Agenda item

To receive the SSCP Annual Report for 2024/25 from Alasdair Smith, Director of Children’s Services

·  Major Changes- Children’s well-being and schools bill in parliament, scrutiny of safe-guarding work, core child protection activity and reduction of children in child protection plan

·  SSCP transformation and roles

The commission then received a presentation from Alastair [Director of Children’s Services], in his capacity as current Chair of the Southwark Safeguarding Children Partnership (SSCP), on the 2024–25 Annual Report and safeguarding arrangements.

Alasdair outlined the partnership arrangements, including:

• The statutory partnership between Local Authority, Police and Health leaders, with the role of Chair rotating annually between these agencies.

• Key sub?groups, including:
  • Learning Network – disseminating learning from reviews and audits, refreshed with strong public health input.
  • Child Safeguarding Practice Review (CSPR) Sub?group – considering serious incidents and determining learning and review activity in line with statutory guidance.
  • Quality and Effectiveness Sub?group – the “engine room” of the partnership, scrutinising performance data, audits and practice.
  • MACE (Multi?Agency Child Exploitation) arrangements – focusing on extra?familial risks, including criminal and sexual exploitation.
  • MASH Strategic Partnership Board – overseeing the multi?agency safeguarding hub (MASH), which acts as the front door for referrals.

The commission’s attention was drawn to key data in the report (Section 6), including:

• A lower number of children subject to child protection plans than historically, now closer to statistical neighbours.
• However, high levels of child protection activity overall, particularly Section 47 enquiries:
  • A local rate of 262 per 10,000 children, compared with 225 for statistical neighbours, 172 for London and 187 for England.
• The need to balance proactive safeguarding with respect for family life and proportionality, acknowledging that intrusive involvement must be justified and ethical.

Alasdair highlighted several areas of focus for the partnership:

• Neglect:
  • Neglect remains one of the largest categories for children on child protection plans.
  • The partnership has developed a neglect strategy, shaped by learning from Covid?19 and the cost?of?living crisis, to better distinguish between poverty?related hardship and neglect, and to ensure families receive support rather than punitive responses where appropriate.
• Domestic abuse:
  • Ongoing work to strengthen the multi?agency response and to learn from serious incidents.
• Child safeguarding practice reviews:
  • Rapid learning from cases, such as the review related to “Child H”, with an emphasis on disseminating learning early rather than waiting for long reports.

The partnership has increased engagement with schools and education, recognising:

• The critical role of attendance data, suspensions and exclusions in identifying safeguarding risks.
• The complexity of coordinating with a diverse group of schools and academy trusts, and the steps taken to involve them systematically in the SSCP Executive and sub?groups.

The commission heard that the partnership intends to focus on Awaab’s Law and the implications of new statutory duties regarding:

• Damp, mould, overcrowding and disrepair in homes where children live.
• The need for a stronger multi?agency response when poor housing conditions contribute to risk, including clarity about responsibilities and escalation pathways for professionals in and out of the home.

Members asked questions and raised the following points:

• The need for clearer data and trend information in the annual report, particularly around the areas of focus (neglect, sexual abuse and housing?related risks).
• Interest in whether data can link housing conditions, overcrowding and poverty to children becoming subject to child protection plans, recognising that housing factors may sit beneath headline categories like domestic abuse or neglect.
• The potential for overcrowding and poor housing to exacerbate family stress, domestic conflict and safeguarding concerns, even where there are strong familial love and commitment.

Alasdair agreed with the commission to:

• Explore what data is available regarding housing conditions and safeguarding, and to share further analysis with the commission where possible.
• Facilitate engagement with frontline social workers, parent peer advocates and children in care councils (Speakerbox), so the commission can hear directly from those with lived and practice experience of the safeguarding system.

The commission welcomed these proposals and indicated an interest in visiting services (as it previously had with the EHCP service) to inform further scrutiny.