Child Looked After Reviews

A Child Looked After Review must take place before any significant change is made to the child's Care Plan, unless that is not reasonably practicable, including a decision to cease looking after a child.

Child Looked After Reviews should normally be conducted at a meeting although this may not be required in respect of a child who has been in a designated Long-term Foster Placement for over twelve months (see Section 10, Child Looked After Reviews Concerning Children in Long Term Foster Placements).

The purpose of the Child Looked After Review is to:

• Ensure that appropriate plans are in place to safeguard and promote the overall welfare of the Looked After child in the most effective way and achieve permanence for them within a timescale that meets their needs;
• To monitor the progress of the plans and ensure they are being progressed effectively;
• To make decisions, as necessary, for amendments to those plans to reflect any change in knowledge and/or circumstances;
• To ensure the needs of children looked after as a result of a secure remand are met;
• To ensure that an Eligible Young Person moving into semi-independent accommodation is ready and prepared to move;
• For a young person living in foster care, the first Child Looked After Review following their 16th birthday should consider whether a Staying Put arrangement (whereby the young person remains in the foster home after the age of 18) should be an option.

It is important that decisions taken at Child Looked After Reviews are implemented and responsibility for actions clearly defined.

The key plans that should be considered at a Child Looked After Review are:

• Care plan;
• Permanence plan;
• Health care plan;
• Pathway plan if applicable;
• Personal education plan (PEP).

The review should also take account of the child's Placement Plan (recorded on the Placement Information Record) and any other plans or strategies (e.g. behaviour management strategy), ensuring that they are up to date, or that arrangements are in place to update them.

In addition, Pathway Plan Reviews are also considered for all young adults who have recently turned 18. The IRO will discuss the child when they are approaching 18 with their manager, and a RAG rating will be added to the child’s file which will indicate any ongoing involvement of the IRO, and the level of involvement (see Section 16, Post-18 Pathway Reviews).

Independent Reviewing Officers (IRO's) will chair reviews.

The IRO's responsibilities are outlined in Section 8, Independent Reviewing Officer's Responsibilities.

See also Appointment and Role of Independent Reviewing Officers Procedure.

If the allocated IRO cannot attend the meeting and it is important that the review meeting is not delayed, the meeting will be chaired/attended by a substitute IRO.

Communication should take place between the social worker and the child (subject to age and understanding) at least 20 working days before the meeting about who the child would like to attend the meeting and where the meeting will be held.

Invitations to reviews will be sent by the Independent Reviewing Service’s Business Support Team following consultation with the child's social worker and the IRO, who will decide who should be invited in consultation with the child. Invitations to reviews and consultation documents should be sent out to all those participating in the review at least 10 working days before the meeting.

The invites should include links to the various consultation forms. There are separate forms aimed at children, parents, carers and keyworkers. Responses to these forms will provide a basis for an IRO collating information in advance of the review.

The following people should normally be invited:

• The child. There is a presumption that the child will attend the review. A child's disability must not be a bar to the child's attendance;
• The parents and those with parental responsibility, carers and any significant people or specialists involved in the child's case, (except as set out below);
• The supervising social worker, if the child is placed with foster carers;
• The link worker if the child is in residential care;
• The following people can be invited where appropriate and taking into account the wishes of the child:
• The most appropriate teacher at the child's school (usually the Designated Teacher for looked after children);
• A Personal Adviser, if the child is over the age of 16;
• An Independent Visitor, if involved;
• If required, an interpreter;
• Any other person with a legitimate interest in the child e.g. health care professional, GP, a representative from the Local Authority in whose area it is proposed that the child will be placed; (Such attendance should always be discussed with the child before invitations are made and their views obtained);
• The officer with lead responsibility for implementing the authority's duty to promote the educational achievement of its looked after children.

A balance must be struck in relation to who the child wishes to be present and the need for information and input from the professionals and family members involved. Efforts should be made to keep the number present at the review as small as possible. It may be appropriate for information to be provided in writing or at a separate meeting where the contribution is strictly factual.

Children and parents should also be informed that they can arrange to see the IRO separately if they wish or bring a supporter or interpreter to the review.

