting.

Members are reminded to consider the categories of interest, identified in the Code of Conduct for Members to determine: whether they have an interest in any agenda item and any action they should take. For further details, see the attached note from the Monitoring Officer.

Members are also reminded to declare the nature of the interest at the earliest opportunity and the agenda item it relates to. Please note that ultimately it is the Members’ responsibility to identify any interests and also update their register of interest form as required by the Code.

If in doubt as to the nature of an interest, you are advised to seek advice prior the meeting by contacting the Monitoring Officer or Democratic Services.

No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interest were made by the members.

To confirm as a correct record of the proceedings the unrestricted minutes of the meeting of the held on 9^th February 2021.

The minutes from the previous meeting of 9^th February 2021 were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting and were signed off by the Sub-Committee.

Matters arising

Councillor Bex White, informed members she had received an update on the offer made by the Silver Employment group as well as on workplace testing for early years settings.

Councillor White said she had a discussion with Councillor Asma Begum and Councillor Rachel Blake about PPE. 

• ACTION: Councillor White to share emails exchanged in relation to PPE, with other members of the Sub-Committee.

A verbal update to be provided at the meeting.

The Sub-Committee received a verbal update on the impact Covid-19 is having on social care and the supporting of vulnerable children and families.

The Sub-Committee heard from Mr Richard Baldwin, Divisional Director for Children’s social care, who stated that over the past twelve months the social care teams have had to use innovative methods to stay in touch with young people and their families. He said there had been a shift in how families relate to the Council and demand at the front-door had also been affected. He said there was plenty of new ideas as to how the Council can do things differently in the future.

The Sub-Committee heard from Ms Mubarakat Uthman, a senior practitioner on how contact with young people had been maintained throughout the Covid-19 pandemic.

The main points made by Ms Uthman were:

• Prior to the pandemic, face to face visits were held with young people, this would involve engaging with them in age appropriate activities such as sharing food or playing games
• During the pandemic many visits have taken place via Teams and Zoom. Creative ways have been used to support young people to open up and talk about their issues and worries. Examples of this included using TikTok dances as an icebreaker to encourage open dialogue; to arranging a pizza delivery to the young person in a placement and sharing dinner and conversation with them.
• With young babies and toddlers, puppets have been used to interact with them, playing peekaboo and storytelling whilst speaking with their carers about the child’s health, such as weight and eating habits.
• Virtual meetings can make it harder to hold difficult conversations due to privacy and confidentiality issues.
• Virtual meetings have been a positive addition to the tools a social worker can use to engage with young people, however face to face engagement is also necessary.

The Sub-Committee then heard from Ms Deion Grant, Team Manager in Family Support and Protection on how contact with young people had been maintained throughout the Covid-19 pandemic and how the welfare of staff had been managed.

The main points made by Ms Grant were:

• Despite their own fears about Covid-19, social workers continued to provide an excellent service to protect vulnerable children and families, especially for cases which involved neglect. Ms Grant said it was obvious to the social work team, that such cases could not be fully managed by virtual visits and therefore face to face visits continued throughout the pandemic.
• The pandemic had heightened fears among the looked after children and their families. Social workers had to reassure families that visits could take place safely. There was positive engagement from young people to return to education, with some more eager than previously.
• Social workers expected domestic violence cases to increase during the lockdown and as such discussions took place as to how the team would deal with this. 
• Prior to the pandemic and the lockdown, social workers would meet in team meetings, to discuss cases and decompress. However, this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.1

A presentation to be made at the meeting.

The Chair introduced this item and said a few years ago, central government had instructed local authorities to regionalise their adoption arrangements. Therefore, the adoption team at Tower Hamlets became part of the regional adoption agency called Adopt London East (ALE).

Mr Baldwin stated ALE had been in operation for about two years, with several areas including adoption moving to the regional agency. He introduced Ms Lissa Marie Minnis, the Service Manager for Fostering and Regulated Services and Ms Sue May, Team Manager at ALE, who gave a presentation to the sub-committee. 

