HERTFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
CORPORATE PARENTING GROUP
Wednesday 22 March 2006 at 2.00 pm
NEW PRACTICE FOR CHILDREN RECEIVING SHORT BREAKS
Report of Director of Children Schools and Families
Authors: - Jacqui Thorne, Project Manager,
01442-256464
Wendy Gill, Policy & Practice Development Officer,
Tel. No. 01992-588813
Executive Member: - Jane Pitman
1. Purpose of the report
To inform the Corporate Parenting Group of the introduction of the Short Breaks Review System.
2. Summary
The report covers the following areas
· The background for the proposed changes
· The current work of the project group
· Practice and resource implications
3. Conclusions
The panel is asked to note the progress and to comment on the direction of the ongoing work
4. Background
4.1 This document applies to children where a series of pre-planned short term placements are set up either in residential or foster care. The background to the legal framework for children receiving a series of short breaks goes back to the Children Act 1989. This stated that children receiving a series of Short Breaks, exceeding 24 hours, in accommodation provided by the Local Authority were deemed to be" looked after" for the period of the respite break.
4.2 Local Authorities commonly provide these regular breaks to support families; often where a child has a disability but not exclusively. Placements should under-pin not undermine the child's primary relationship.
4.3 Hertfordshire has a mixed history of dealing with children placed for short breaks. Prior to CSF in 2001, some areas appropriately ‘LAC Ed’ these children and a form of review took place. Others deemed that the respite was provided under S17 and therefore no review was arranged.
4.5 In the 4 years since CSF there has been a lack of clarity around this issue. There is a growing awareness that Hertfordshire is out of step with other local authorities. Concern was raised that because the Dept had not universally regarded these children as "looked after"; there is no accurate picture of the needs of children receiving short breaks. The lack of care planning for these children and inequity both in resources and service delivery across the County has also been highlighted in recent months.
4.6 CSCI reports, both on in-house and external providers of respite care, have also highlighted a failure by the LA to ensure that these children receive statutory reviews. This has led to non-compliance under Care Standards and has had implications for the units providing care. In May 2005, Stairways received a report stating that “...it is essential that a formal system (of review) be instituted”. It concluded that this was the primary responsibility of the placing Authority and not the registered provider.
4.7 In September 2005 it was agreed that a way forward needed to be identified to bring Hertfordshire into line with other LAs in assessing and reviewing these children.
5. Statutory Framework
5.1 Short breaks are provided under Section 20 of the Children Act 1989. They apply to non-disabled and disabled children. All children receiving short-term placements are regarded as looked after for the duration of their time in placement. This only applies to children receiving a short-term placement of more than 24 hours.
The guidance states that no placement should exceed 28 days and the total duration should not exceed 120 days in a year.
5.2 LAC circular (95) 14 allowed for some easement on the review process. This stated that reviews should be convened 3 months after the first period of respite and the 6 monthly.
5.3 In September 2004 new guidance related to the Adoption and Children Act 2002 was launched regarding the role of the Independent Reviewing Officer for looked after children. This started clearly that ALL children looked after by the LA required an Independent Chair of their LAC review. In April 2005 after significant discussion with the DfES it was clarified that this included children receiving a series of short breaks.
5.4 Different intervals between reviews are required when a child is in more than one placement for respite but one review should be held to consider the child's welfare and the impact of the various placements on their well being.
6. Work currently being undertaken
A project group has been set up to take forward the required changes. The membership of the group are representatives from the locality Teams, the LAC Team and the internal providers for disabled children, Commissioning and the Independent Review Team. Jacqui Thorne will be the Project Manager. John Richards and Debbie Orton are overseeing the work in their respective roles.
7. The project group has started work on the following tasks:-
7.1 Develop a database of the relevant children in this cohort- it was agreed there are approximately 250-300 children who are in receipt of short breaks. The database will help inform us of actual numbers and the involvement from CSF.
7.2 Develop procedures for a new system on IRIS for the locality teams and the Independent Review Team. These are in the process of being drafted and will be going out for consultation. (See Appendix3)
7.3 Assess resource implications for the locality teams- the new process will involve increased work for staff. There are three phases to this:
· what is needed immediately to get the client information Database set up.
· what is needed to set up the IRIS system and undertake the initial visits to complete the care plans
· the longer-term impact for each team to undertake the statutory visits, reviews and any additional work that may be required from the reviews.
7.4 Communication with parents - A letter has been drafted outlining the changes. This is due to go for consultation with parents through Parent Advisory Group. ( see appendix 1). There is also a leaflet explaining the new procedure (please see appendix 2).
7.5 Communication within CSF. The work of the project group has been shared at both manager and practitioner forums. Consultation will continue through he various stages of the project tasks.
7.6 Communication with stakeholders and other providers - there have been various briefings and copies of the letter and other relevant detail will be sent out at appropriate times. The commissioning department will liaise with contracted providers during the initial phases of set up.
8. Resource Implications
The new practice is going to involve an increase in work as described above which do have implications. Currently we have estimated that each team will need an additional 0.5 WTE Professional Assistant hours to assimilate the additional tasks. The cost of this will be approximately £43.000.
In addition, there are potential visiting and meeting issues that need to be overcome in relation to evening work
9. Partnership concerns
We have been consulting as widely as possible with parents, carers, CSF and stakeholders. Due to the fact that this protocol is being introduced after the relationship for most families has started with CSF we could be faced with parents being reluctant to accept the changes. We need to be aware of the impact of both enquires about the changes and the possible refusal of some to participate in the process. These are areas to be supported through identified tasks in the project group.
10. Policy and Procedures
The new system requires CSF to set up procedures that enable effective processes for the local Services Teams and Independent Review Team. There is an expectation that there be a ‘light touch’ applied to the use of existing LAC paper work. This will need to be reviewed with all the workers concerned to ensure consistency of practice and address any issues that present themselves particularly from the early reviews.
11. Conclusion
The change in practice for children who are receiving a series of short breaks is overdue. The proposed changes will ensure that children are in placements appropriate to their needs. Considerable thought has gone into considering how the Dept can prepare children, their parents and carers for the new process. Some parents are likely to feel aggrieved that this is starting now, sometime into their relationship with CSF. With time it is hoped that they will see the benefits of children receiving this service being regarded as " looked after" for the duration of their placement. Good consultation and a strong emphasis on this being a voluntary, support service will be crucial to the outcome.
Reference sources:
Local Authority Circular LAC (2003) 13, Guidance on Accommodating Children in Need and their Families
Local Authority Circular LAC (95) 14, Respite Care: Series of short-term Placements of Children
Reviews of Children provided with respite care - DfeS guidance.
Review Regs 1991 Reg 11