Setting

Mr John Coughlan Acting Director of the Children and Young People’s Service London Borough of Haringey 3 rd Floor 48 Station Road Wood Green London N22 7TY

p.1

2008

This letter summarises the findings of the 2008 annual performance assessment (APA) for your council. The evaluations and judgements in the letter draw on a range of data and information which covers the period 1 April 2007 to 31 March 2008. As you know, the APA is not based on an inspection of your services and, therefore, can only provide a snapshot based on the evidence considered.

p.1

2008

Performance is judged on a four point scale as detailed in the handbook. I should emphasise that the grades awarded are based on an overall ‘best fit’ model. For instance, an outstanding judgement of Grade 4 reflects that overall most aspects, but not necessarily all, of the services in the area are working very well. We know that one of the features of outstanding provision is the drive for greater improvement and no council would suggest, and nor would Ofsted, that a judgement of outstanding indicates that everything is perfect. Similarly within a judgement of inadequate overall, Grade 1, there could be some aspects of the overall service that are adequate or even good. Judgements are made in a rounded way, balancing all of the evidence and giving due consideration to outcomes, local and national contexts, priorities and decision-making. Alexandra House 33 Kingsway London WC2B 6SE T 08456 40 40 40 enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk

p.1

2008

www.ofsted.gov.uk Direct T 0117 945 6293 Direct F 0117 945 6554 South_apa@ofsted.gov.uk The following table sets out the grades awarded for performance in 2008.

p.1

Assessment judgement area APA grade

Overall effectiveness of children’s services 1 Being healthy 1 Staying safe 1 Enjoying and achieving 3 Making a positive contribution 2 Achieving economic well-being 2 Capacity to improve, including the management of services for children and young people

p.2

Assessment judgement area APA grade

Inspectors make judgements based on the following scale 4: outstanding/excellent; 3: good; 2: adequate; 1: inadequate

p.2

Overall effectiveness of children’s services Grade 1

The London Borough of Haringey delivers inconsistent services for children and young people and is inadequate overall. Outcomes are mostly adequate or inadequate.

p.3

Overall effectiveness of children’s services Grade 1

In staying safe, outcomes are poor. There has been a serious deterioration in performance and limited impact from services. The specially commissioned joint area review in November 2008 judged safeguarding services to be inadequate. While thresholds for accessing services and referral processes are clear, these are inconsistently applied in children’s social care. Poor quality assessment, care planning and child protection arrangements place some children at risk.

p.3

Overall effectiveness of children’s services Grade 1

In enjoying and achieving and economic well-being, services are making a greater difference. They are of clear benefit to many children and young people. Impact is evident in terms of: improved outcomes in the Foundation Stage; attainment that is continuing to improve at all key stages; a higher proportion of young people gaining qualifications by age 19; and there is better attendance in schools. However, too many schools are still below floor targets and the proportion of young people not in education, employment or training is too high.

p.3

Overall effectiveness of children’s services Grade 1

Given the severity of the shortcomings in staying safe and performance management, children and young people’s services are judged to be poorly managed and have inadequate capacity to improve further.

p.3

Being healthy Grade 1

The contribution of services to improving outcomes for children and young people in this aspect is inadequate. The council’s analysis of its strengths and areas for development in this outcome area underestimates a number of important weaknesses. The table below sets the evidence for the grade awarded.

p.3

Major strengths

ƒ The proportion of schools achieving Healthy School status is above similar councils and the national average. ƒ Targeted work, such as the Teens and Toddlers Programme, has improved access to sexual health and family planning services. ƒ Teenage conception rates for looked after children have significantly decreased.

p.3

Important weaknesses and areas for development

ƒ Teenage conception rates overall remain significantly above the national average. ƒ Access to both non-specialist and specialist assessment by child and adolescent mental health services is inequitable and significant differences in waiting times exist between trusts. ƒ The quality and accuracy of health assessments for looked after children are poor, with insufficient guidance to general practitioners who undertake assessments.

p.3

Staying safe Grade 1

The contribution of services to improving outcomes for children and young people in this aspect is inadequate. The council’s analysis of its strengths and areas for development in this outcome area underestimates a number of important weaknesses. The table below sets the evidence for the grade awarded.

p.4

Major strengths

ƒ Staff in schools report that the quality of child protection training is good, with very useful advice and support provided by child protection advisers.

p.4

Important weaknesses and areas for development

ƒ Performance data in children’s social care is unreliable and in some important instances inaccurate, so is failing to inform accurately the quality and effectiveness of practice. ƒ There are inconsistencies in the application of thresholds, referral systems, quality of assessments, care planning and recording processes for children in need and child protection referrals or cases. ƒ The quality assurance monitoring of safeguarding practice is inadequate. ƒ Some staff in children’s social care do not adhere to child protection procedures. ƒ Unacceptable and extreme delays in distributing the minutes of child protection conferences, core group meetings and statutory reviews of looked after children and young people mean that follow-up action is not always communicated or carried out in a timely manner. ƒ The use of the common assessment framework for multi-agency assessment and service provision is ineffective.

p.4

Important weaknesses and areas for development

ƒ The long-term placement stability of looked after children is below that of similar councils. ƒ Respite care and/or short break opportunities for carers of children and young people with learning difficulties and/or disabilities are insufficiently flexible.