Where the child does not wish to attend the review, the IRO must at the very least speak to the child before the review - wherever possible in a face to face meeting.

The child's social worker must ensure that children and families have been given information about the Complaints Procedure. They should provide the child with details of independent advocacy services who may provide support if the child requires it.

See Section 7, Supporters and Interpreters.

A decision not to invite a child or parent(s) to a review should only be made in exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the IRO, prior to the review. The decision should be recorded, together with reasons, on the review document and child's record.

Where any other invited person cannot attend, the IRO may agree that a delegate attend instead.

The child's social worker must discuss the purpose of the review with the child, parents and carers and consult the child about invitations at least 20 working days before the review meeting.

In all cases, the child and parent(s) should be encouraged and supported by the social worker to prepare for the review, in writing or other ways if they wish. This could include meeting the IRO, completing an electronic consultation form, or any other way that promotes participation for children and parents.

The child's social worker must also ensure the child's IRO is kept informed of any significant changes in the child's circumstances and the outcomes of any other meetings held as part of the review process, which consider aspects of the child's Care Plan. In addition, the social worker must notify the IRO if they believe that decisions made at a review are no longer appropriate because of a change in circumstances.

Where the child has been or is the subject of Court proceedings, the social worker should ensure the IRO has clear information of the child's legal status and the Court timetable.

Prior to the review, the social worker must ensure the child's records and plans are up to date, for example, that they include records of the placement visits and the last date when the child's sleeping accommodation was seen. Any changes in household membership need to be clearly recorded.

The social worker must send the IRO the following documents 3 working days before an Initial Review and 5 working days before a subsequent review:

• Review of Arrangement Report;
• Care Plan or Pathway Plan;

In preparation for the review, the IRO will consult:

• Progress Report;
• Care Plan or Pathway Plan;
• All completed consultation documents (the social worker is responsible for sending these to the child, carers and family members as appropriate);
• Health Care Plan;
• Personal Education Plan;
• Any other relevant reports by professionals.

The IRO will then summarise these documents during the review and provide information about the discussion with the social worker as appropriate.

After the review, the social worker is responsible for updating the Care Plan within 10 working days, in relation to any changes to the Care Plan agreed at the review.

The social worker should also update the Permanence Plan, Health Care Plan and Personal Education Plan as required, and arrange for a Pathway Plan to be completed/updated, if relevant.

The social worker should also ensure that the child's Placement Plan (recorded on the Placement Information Record) is updated.

See also Appointment and Role of Independent Reviewing Officers Procedure, Duty of Social Worker to Keep IRO Informed.

The social worker and IRO should consider prior to the review whether either the child or parent(s) would benefit from the presence of a supporter or advocate and if so, the social worker should ensure the necessary arrangements are made. A supporter may be either an advocate on behalf of the child/parent(s) or a person with specialist skills or knowledge.

It may also be necessary for the social worker to make arrangements for an interpreter to attend. Special needs, for example those arising from disability, should always be considered and appropriate assistance arranged where relevant.

Any request by the child or parent(s) for their legal adviser to attend as their supporter should be notified to the IRO prior to the review and arrangements made where appropriate for the attendance at the review of a local authority legal adviser.

The IRO's role is to chair Child Looked After Reviews and monitor the appropriateness of the Care Plan (on an ongoing basis including whether any safeguarding issues arise), its implementation and to establish whether the milestones set out in the plan are being achieved in a timely way.

See also Appointment and Role of Independent Reviewing Officers Procedure, which sets out in detail to role of the IRO outside the Child Looked After Review.

In relation to their role at reviews, a key task for all IRO's is to ensure that the review process is child and family centred and that the child's views are heard. They should be satisfied that disabled children's contributions are obtained and effectively presented in the review.

The IRO should consult the child about their Care Plan at each review and at any time that there is a significant change to the Care Plan. The IRO should communicate with the child before the first Child Looked After Review and arrange to meet the child as appropriate in advance of subsequent Child Looked After Reviews.

The IRO must be satisfied that the wishes and feelings of the child's parents, any person who is not a parent but who has parental responsibility and the current carer (foster carer or registered person in respect of a children's home) have been taken into account as part of the review process.

