Agenda item

7.1

The Executive Director, Children, Young People and Families, submitted a report containing an overview of the main developments and priorities of the Fostering Service from April 2015 to February 2016.

7.2

The report was supported by a presentation from Suzanne Whiteley, Adoption and Fostering Service Manager, who reported on Sheffield Fostering Service, referring to foster carer initiatives, training issues, statistics and key priorities for the Service. 

7.3

Members of the Committee raised questions and the following responses were provided:-

·                Whilst statistics were not available in terms of retention rates regarding foster parents, such information was presently being collated by the Service’s Communications Team, using a demographic-based model. The Communications Team had used social media, with the results of this exercise being awaited, to see if such an initiative had an impact.  It was considered that a ‘drip drip’ method of advertising for foster carers often proved more effective than one-off targeting campaigns.  In terms of sharing good practice, officers were due to meet with the Marketing Manager in the Fostering Team at Leeds City Council, which Authority had recently run a very successful recruitment campaign.  It was considered that the Council had a very successful brand in terms of fostering, which tended to be more effective for the younger children. 

·                Whilst the figures regarding the deregistration of foster carers were not available in respect of the last few years, it was believed that, more recently, the number of carers deregistering had reduced. It was believed that the reasons for the deregistration of the majority of such carers was due to general concerns regarding the standard of care provided. In terms of those cases where foster carers had been deregistered by the Authority, of which there have been three, such action had been taken as the standard of care provided had not been deemed sufficient.  The cases did not include any incidences of neglect. Similarly, there were a number of different reasons as to why foster carers withdrew from the fostering process.  One of the reasons was due to the complexity of the system, and the consequent difficulties faced by some prospective foster carers in dealing with this.  Whilst it was appreciated that such a system needed to be highly regulated, it was considered that the system needed to be simplified, particularly for prospective foster parents for unaccompanied asylum seeking children.  Officers in the Fostering Service regularly liaised with colleagues in terms of how they could engage better with representatives from different communities within the City.  Representations had recently been made at a national level in terms of looking at different regulations with regard to foster placements that were culture-specific, and the outcome of such discussions was still awaited.  The reasons as to whether children were placed with permanent foster carers or placed with task carers was dependent on the individual plan for each child.  When a child first came into care, they were registered with short-term foster carers, known as task carers.  When it was deemed a long-term placement would be suitable for the child, the Council would look at providing a placement, where the foster carer involved was able to commit longer-term. 

·                Whilst it was accepted that young people remaining to live with their foster carers after the age of 18 could have an impact on the number of foster carers available, the Council was very keen to support the extension of young people’s placements in a way that allows them to progress to more independent living, whilst remaining with their foster carers, which was known as ‘staying put’.

·                There were currently four foster carers who provided out of hours foster provision, and there were very few occasions where the Council was not able to provide any remand provision. 

·                The details in terms of whether the recent poster campaign in terms of foster carer recruitment had resulted in an increase in enquiries and/or applications were not available at the meeting, but could be provided to Members at a later date.  However, there were generally fluctuations with regard to recruitment statistics throughout any given year.  Also, there were no details available in terms of the effectiveness of recruitment campaigns with regard to BME and other hard to reach communities.  There had been a small number of approvals from BME communities, but it was accepted that the numbers needed to be higher, and the Service would welcome any ideas or suggestions in terms of how such communities could be targeted more effectively in terms of publicity.  The information on this, together with the details relating to the recent poster campaign, were being handled by the Service’s Communications Team, and could be circulated to Members at a later date. 

·                The post of Training and Development Officer in the Service had been vacant for some time as a result of the post-holder being on sick leave.

·                Information regarding (a) the impact of the recent poster/leaflet recruitment campaign, currently being analysed by the Fostering Service’s Communications Team and (b) the ethnic diversity of current foster carers on the list would be circulated to Members.

7.4

RESOLVED: That the Committee:-

(a)       notes the contents of the report now submitted, together with the information reported as part of the presentation and the responses to the questions raised;

(b)       thanks Suzanne Whiteley for attending the meeting, making the presentation and responding to the questions raised; and

(c)        requests that any issues of concern regarding the Fostering Service that arise prior to the next Annual Report, be reported to Members.

(NOTE: Councillor Ian Saunders declared a personal interest in this item, and left the room during the consideration of the item.)