The key points from the presentation were:

• ALE was established in October 2019. At the beginning of the implementation phase there was a dip in performance however this has significantly improved.
• Explanation was provided regarding the categories A1 and A2. A1 referred to the time a child comes into care and the time it takes to place them with their adoptive family. A2 referred to the time from when a court order is received, which gives permission to place a child for adoption to the time the child is matched i.e. the time the agency decision maker has agreed that the adopters are suitable for the adoptive child.
• Tower Hamlets average is 138 days whereas the England average is 182 days. The target is 121 days. ALE had made significant progress over the past two years in relation to closing this gap.
• Explanation regarding performance figures was provided to the Sub-Committee. There had been an increase of two in relation to the number of children to be adopted for 2020/21.
• The number of adoptions per year had decreased but this was partially due to court delays during the pandemic and the slow pace of courts operating virtually during the first lockdown. Ms May provided an explanation for the court delays and said she had worked with East London courts to address the challenges faced. She said there was also an increase in the number of contested adoptions, and this had added to the delay, albeit it effected a small number of children.
• With respect to the number of approved adopter families, the figure for 2020/21 was thirteen. There had been a dip in the recruitment of suitable families which was due to the agency being set up. However, Ms Minnis added that the number of matches had gone up. They had worked in partnership with ALE and this year had placed 5 children under fostering for adoption regulations. She said this limited the number of unnecessary moves for the child, with the long-term goal of the child being adopted by the family who is fostering them.
• Historic figures showing the number of adopters was provided per borough.  It was stated that figures are difficult to segregate as the agency worked on a regional basis. The number of adopters for 2020/21 had increased to 22 at the end of the financial year.
• Ms May stated the number of adopter approvals had taken longer than expected but this was the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.2

A presentation to be made at the meeting.

Councillor Asma Begum, Deputy Mayor and Cabinet Member for Children, Youth Services and Education introduced this item and said there would be a presentation from Mr Richard Baldwin, Divisional Director for Children Social Care followed by Officers from the service who would provide the Sub-Committee with an update on the Early Help service.

Mr Baldwin gave a presentation outlining the current position for the Early Help Service, the assurance mechanisms in place and the future developments for the service. He said the service was monitoring demand because they envisaged a higher need post-Covid19 and lockdown. He said the service was last inspected in the summer of 2019 and inspection of the service was never far away. He said the likelihood of further inspections with a focussed visit from Ofsted, a SEND inspection and Youth Justice inspection in the next twelve months. Mr Baldwin continued stating that performance data was monitored and challenged via various assurance processes such as the Improvement Board, Performance Surgeries as well as through peer reviews. He said continued efforts were being made to strengthen practice, by analysing data to ensure the quality of practice was excellent.

The Sub-Committee then heard from Mr Mohammed Jolil, Interim Head of Early Help, Nicola Mutale, Early Help Operations Manager and Karen Simpson, Early Help Coordinator.

The key points made by the Early Help Team were:

• The service helped families who did not meet the statutory thresholds, by getting involved as early as possible, with interventions to help those were in need.
• The Early Help service faced similar challenges described by social work colleagues. Face to face meetings had moved to an online platform, during the pandemic. Communication by phone and online were the methods used to engage with families, such as those shielding who required medicine and food assistance.
• 70% of referral were made via the Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH) process of which 60% were from the police. Cases were assessed by the MASH team who decided if the social care thresholds were met and if not, cases would be referred to the Early Help Team.
• Approximately 500 calls per week are received by the helpline of which 300 families are supported on a long-term basis over a period of six to nine months. Action plans for the families are put in place and those that are borderline are referred to the Social Inclusion Panel.
• The Early Help Hub is the front door service for accessing early help services. The hub operated a reduced service from the Town Hall throughout the pandemic as well as a phone line service to the community, their families, and other professionals within the local authority.
• Creative approaches had been used to reach out to families. For example, refugee families who had moved to the borough. They had been supported by providing housing, food vouchers as well as access to education.
• The Early Years’ Service worked with the voluntary sector and weekly meetings were held with the Home Office on the next steps  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.3

No other business was discussed at the meeting.