Wherever possible, the child should be encouraged to chair the meeting and in these circumstances the IRO will assist the child. In all other cases, the IRO will chair the review - see Section 3, Chairing of Reviews.

More than one meeting may be required to ensure the views of relevant people inform the review without the meeting becoming too large. For example it may be appropriate to hold a meeting involving the child prior to a meeting involving the parent to obtain information and ascertain the views of both where the child does not wish to attend a review with their parents present.

The IRO is responsible for ensuring that all relevant people, including the child and parents, understand the purpose of the review and have been given appropriate opportunities to contribute and express their views. The IRO should also ensure that relevant consultation has taken place with those professionals who are not in attendance at the meeting.

Where participants' views are not followed, an explanation of the reasons why needs to be provided by the IRO and/or the social worker. Any differences of opinion should be recorded in the minutes. 

If the parent(s) or the child brings a supporter, the IRO will need to explain their role, ensuring that the supporter understands that they may clarify information but may not cross-examine any contributor.

The agenda for each review will be agreed at the beginning of the meeting and each participant will be invited to contribute their own items to the agenda and have the opportunity to contribute to the discussion.

The IRO will decide on what actions in principle are necessary to meet the child's reviewed needs and make recommendations as to how these should be achieved.

Where a review considers that adoption or long-term fostering is the most appropriate way to meet the child's needs, the recommendation is then submitted to the Adoption Panel for consideration - see Placement for Adoption Procedure.

The IRO may adjourn a review meeting once, for not more than 20 working days, if not satisfied that sufficient information has been provided by the Local Authority to enable proper consideration of any of the factors to be considered.

The IRO should consider the effects on the child of delaying the meeting, and seek the wishes and feelings of the child, carer and parents where appropriate.

No proposal under consideration at the adjourned review can be implemented until the review has been completed.

It will be necessary for the IRO to ensure decisions are clear and establish who is responsible for action and the timescales agreed for completion. The IRO should ensure that the following are considered and accounted for during the review:

1. The effect of any change in the child's circumstances since the last review, any change made to the Care Plan, whether decisions taken at the last review have been successfully implemented and if not the reasons;
2. Whether any change should be sought in the child's legal status;
3. Whether there is a plan for permanence;
4. Arrangements for contact/whether there is any need for changes to the arrangements in order to promote contact between the child and parents/other Connected Persons;
5. Whether the placement continues to be the most appropriate available, whether any change to the placement agreement or any other aspect of the arrangements is likely to become necessary before the next review;
6. Whether the placement safeguards and promotes the child's welfare, and whether any safeguarding concerns have been raised;
7. The child's educational needs, progress and development and whether any change is likely to become necessary or desirable before the next review, including consideration of their most recent assessment of progress and development; whether the arrangements are meeting the child's educational needs; whether the child has a Personal Education Plan (PEP) and whether its content provides a clear framework for promoting educational achievement;
8. The child's leisure interests and activities and whether the arrangements are meeting their needs;
9. The child's health report, and whether any change in health care arrangements is likely to be necessary or desirable before the next review; whether the content of the health plan provides a clear framework for promoting the child's health; whether the arrangements are meeting the child's health needs;
10. Whether the child's needs related to identity are being met and whether any change is required having regard to the child's religious persuasion, racial origin and cultural background;
11. Whether the arrangements for advice, support and assistance continue to be appropriate and understood by the child;
12. Whether any arrangements need to be made for the time when the child will no longer be looked after;
13. The child's wishes and feelings and the views of the IRO about any aspect of the case and in particular about any changes made since the last review or proposed to be made to the Care Plan; whether the plan fulfils the duty to safeguard and promote the child's welfare and whether it would be in the child's interests for an independent visitor to be appointed;
14. Where the child is placed with parents before an assessment is completed, the frequency of the social worker's visits;
15. Whether the delegation of authority to take decisions about a child's care continues to be appropriate and in the child's best interests;
16. Other matters which may arise should also be considered with due regard to the circumstances of the child and the placement.

The IRO will record in the minutes the way in which the child participated in the review, together with the outcome and the date for the next review.

