To consider the contents of the report.

The Director of Operations – Optalis introduced the item, explaining that a complaint had been made against the Council to the LGO and outlined the background of the case and the circumstances of Ms C’s situation. The Director of Operations – Optalis stated that in hindsight the Council’s approach did fall below standards and a different approach would be taken should similar circumstances occur again.

Members were informed that it had been difficult to engage with Ms C for a number of reasons, including her not being at a set address and due to her drug and alcohol dependency. She attended a number of multi-agency meetings and had received emotional and housing support from the DASH charity. She was also in receipt of clothing and food vouchers from RBWM Customer Services. She was housed for a period by voluntary groups; however due to repeated breaches of her residency she was asked to leave her accommodation.

The Director of Operations – Optalis informed Members that social workers had found it difficult to engage with Ms C because of her background, chaotic lifestyle and her immigration status, and stated that this had been an unusual case for Social Services to deal with. However it was acknowledged that enquiries regarding Ms C’s safeguarding should have been made from the outset of the case. It was also acknowledged that although the social worker had attended a number of multi-agency meetings regarding Ms C, there had been no clear strategy to co-ordinate them all. The Director of Operations – Optalis informed the Panel that a lessons learned process had been implemented to ensure that in future staff knew when to activate a safeguarding procedure and that recordings of meetings were carried out properly. It was noted that in some cases there were no formal recordings of the multi-agency meetings. The lessons learned process had also highlighted a need for the Council to better engage with groups in the voluntary sector who were better placed to help people who had issues with substance misuse.

Responding to a question from Cllr Majeed, The Director of Operations – Optalis stated that she did not known how Ms C had come to live in the Royal Borough and it was not known whether her child was still in local authority care in Birmingham, where she had been living previously. The Managing Director stated that it was her belief that it was likely the child would have been put up for adoption, and the local authority in Birmingham would have been unlikely to have looked to reunite the family. She added that the Council would try to bring families back together whether possible, but that in this case that had not been sought by Ms C. Members were informed that there was no communication between the Council and local authority in Birmingham regarding Ms C.

Cllr Majeed noted that a safeguarding referral was made on August 5^th 2016 but no assessment was carried out until August 26^th. The Director of Operations – Optalis stated this was because it was difficult to engage with Ms C, and that on one occasion she had not been in the location she said she would be in. It was also not possible to make a formal diagnosis of whether Ms C suffered a physical or mental impairment due to her continued misuse of alcohol and drugs. The Director of Operations – Optalis stated that Ms C’s case should have been taken on as a clear safeguarding issue much earlier in the process. This would have meant a Human Rights Assessment would have been made earlier; however Members were informed that carrying out such an assessment was rare and there wouldn’t have been many members of staff that would have done one before.

Cllr Majeed stated that he had contacted the DASH charity regarding this case and had been told they held more than 400 case notes relating to Ms C, and that DASH had come up with a list of five recommendations for future cases. It was agreed that this list of recommendations would be circulated to the Panel, and would be discussed at the next meeting.

Members noted that it had been determined Ms C had no recourse to public funds. The Panel was informed that advice was for people in this situation to receive help from social services but not to receive additional support from the Council; however this did not prevent people from working with voluntary groups who would be able to provide assistance. The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Public Health stated that frameworks restricted what the Council were able to do. He added that Council staff had the right attitude and wanted to help people

It was highlighted that Ms C had been housed under the Severe Weather Emergency Protocol for a prolonged period of time. The Director of Operations – Optalis stated that this reflected the seriousness of Ms C’s case and how vulnerable she was, as she had been housed under the Protocol for longer than would usually be the case.

Members were informed that closer links with experts in the voluntary sector were being sought in order to provide better support for residents, and that this would help to improve the knowledge base of Council staff. It was noted that Ms C has allocated a place at the Sisters of Southall to find support. Members were told that some centres that provided the right support for people with complex needs were sometimes out of the Borough, and that residents would be given assistance in the form of travel warrants to get them to a specialist centre.

The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Public Health and Director of Operations – Optalis both left the meeting at 7.41pm.