Agenda item

Report of the Interim Corporate Director of People.

The Committee receive a report of the Interim Corporate Director, People which set out the statutory Children and Families Services Complaints Annual Report for 2017/18.

Following a brief overview of the report, the presenting officers responded to Members questions as follows.

There were 3,990 children who were considered to be children in need (CiN) throughout 2017/18 and their ethnic breakdown was predominantly BME (Black and Minority Ethnic) with just over a quarter being of white ethnicity.  Why was there no data in the report regarding the ethnic breakdown of complainants?  Why did 27% of complainants ‘disagree with social care opinion’?

An officer advised that this data was captured by a different team.  The data in the report related to the number and nature of complaints received and outcomes.  The officers undertook to provide information regarding the ethnic breakdown of complainants in future reports.  He added that the equalities data included in the report demonstrated that the complainants were of various ethnicities.

The Member pointed out that the term ‘Afghani’ referred to the currency of Afghanistan and that the correct term for someone from Afghanistan was Afghan.  This was noted by the officers.

An officer added that Managers, social care staff and the complaints teams continued to work towards a more balanced, open and less defensive approach to complaints, where concerns were recognised and complainants received appropriate, timely responses. Officers were encouraged to reflect on practices and on the outcomes of each complaint and endeavoured to successfully resolve some complaints before they reached stage 1.

Were complaints made about individual social workers tracked to see if there were any patterns emerging?  How was the complaints process signposted to clients? Were written complaints taken more seriously than verbal ones?

An officer advised that complaints against social workers were monitored and confirmed that no single social worker had received multiple complaints.  If any issues relating to practice or performance were highlighted then these would be dealt with through additional training.  Every looked after child was given a complaints leaflet and their carers and advocates could represent them.  Individuals could complain by phone or in writing and no complaints were turned away, even those that may appear trivial in the first instance. 

Why had there been an increase Stage 1 complaints?

During 2017/18 there was a slight increase in the number of Stage1 complaints received.  As with previous years, the majority of received transactions (both representations and formal complaints) were via Targeted Services (81%).  There had been no stage 3 complaints and one case had been referred to the Ombudsman under the EHCP (Education, Health & Care Package) process.

How were anonymous complaints dealt with?  At what stage would the team involve other partner agencies such as the police in a case? How were stage 2 complaints dealt with?

An officer advised that some anonymous complaints had been received over the years and these would be investigated and the appropriate safeguarding procedures would be followed.  There was a detailed policy regarding this and the appropriate child protection procedures would be followed and an information sharing meeting with the police would take place quite early on in the process. In accordance with legal requirements, stage 2 complaints were dealt with by an external independent investigator.

A Member stated that she was pleased to see the compliments received by the section.  She asked how SEN (Special Educational Needs) children were assisted to make complaints.

An officer added that the MASH (Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub), which had recently undergone a peer review and an Ofsted review, now had a teacher representative on its board who assisted with communicating information to schools.  Members of the advocacy service had specialist skills in supporting these children and the Council had an SLA with all Harrow schools to provide training to enable them to better manage their complaints process.  The complaints team regularly met with advocacy groups.

A Member asked whether for those complaints that were upheld or partially upheld, had the children in question been exposed to any serious risks?  What did the corporate complaints relate to?  Did other corporate bodies make complaints?

An officer advised that none of the children had been exposed to significant harm.  He added that the corporate complaints process captured any complaints that fell outside the statutory process or where there may be a cross-over of service areas, for example, when someone, who was not the parent or guardian of a child made a complaint on behalf of the child.  In the past, complaints had been received from health partners and there was a separate protocol to deal with these.  He added that a breakdown of the representations would be included in future reports.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.