Where there is evidence of poor practice, the IRO will consider what action is needed to bring this to the attention of the relevant and appropriate managers - see Section 14, Monitoring of Review Decisions.

It is also the IRO responsibility to focus on resolution of any practice matters which have caused them concern - see Section 15, Resolution Framework.

The Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) must check that the child's Care Plan includes a Permanence Plan with measurable milestones and a Contingency Plan should the preferred plans not materialise.

At the second Child Looked After Review, there is a requirement to focus on the Permanence Plan, to ensure it provides permanence for the child within a timescale which is realistic, achievable and meets the child's needs. Parallel plans should also be considered at this point.

All subsequent Reviews should review the progress and validity of the Permanence Plan. The IRO is encourage to consider permanence through the three lenses of:

• Legal permanence;
• Emotional permanence;
• Geographical permanence

Children who are Section 20 Accommodated (Children Act 1989): IROs should pay particular regard to children accommodated under S.20 to ensure there is appropriate progression of their plans and that there are no delays in respect of them having 'permanence', (which should include a return home).

In circumstances where the threshold criteria (for Care/ Supervision Orders) under Section 31 Children Act 1989 are met, (i.e. where a child is at risk of significant harm, or the likelihood of significant harm), then care proceedings should be issued without delay.

The IRO can make a recommendation for the child’s situation to be presented at Permanence Panel and/or a Permanence Planning Meeting where it is felt this aspect of their plan needs further tracking and discussion.

If a Post-18 Pathway Review is being held, the focus changes from ‘permanence’ to ‘stability’ (see 16. Post-18 Pathway Reviews). The IRO is encouraged to consider post-18 stability through the three lenses of:

• Legal/economic stability;
• Emotional stability;
• Geographical stability.

Paragraph 4.17 of The Children Act 1989 Guidance and Regulations - Volume 2: Care Planning, Placement and Case Review sets out that where a child is placed in a designated long-term foster placement and has been in this placement for more than a year consideration should be given to whether it is necessary to hold a meeting as part of each review.

The guidance requires that the social worker should consult the IRO and the child (where appropriate to age and understanding) in reaching a decision on whether to hold a meeting. Where it is agreed that a meeting will not be held as part of every review, a meeting should be held at least once a year. The factors leading to a decision to hold review meetings on a less frequent basis must be recorded in the child's Care Plan.

Where a decision is taken that the review process will not include a meeting, the IRO must ensure that full consultation with all relevant individuals, including the child, has taken place to inform the review of the child's case.

Where a looked after child remains the subject of a child protection plan, there should be a single planning and reviewing process, led by the IRO, leading to the development of a single plan.

Consideration should be given to the IRO chairing the Child Protection Conference where a looked after child remains subject to a Child Protection Plan. Where that is not possible, it will be expected that the IRO will attend the Child Protection Review Conference.

The timing of the review of the child protection aspects of the Care Plan should be as in Section 2, Frequency of Child Looked After Reviews.

The Child Looked After Reviews, when reviewing the child protection aspects of the plan, should consider whether the criteria continue to be met for the child to remain the subject of a Child Protection Plan.

Consideration must be given to ensuring that the multi-agency contribution to the review of the Child Protection Plan is addressed within the review of the Care Plan.

It is the responsibility of the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) to record the review. A written record of the decisions and recommendations will be completed and circulated by the Independent Review Officer to all participants within 5 working days of the meeting. This should also be sent to the designated senior manager who will consider the decisions made at the review - see Section 13, Review Decisions.

The full written record of the review will be completed within 15 working days of the review. The full record should contain an accurate and comprehensive record of the meeting, or meetings, which constituted the review and of the views of all those who attended or were consulted as part of the review process. The record should also reflect the review process for a designated long term foster placement where a meeting did not take place. In addition, the IRO should write a separate letter to the child giving a summary of the matters discussed during the review. The IRO Business Support Team will send copies out to all relevant parties who have provided their full name and address on the attendance sheet within 20 working days of the completion of the review.

The decisions should have any identifying details removed as necessary, for example, exceptionally, the address of the placement.

