Issue - items at meetings - Early Help Pathyway and Hub

9.1             The Committee considered two reports of the Executive Director for Children’s Services in relation to the Brighton and Hove Threshold Documents and the Early Help Pathway Hub. The first report related to the responsibility of the Local Safeguarding Children’s Board’s (LSCB) need to ensure that there was a common understanding across professionals in relation to the circumstances whereby they should be making a referral to Children’s Social Work services for a child in high need or at risk of significant harm. The second report asked the Committee to note the key principles underpinning the design, consultation and implementation of an Early Help Pathway and Early Help Hub for Children’s Services as part of the Brighton & Hove Early Help Partnership Strategy 2013-17.

9.2             In response to a query from Councillor Wealls the Interim Assistant Director explained that it was the intention to locate all the staff in the hub together. The current accommodation was not large enough; however, the Police had offered some space and following some initial expenditure this would be suitable.

9.3             In response to Mr Glazebrook from the Community Voluntary Sector Forum it was explained that the children of people in prison could come into the pathway, and the pathway would be looking very closely at individual needs.

9.4             Councillor Gilbey asked how all professionals would be involved in undertaking early help assessments and the Interim Assistant Director explained that there were currently a ‘family’ of assessments that would be clarified as ‘early help’ – the threshold document would ensure that these were all properly working together.

9.5             Mr Glazebrook asked a further question in relation to what work the authority was undertaking in relation to the national cross-party manifesto around ‘critical days’. The Assistant Director for Children’s Services explained that there had been discussions about these interventions and locally this service was provided in part through family assessments; however, there were conversations with the CCG about how this work might be commissioned.

9.6             The Chair then put the recommendation to the vote.

9.7             RESOLVED: That the Committee note the contents of the report.