p.4

Enjoying and achieving Grade 3

The contribution of services to improving outcomes for children and young people in this aspect is good. The council’s analysis of its strengths and areas for development in this outcome area is consistent with the evidence. The table below sets the evidence for the grade awarded.

p.4

Major strengths

ƒ Early years provision is good and leads to an improvement in outcomes and a greater reduction in the inequality gap compared with the national average. ƒ Standards, while below average, are improving faster than the national rate and that of similar councils for most groups at Key Stages 1, 2 and 3, and for five or more A* to C grade GCSEs. ƒ The attainment gap has narrowed for some minority ethnic groups. ƒ The proportion of young people leaving care with five A* to C GCSE grades or equivalent is above both statistical neighbours and the national average.

p.5

Important weaknesses and areas for development

ƒ Despite improvements the number of schools still performing below floor targets is too high. ƒ Despite improvements the percentage of looked after children absent from school for more than 25 days is higher than in similar councils and the national average.

p.5

Making a positive contribution Grade 2

The contribution of services to improving outcomes for children and young people in this aspect is adequate. The council’s analysis of its strengths and areas for development in this outcome area underestimates a number of important weaknesses. The table below sets the evidence for the grade awarded.

p.5

Major strengths

ƒ Strong mechanisms in schools for consultation and participation are embedded in practice and formalised at a strategic level. ƒ Children and young people participate well in decision making and there are good local arrangements for some vulnerable, disaffected and hard-to-reach groups. ƒ Effective targeted work has reduced re-offending rates to below those in comparator councils and has increased the proportion of supervised juveniles in full-time education, employment or training.

p.5

Important weaknesses and areas for development

ƒ The views of looked after children are not always gathered and they have insufficient involvement in their reviews ƒ Children and young people with a child protection plan are not always consulted to establish their views.

p.5

Achieving economic well-being Grade 2

The contribution of services to improving outcomes for children and young people in this aspect is adequate. The council’s analysis of its strengths and areas for development in this outcome area overvalue the progress that has been made in some areas. The table below sets out the evidence for the grade awarded.

p.6

Major strengths

ƒ Strong 14–19 collaboration has led to good progress in the development of Diplomas. ƒ There is a good trend of improvement in the numbers of young people aged 16 who continue in learning and a higher proportion gaining Level 2 and 3 qualifications by age 19 than in similar councils. ƒ The proportion of care leavers are in full-time education, employment or training is higher than the national average.

p.6

Important weaknesses and areas for development

ƒ The proportion of young people not in education, employment or training, although reducing, is above that in similar councils and the national average. For some minority ethnic groups the proportion is well above statistical neighbours and the national average. For young people with learning difficulties and/or disabilities the proportion is above statistical neighbours and well above the national figure.

p.6

children’s services Grade 1

The council’s capacity to improve its services for children and young people, including its management of these services is inadequate The Children and Young People’s Plan (CYPP) articulates a clear vision, shared with partners, for the development of children’s services in Haringey. Priorities are well reflected in the Local Area Agreement and give adequate attention to equality and diversity issues. There is clear determination to enable young people and their families to voice their opinions and play a part in the development of services. The recent joint area review exposed weak governance arrangements. It judged the relationship, accountabilities and lines of communication between the children and young people’s strategic partnership board, the Local Safeguarding Children Board and the children and young people’s consultative committee as insufficiently defined in the terms of reference. Furthermore, it found limited evidence that the priorities and policies of

p.6

children’s services Grade 1

the CYPP were supported by effective planning and evaluation. Performance management arrangements are insufficiently robust with a too great a reliance on national and local performance indicators at the expense of understanding the quality and effectiveness of service provision. The council’s self-assessment overstates progress in almost all outcomes and seriously so in staying safe. Weaknesses have been identified at all levels of the council. Capacity remains stretched and the council’s recruitment and retention policy has failed to achieve planned improvements.

p.6

Major strengths

ƒ Many children and young people achieve well in relation to their starting points.

p.7

Important weaknesses and areas for development

ƒ Corporate parenting arrangements are not good enough. There is a lack of shared responsibility across the council. ƒ Evidence of the priorities and policies of the CYPP being robustly put into practice is limited. ƒ The continued high use of agency staff, inability to attract permanent staff and high vacancy levels preventing continuity of service delivery within children’s social care. ƒ Leadership and management in some areas of children’s services have not developed clear and effective accountability structures. ƒ Governance of safeguarding arrangements is weak and shows insufficient strategic leadership and poor management oversight of safeguarding by elected members, senior officers and others within the strategic partnership. ƒ Rigorous, accurate and effective arrangements for the management of performance at strategic level and in some outcome areas are limited. ƒ There is too much reliance on quantitative data to measure social care practice

p.7

Important weaknesses and areas for development

at the expense of more robust analysis of the underlying quality of service provision and practice and on outcomes for children.

p.7

Important weaknesses and areas for development

The children’s services grade is the performance rating for the purpose of section 138 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006. It will also provide the score for the children and young people service block in the comprehensive performance assessment to be published by the Audit Commission.

p.7

Important weaknesses and areas for development

We are grateful for the information you provided to support this process and for the time given by you and your colleagues during the assessment.

p.7

Important weaknesses and areas for development

Juliet Winstanley Divisional Manager, Local Services Inspection

p.7