Minutes:
Councillor K Van der Plank, as the Committee’s Risk Champion presented her most recent report, following discussions with the Head of Community Services. Councillor Van der Plank explained that her discussions had covered the following four areas and she would provide information on each of these in turn, concluding with a number of recommendations, which she hoped the Committee would support.
• Training
• Policies, procedures and ways of working
• Recruitment
• Role in the community
In respect of training, Councillor Van der Plank had made the following observations from her discussions with the Head of Community Services.
· Clear accountabilities: the Head of Community Services was the safeguarding lead for the Council.
· A detailed piece of work had been carried out some 5 years ago, which mapped all posts and identifying all roles that needed additional safeguarding training or checks.
· The approach taken to Safeguarding was that it was everyone’s responsibility so basic safeguarding training had been rolled out to everyone.
· For office-based roles basic safeguarding training was provided through the IT system called NetConsent. This was controlled through access to an individual’s PC and if the training was not completed access was denied until the training had been completed.
· For non-office-based staff training was face to face to face, where the training was made, where possible related to the particular role of the staff.
· Certain roles had been identified as requiring additional safeguarding training and this was picked up with Worcestershire County Council (WCC) assistance. Councillor Van der Plank provided a number of examples of where this had happened.
· Consideration was also given to services that were outsourced by the Council, as part of its statutory responsibility.
· All new starters (including volunteers) had to do safeguarding as part of their induction programme
· Elected members were offered training annually, and a briefing paper was also included as part of induction folder new Councillors received. It was noted that this training was not mandatory, and Councillor Van der Plank suggested that due to low attendance at some of these sessions, consideration should be given to how this training was provided.
In respect of policies, procedures and ways of working Councillor Van der Plank highlighted the following areas:
· The safeguarding policy was reviewed and updated annually and was currently being carried out. It was also noted that this was signed off by the relevant Portfolio Holder.
· A new approach had been introduced since lockdown with a Safeguarding champion being appointed as the contact point for each service area. The champions played a key role in ensuring training was up to date and communications were disseminated to everyone in that service area.
· A log was kept of safeguarding referrals and what action had been taken and any outcomes. It was noted that there had been approximately 25 in the last 12 months.
· Clear processes appeared to be in place for handling serious incidents.
· The Council worked closely with WCC which seemed to work well, with Council officers often asking WCC Officers for advice.
· Referrals came from several areas including from Members.
In respect of the discussions Councillor Van der Plank had had with the Head of Community Services around recruitment the following observations were reported:
· The importance of Safer recruitment policies being followed for all recruitment. This included DBS checks where applicable and following up on references. It appeared unclear as to how the Council was compliant in this area and Councillor Van der Plank flagged that there had not been any training on safer recruitment for some time, which she felt needed to be addressed.
· It was noted that references and DBS checks also applied to volunteers.
· For the final section of her report, Councillor Van der Plank highlighted her observations in respect of the role in community:
· As previously stated the Council had good clear links and worked well with WCC on safeguarding on a day to day basis and also more formally through the Corporate Parenting Board and the Bromsgrove Partnership which was also used as a route to the wider voluntary sector.
· There did not seem to be much overlap with Parish Councils in this area other than through a representative from CALC sitting on the Bromsgrove Partnership.
Councillor Van der Plank also noted that there were a number of barriers and issues which impacted on effective working in this area, these included:
· Officer time constraints were the biggest challenge. It was anticipated that as the role of the Safeguarding champion developed this would improve.
· It was acknowledged that record keeping and recording training was always a challenge. However, general awareness across the organisation would help with this.
· Leadership was important and was felt that it was helpful having the Chief Executive as the District Council’s representative on the Safeguarding Board.
· Councillor Van der Plank questioned what plans were in place to improve, and whether there were sufficient resources to achieve the improvements.
After a short debate, the following actions to enable improvement and to minimise risk in some areas (for the Head of Community Services and the Portfolio Holder to consider) and recommendations were agreed by Members.
Actions
1. Face to face training – consider how testing for understanding could be carried out for example at the end of session follow it up with a quiz or ask some follow up questions to ensure there is an understanding of the training, this could be done in a one-to-one session with the relevant Line Manager.
2. Ensure that records are kept up to date.
3. review and refresh the safer recruitment training.
4. Check the policy and the process for references to ensure that these are all being requested and followed up in a timely manner.
5. DBS checks – whilst it appeared clear that these were done for new starters it was not clear what happened when staff change roles within the organisation. This needed to be addressed to ensure those relevant checks were carried out.
6. The Head of Community Services, in conjunction with the relevant Portfolio holder consider how best to share areas of improvement and encourage best practice in respect of Safeguarding with Parish Councils including perhaps giving Parish Councillors access to the Council’s safeguarding training – especially if an online course for District Councillors was developed.
RECOMMENDED that
1) the Member Development Steering Group consider making Basic Safeguarding training for Members be mandatory and carried out at least once in 4-year term;
2) the Member Development Steering Group consider providing training for both Safeguarding and other types of training in different formats, such as online; and
3) the Cabinet and relevant Portfolio Holder considers bringing the updated Safeguarding Policy to full Council due to the length of time since it was last reviewed and as a reminder to Members of its importance.