Where parents do not attend the review/part of the meeting and contribute their views in some other manner, a discussion should take place between the social worker and the IRO as to whether it is in the child's interest for the parents to receive a full record of the review, and, if not, what written information should be sent to them. Examples of where this should be a consideration are where there is a 'no contact order' or supervised contact only.

A Team Manager should consider the decisions made at each Child Looked After Review within five working days of receiving them and to advise the IRO and all those who attended the review if they are unable to agree them. If the Team Manager is unavailable, then their manager, or a duty manager, should consider the decisions in their place.

If no response is received the decisions should be considered agreed by the Local Authority and should be implemented within the timescales set out in them.

If the senior member of staff disagrees with any of the decisions within that initial five working day period, this should be notified in writing to the IRO and all those who attended the review.

In the first instance the IRO should attempt to resolve the issue informally. If this is not successful the IRO can consider scheduling a resolution meeting  - see Section 15, Resolution Framework.

The Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) plays an important part in the quality assurance function of the local authority's service for looked after children. Itis encouraged for them to recognise and report on good practice by individuals or teams.

It is important for the IRO to have a collaborative relationship with the social workers and their managers.

Every child who has progressed past the second review, should have midway oversight of their care plan by the IRO. This can take the form of a file audit, or a meeting with the child’s social worker and anyone else the IRO feels necessary to contact. It is good practice to speak to the child at this time as well. If the IRO has any concerns about the progress of the care plan at this stage, they should considering convening a resolution meeting - see Section 15, Resolution Framework.

Problem resolution is an integral part of joint working to safeguard children, and professional challenge is a fundamental part of professional responsibility. In this context, escalation and resolution is about raising concerns or challenging decisions about practice or actions which, according to those holding the concerns, may significantly impact the protection and well-being of the child(ren).

Occasionally situations may arise when an IRO considers that the decision made by an involved practitioner or manager is not an adequate or a safe decision. Many professional challenges will be resolved on an informal basis by contact between the professionals and agencies involved.

However, drift arising out of professionals’ differences should be avoided; unresolved concerns should be addressed using this framework.

Disagreements and difficulties could arise in a number of areas, but are most likely to arise around:

• Deciding levels of safeguarding and protection needs;
• Roles and responsibilities of agencies;
• Quality and progression of plans for children subject of a CP plan or for children who are looked after;
• Professional vocabulary and communication issues;
• Understanding professional perspectives.

It may also be necessary for the IRO or to use the resolution framework to highlight a child or young person’s circumstances which would be in breach of policies, procedures or guidance. This is particularly relevant to:

• Children and young people who are believed to be living in arrangements that are directed by the local authority and hence should be considered looked after but have not been recognised as such;
• Children and young people who are living in arrangements where kinship assessments have not concluded in statutory timescales;
• Children and young people in need of care, who are living in semi-independent accommodation or bespoke arrangements that offer support not care;
• Children and young people subject to Care Orders, who are living in arrangements, most often with family members, which have not been assessed, and hence ratified by the Director via placement with parent’s regulations;
• Where a court has directed that a child be placed with a family member or any other care arrangement, and the local authority has not followed its required processes of assessment, ratification and hence regulation;
• Where a placement in any other context is not regulated i.e. required ratification from Fostering Panel and/or the Agency Decision Maker has not been acquired.

Finding a way forward will not always include changes to original decisions. However through raising concerns and improving shared understanding through effective dialogue, the overall quality and robustness of the decisions will be greater.

Please refer to the separate Resolution Framework document for a detailed description of the council’s processes for managing concerns and/or disagreements raised by the IRO.

Practice Guidance: undertaking Independent Reviewing of Pathway Plans of relevant and former relevant young people.

Introduction

This guidance applies to Independent Reviewing Officers (IROs), Social workers, Team Managers and Personal Advisors (PAs). The guidance sets out the arrangements for undertaking reviewing of pathway plans for young people aged 18+ who are “Former Relevant” young people, as defined in the Leaving Care Act. i.e. young people who are: “aged 18 to 21 (or up until their 25th birthday if in full-time further or higher education), and have left care having been previously either 'Eligible', 'Relevant' or both.”

