Agenda item

The Committee received the new process and procedures on the management of incidents within Hillside Secure Children’s Home, as detailed within the circulated report.

Members were informed that they had previously received a report in December 2015 on the procedures for the management of incidents within the Home. The report highlighted the automatic response of reporting incidents to the Police was not always the most appropriate response or in the best interest of the young person. . It was highlighted that there had been further evidence in the Lord Laming report – In Care, Out of Trouble – that every effort should be made to avoid the unnecessary criminalisation of children in care.

Members had previously asked for further clarity on the processes in place to manage  incidents .  It was noted that there had been limited guidance in place and no joint agency policy agreement.Officers apologised for the delay in providing Members with this report due to the time taken to collate information and the subsequent work to develop appropriate processes.

It was noted that Hillside had developed a joint protocol and working agreement with South Wales Police and the Western Bay Youth Offending Service, as detailed in appendix 1 to the circulated report.

Joint protocols had been considered from other areas and adapted to best fit the needs of Hillside. The protocol had been achieved through collaborative discussions with South Wales Police and Western Bay Safeguarding Board. It was highlighted that the protocol established a three tier response to incidents and applied the test for staff to ask ‘if the incident happened in a supportive caring family environment would a reasonable parent involve the Police?’ It had been recognised by South Wales Police as good practice and would be shared with other areas.

Members queried if staff would be supported to apply this test and make that decision. Officers explained that there would be support and reassurances were provided that the process would be effectively managed. Members asked why the word ‘reasonable’ was chosen rather than the word ‘responsible’ in regards to the reasonable parent test. Officers informed Members that research showed that the word ‘reasonable’ was the preferred word used and was therefore chosen for the protocol.

 The Committee recognised and commended the tremendous work that had been undertaken in finding and adapting good practice that was fit for purpose. It was noted that this work reflected the findings by the Howard League for Penal Reform to reduce the criminalisation of young people. It was commented that this progress also highlighted the advantage of scrutiny in improving processes and policies.

Following Scrutiny, it was agreed that the report noted.