Agenda item

Questions may be submitted in advance by emailing democracy@islington.gov.uk no later than Wednesday 14 February 2018.

Councillor Caluori, Executive Member for Children, Schools and Families, provided a verbal update on his work. It was noted that the council would respond to the recommendations of the Fair Futures Commission in due course.

A public meeting about the Catholic Diocese’s proposals to form a multi-academy trust would be held on 6 March 2018. The meeting would include representation from local schools, school governing bodies, the Catholic Diocese, the National Union of Teachers, and others. In response, Mary Clement reported that she had raised this matter with the Diocese, and had been advised that decisions to convert catholic schools to academies were being considered on a borough by borough basis.

A member of the public asked why Children’s Services were so female-carer centred and why they seemed to have an aversion to the concept of male carers and including them in their work. In response, it was advised that social workers were supposed to work with the whole family and this should include both male and female carers. Whilst the majority of child carers tended to be female, male and female carers should be considered equally by council services. The Executive Member could not comment on individual cases, however advised that complaints may be raised on such matters and dealt with through the council’s procedures.

A member of the public asked why, despite receiving training, Children’s Services were ignoring and denying male domestic violence; and why Children’s Services had declined an offer of advanced training on this matter. In response, it was advised that the council acknowledged male victims of domestic violence. Domestic violence training courses were held three times a year and this included reference to male domestic violence victims.

A member of the public asked why accuracy in note taking, reports and fact checking was not a priority for Children’s Services, why challenges on the accuracy of note taking were dismissed, what audits were carried out to ensure work was carried out in accordance with Health and Care Professions Council guidelines, and what actions were taken following any audits. In response, it was advised that accuracy was considered very important, audits were regularly carried out, these resulted in action plans, and action plans were monitored by the Children’s Services management team. Children’s Services also held ‘practice weeks’ where senior officers carried out audits, observations, and worked alongside practitioners. This provided opportunities for management to scrutinise record keeping and other matters, if required.

A member of the public asked why social workers had not completed parts of welfare reports under Section 7 of the Children Act 1989, what could be done to ensure that officers were completing their work, and what processes were in place to ensure that this did not continue to happen? In response, it was advised that social workers and legal officers had received training on Section 7 reports and social worker reports were regularly quality assessed. This training would be repeated twice a year. The Executive Member could not comment on individual cases.

A member of the public asked why their experiences of Islington’s children’s services did not meet the standards that Cllr Caluori described. In response, it was acknowledged that things did not always go well in all cases, however local agencies sought to learn from such cases. It was commented that a recent Ofsted inspection of services for children in need of help and protection, children looked after and care leavers found Islington’s services to be good with outstanding features. 

A member of the public asked what was the current situation of local school reserves earmarked for schools and special needs pupils. In response, it was advised that the total figure of school reserves was £8,270,211. Decisions on reserve expenditure were made by schools, in accordance with school priorities.

A member of the public asked if Islington academies were taking their surpluses with them after academisation. In response, it was advised that The Bridge had carried over a deficit, and final accounts had not yet been received for other schools converting to academies.