Agenda item

The Strategic Director of Social Care and Education submits a report providing an update on performance in social care and education and information on monitoring and improving quality.

The Strategic Director of Social Care and Education submitted a report and presentation providing an update on performance in social care and education and information on monitoring and improving quality.

Key points other than those included on the slides (which were taken as read) included:

• At the end of the previous municipal year it had been agreed that there would be a new framework to report on priorities for the department to ensure that things got done.
• This was a strategic framework for performance ambitions, and it was aimed to be more transparent.
• Updates would be brought six-weeks following the end of each Quarter.
• Obstacles were acknowledged with regard to the ILACS improvement plan.
• With regard to performance ambitions, it was aimed to look at the direction of travel and how the Council compared nationally, regionally and to other Local Authorities in terms of family benchmarks.
• It was aimed to look at actions that could change trajectory.

The Committee were invited to ask questions and make comments. Key points included:

• With regard to points raised about the increasing figures for children in care in the city, it was explained that a large part of this was due to the pace of the courts as there had been issues surrounding the availability of Judge time an the availability of information that Judges wanted.  Over time, care proceedings would have more children in the care system.  It was further noted that there were a large number of under-1s in the adoption system, by the system had been elongated.  There had also been volatility in Leicester as there had often been many children from the same family going into care at the same time.  Work had been done through Family Help reforms which should see numbers coming down and a slight reduction should be seen this quarter.  The whole system was under pressure and there were wider societal factors around poverty and depravation.
• In terms of support for those in financial difficulty, it was suggested that there was lots that could potentially be done, however, significant change was needed.  There were particular factors around work and financial management in the long term for the crisis resilience fund.  It was acknowledged that there were high levels of deprivation in the city, and that intelligence around what was happening could help officers understand what needed to be done differently.  There was a pathway to cultural change in terms of crisis and resilience.
• In response to queries about the functions of LiquidLogic, it was explained that it was a recording system and database to record families worked with.  It was being reviewed in terms of making it more user friendly so Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools could make it easier to record data.  Thes had the potential to free-up social workers in terms of workload.  Confidentiality aspects would need to be overcome, and it was necessary to think about how technology could help in terms of accurate recording and accountability.  Other authorities were already using LiquidLogic.  Microsoft Copilot had also been introduced, and the process of data protection was being worked through.  This would offer potential to allow social workers to do more work with people as they would not need to spend so much time working on administration.  It was necessary to ensure that AI understood standards, and work would be checked in real time.
• In terms of audit, this would always be checked by humans.  People were involved in quality assurance, and some pressures meant that there had not been enough manager time for case management.  The number of team managers and service managers had been expanded, and it was hoped to grow capacity.  Ai could do a ‘second-look’ and moderation. 
• Some agency staff were used, but mostly for the purposed of covering staff on maternity leave and long-term sickness.
• Numbers of Social Work managers, team leaders and heads of service had been increased.
• Overseas social workers could be brough to Scrutiny to gain their insights.
• Responding to a query on how the methodology had changed, it was explained that previously there had not been a consistent way of recording quality assurance, and because it had been so variable, it had been difficult to find patterns.  A system was desired that could aggregate findings.  Pro-formas had been used that people could fill in which allowed for aggregation.
• Further information on the 'Four Pillars of Prevention' on the LBL roadmap could be provided.

AGREED:

1)    That the report be noted.

2)    That comments made by members of this commission to be taken into account by the lead officers.