The guidance is not applicable to care leavers aged 18+ who have a care plan as an adult service user. In those cases the adult services care plan is reviewed in the usual way by adult services, with a contribution from the Personal Advisor with regard to the young person’s leaving care entitlement

The guidance also applies to young people who are “relevant” care leavers i.e.:

Young People aged 16 or 17 who are no longer Looked After, having previously been in the category of Eligible Young Person when in care.

A young person is also 'Relevant' if, having been in care for three months or more, he or she is then detained after their 16th birthday either in a hospital, remand centre, young offenders' institution or secure training centre. There is a duty to support Relevant Young People up to the age of 25, wherever they are living.

The requirement of Local Authorities for this group of young people is:

• To provide the young person with a personal adviser;
• To review and revise the pathway plan regularly;and
• To keep in touch.

Role of the Independent Reviewing Officers

The IRO handbook describes the role of Independent Reviewing Officers in relation to care leavers:

“Where a review concludes that it is appropriate for a looked after young person to make the move to independent living arrangements, and such a move takes place, this does not automatically result in the young person ceasing to be looked after. It is likely that given their vulnerability most young people will benefit from the support that results from being looked after (including having a pathway plan that is kept up to date and reviewed by an IRO) until the age of 18. However, where there is consideration that it might be in a young person’s interests to no longer be looked after and become a ‘relevant child’ then this entirely separate issue must be considered by a properly constituted statutory review of the pathway plan, chaired by the IRO. The proposed pathway plan for the young person concerned must be available for scrutiny at this review. The review should also stipulate how in future the pathway plan is to be reviewed and whether there would be any benefits in these meetings being chaired by an independent person, with an established competence in the provision of leaving care, housing support and other services to care leavers”.
IRO Handbook Paras 5.16 & 5.17

The offer to relevant and former relevant young people is that the first meeting where the pathway plan is reviewed may be chaired by an Independent Reviewing Officer. This will be the same IRO who previously reviewed their looked after care plan, as this ensures continuity in the planning and reviewing process, minimises the number of new professionals the young person needs to deal with, and maintains the relationship between young person and their IRO.

The criteria to consider whether an IRO led Pathway Plan Review is proportionate is;

• Has the young person achieved geographical stability? Ie - they have secure and stable living arrangements;
• Has the young person achieved emotional stability? Ie - they have the right support being delivered by identified persons including family and friends;
• Is the young person experiencing protracted legal processes which may impact on their capacity to move on?
• Whether the young person wishes the IRO to continue to be involved.

When a child is approaching 18, the IRO will discuss their circumstances with the IRO Manager of Service Manager and a RAG rating will be agreed which will inform the level of IRO involvement going forward.

The IRO may offer to chair a maximum of 2 Pathway Plan reviews following the young person ceasing to be looked after. They may instead use the midway meeting framework if they only need oversight of one or two issues, meaning a full review meeting is disproportionate.

The decision to continue the independent oversight of the Pathway Plan will be led by the young person, who may not want the IRO to continue in this role or may want the IRO to chair only one of the maximum 2 further reviews offered if at all. If the IRO feels oversight is still required and the young person does not consent to a Post-18 Pathway Review Meeting, the midway meeting framework can be used instead. The young person must be informed if this is happening.

Outline Process: Final CLA review

Every young person looked after will have a final child looked after review, usually a few weeks or a month before their 18th birthday. If the young person is a relevant young person, the final child looked after review may be held at a point before or soon after their 16th birthday.

The final looked after review will be chaired by the IRO. The PA would be allocated in advance of this final review, and be in attendance at the meeting, along with the outgoing social worker.

The final child looked after review will make decisions with regard to the implementation of the young person’s pathway plan. One of these decisions will be regarding the on-going arrangements for the future reviewing of the plan. The young person’s view regarding whether or not they wish the IRO to continue in their role will be the primary determining factor.

In unusual circumstances where the young person is seriously unwell, missing, or lacking capacity an IRO may elect to convene a Pathway Plan Review without the young person’s consent to this.

A date for the first pathway plan review will be set no later than 6 months from the final looked after review but more usually will be within 3 months to support the young person’s transition.

