The Board heard from the Chair of the recently established CSIB that:

• The Council has accepted the result of the Ofsted inspection of children’s social care and shown willingness to address the issues identified.  However it was necessary to understand why the issues had arisen and this would act as the basis of diagnosing what needed to be addressed.
• A meeting of CSIB had taken place on 12 June 2017.
• Alan Wood was Independent Chair of this body which would undertake to monitor the Council and its Partners and to evidence whether the arrangements for children in the borough are effective.  The approach of CSIB would be that each Partner would outline the issues faced and the proposed plans to address them and also assess if these plans are likely to be effective and if there was capacity to deliver them.
• A 3-stage process would be followed to enable the Council to assess the services it wants to deliver, whether the measures offer capacity to improve, whether the service delivery has the full support of the Council and are appropriately prioritised –
  • Assess evidence and identify causes
  • Observe the service(s) in action and its/their aims and Identify any gaps
  • Stress test the plan at CSIB meetings
• The role of Partners would be to assist and contribute in terms of their roles as an agent of delivery. This would be mirrored by the Chair in his role also.

The Board discussed the report and submission from the Chair of CSIB and noted the following matters:

• The council should recognise that a child-friendly approach should be taken throughout the organisation and not confined to the directorate.
• The Draft Summary of the Inspection Improvement Plan (IIP) appended to the report covered the ‘assess and observe’ elements of the process.
• In producing the IIP, the Council has been tasked to look deeply into the identified key causes – failure of professional leadership, political and corporate focus on other areas and a culture of false assurance -.
• There was cross-party responsibility for corporate parenting by the Council and therefore all political groups were encouraged to engage in acknowledgement of their responsibilities.
• Reports would also be made to Overview and Scrutiny Committee and to Council.
• It was necessary to learn lessons e.g. how should policy influence decision making.
• In order to assess/measure lessons learned, it was necessary to obtain user feedback as well as other type of assessment.

The Board then heard from Officers and noted the following matters:

• It was necessary to be mindful if the impact of the Ofsted outcome/judgement.
• The IIP provides elements of the causes and will test the assumptions that the Council will make.
• The IIP includes the key improvement plan.
• The Ofsted rating includes the Ofsted mandatory processes of the improvement plan.
• The Department for Education will issue directions and will appoint an Improvement Partner who will comment whether the root causes have been identified and assess whether the IIP is likely to deliver.
• There will be two Ofsted improvement visits in August and December 2017 and a visit every three months thereafter.
• The Local Government Association would also provide support.
• The aim was to evidence an improvement journey and to achieve a good rating in a two-year time frame.
• Root causes were – instability around staff structures which distracted from a focus on the ‘front-line’, insufficient and late intervention and inappropriate intervention thresholds, infrastructure issues, lack of investment, organisational culture and lack of compliance.
• A detailed improvement plan would operate by means of a quality assurance framework to ensure outcomes.

·           As improvements progress the framework will change to reflect the progress made.

·           Progress will be supported by audit evidence.

·           Significant changes had already been made around thresholds and initial referrals.

·           A current audit indicates that there was improvement due to changes in ways of working.

·           The Chief Executive’s role was to ensure that the service was not isolated from other areas of the Council.  The learning would be used to deliver improvements in other areas of the Council.

·           To be successful, the approach must be Council-wide and Partner-wide.

·           All stakeholders must be engaged and have an understanding of the direction of travel.

·           There were capacity implications as a result of the CSIB and therefore Human Resources would be involved to ensure an appropriate capacity, priority and resources.

The following actions were agreed:

• There would be a standing item relating to this matter at future BVIB meetings.
• The issues brought to light should not be approached on a party political basis.
• The challenge of schools forums should be factored into the plan.
• CSIB should discuss how to improve communications.
• The engagement of family and schools partnership should be considered/discussed.
• Elected members should consider/explore what types of questioning would be appropriate to safeguard against false assurance, e.g. information from LSCB, LGA support, expertise from other local authorities and request that information be supported by evidence.
• Overview and Scrutiny Committee should be involved in this matter.
• That CSIB, at its monthly, meetings identify the matters it wishes to examine more deeply and afterwards make a report to BVIB.

RESOLVED

1.   That the contents of the report and the submission of the Improvement Plan to the Department for Education by 20^th July 2017 be noted.

2.   That the actions recommended arising from the discussion of the report be taken forward.