2. Projects Early Help Aim to prevent risk and support resilience Targeted & Specialist interventions Aim to reduce risk and increase resilience Safeguarding & Care Aim to manage risk and achieve permanence Enabling early Help & locality partnership development Locality based targeted support function - interim approach (incl. family support review) Children Centre Plus (Early Years, 0-11,Integrated service) Youth Support - Innovation Fund (11-25, CIN, safeguarding, children in care, care leavers) Refocus safeguarding 0-11 (incl. work with police, recruitment of SW) Children in Care Adoption Practices Models Performance Management & commissioning frameworks Communication Universal Vulnerable (Additional needs) Vulnerable (Multiple needs) Complex Acute

3. Innovations Bid – Why Safeguarding for young people is different Our current model is reliant on a single professional view High number of young people coming into care with high needs – Section 20 (Voluntary Accommodation) Outcomes for young people coming into care as teenagers are poor Too much social worker time spent on assessment and not enough on intervention Service led approach rather than family led Staff have told us……..

4. What are we seeking to achieve? A different response which includes a redesigned multi- professional assessment, formulation service planning and intervention. A new model of service delivery with multi-professional teams as standard, including the right mix of specialists and professionals. This service will replace the current social care (children in need, child protection and children in care), youth offending and part of the CAMHS services for children, young people and their families. A commitment to developing alternative delivery model. Arrangements which would delegate statutory social care functions. Building on our experience of delegating functions for youth offending and care leaving services to Prospects. What should the ‘wrapping’ be?

7. Key Hypotheses – that were supported 1. Young people in this cohort have underlying learning difficulties/ disabilities, especially speech/ language/ communication problems? 2. Underlying physical and mental health problems are common – including within the family? 3. Young people who were known to services at an early age have multiple contacts but no meaningful successful intervention (services disengage after onward referral)?

8. Key Hypotheses – that were supported 4. Education settings are unable to hold on to young people with high needs (truancy, exclusion, multiple school moves)? 5. Young people in this cohort do not have or form positive relationships with family or peers?

9. Summary of Key Hazards Through use of the categorisation from the CIC diagnostic tool it was possible to identify where across the cohort the most prevalent hazards were. The top three identified where: 1. Issues related to education in 27/39 2. Witnessing or experiencing domestic abuse in 25/39 3. Poor parenting skills 22/39 Other factors such as parental mental health, running away/missing, and violent and aggressive behaviour feature in over half of the cohort.

10. Progress so far Underpinning theories and processes well under way. Models will be tested in integrated service in Gloucester. Children in care over 11 being managed under new arrangements. Short courses in development to include recruitment of parent co-developers and facilities. Evaluators (through DFE) in place.

11. Today... We need to explore and develop our proposals and options about the type of organisation that should wrap around the redesigned service.