The review can take a variety of forms however the consent and active involvement of the young person is essential. Ideally the Pathway plan review takes the form of a meeting (which can be virtual or face to face) involving young person, important family members identified by the young person, relevant professionals, the PA and the reviewing officer. The young person’s views of who should attend the meeting will be a key determining factor.

Alternatively the Pathway plan review takes the form of the IRO contacting those involved with the young person either in person or by phone/email (dependant on the young person’s consent) to gather information regarding the progress of the pathway plan. IRO leads the discussion involving PA and /or young person.

Pathway Plan review

A current Pathway Plan, updated where required subsequent to the Final CLA review is the PA contribution to the meeting.

The contributors to the meeting will be invited to complete written consultation forms as they would do for a child looked after review. The contributions and views of review attendees should be captured within the Pathway Plan. It is the responsibility of the PA to determine the views of other agencies and ensure these are accurately recorded within the Pathway Plan.

The IRO will record the meeting in the Pathway Plan Review on CRS

The review agrees a future date for the second pathway plan review if chaired by IRO and this is recorded in the Pathway Plan. Updates added to CRS. IRO places case note on CRS and alerts PA’, Team Manager and IRO Manager

Where an IRO is not leading a second Pathway Plan Review one of the recommendations must be at which stage and whom will review progress of the recommendations this may be;

• Within supervision with line manager;
• Vulnerable Adults Panel;
• Care Panel if relevant to placement arrangements.

The resolution approach used by IRO with children looked after is still applicable where a person is care experienced.

Monitoring arrangements:

The IRO Manager will use a spreadsheet which generates information on all children in care who are approaching 18 in the next two years, to create a RAG rating for each with the IRO. Young people approaching their final review will be discussed in supervision and the following criteria will be used to rate if they need further involvement from an IRO post-18:

Red – They have not achieved stability in one or more areas (geographical; emotional; legal/economic). In this case one or two more pathway reviews should happen, as long as the young person consents.

Amber – There is some minor uncertainty about achieving stability in one or more areas (geographical; emotional; legal/economic). This is usually around waiting for a placement extension to be authorised, or awaiting some form of planned service to begin. In this case the IRO can use discretion and record an update post-18 on a midway review form. If the uncertainty if still present at this stage, the IRO can use discretion to convene a pathway review.

Green – They have achieved geographical, emotional and legal/economic stability and the plans going forward are clear to the professional network, the young person, and their family where appropriate.

This will be the basis of continuing discussion between IRO, TM, PA and young person.

The percentage of care experienced persons receiving an IRO led 1^st or 2^nd per post 18 pathway plan review will be embedded as a performance indicator in monthly snapshot to enable continuous oversight by team manager, service manager and CSLT as to performance

*Post-18 Pathway Review guidance is still at the draft stage and awaiting senior manager sign off. The above guidance is therefore liable to change.

There is then 5 working days to contact IRO for discussion if the PA or TM does not agree with any aspect of the plan. Otherwise the TM indicates their confirmation of the plan, which then becomes the agreed pathway plan.

If the young person wishes the IRO to continue to oversee the subsequent Pathway Plan review/s (second and/or third), these are then conducted in similar way.

Reviews will continue to take place at 6-monthly intervals while the young person has relevant or former relevant status under the Leaving Care Act. These will be carried out by the social worker or Personal Advisor.

Disputes and Challenges.

On occasions, after conducting a review of the Pathway Plan, the Reviewing Officer may identify areas where there is drift, delay or lack of progress with aspects of the plan. E.g. the young person may be in unsuitable accommodation, their health or education needs are not sufficiently met, or there is a safeguarding concern. Decisions or agreed actions from the previous review may not have been followed up, without good reason.

In these circumstances the IRO will challenge the Local Authority by

1. Recording the issue as a concern on the recording of the Pathway Plan Review;
2. Logging the quality assurance issue on the young person’s record by case note and/or use of CERP
3. The record of the quality assurance issue will stipulate the action needed and a clear timescale. The relevant Team Manager and their Service Delivery Manager will be notified of the issue by the IRO.

IRO will use the existing escalation and resolution process (CERP) to escalate concern should they not be resolved.