To receive and consider the Child Exploitation Strategy and Implementation Plan.
Minutes:
Background:
Prevent:
Under the ‘Protect’ element of the paper the team…
Under the ‘Support’ element of the paper the team…
The New Implementation Plan:
· Continued to build upon areas that had worked well within Powys including the Prevent, Protect and Support structure of work.
The Prevent Element continued to:
· Build upon collaborative awareness raising.
· Embed ambassador programme in schools.
· Community of Practices.
· Build upon the cross-partnership data set to develop other actions as required, such as thematic audit and identifying specific training needs.
· Ensure the Safeguarding Strategy Meeting process remained in place and used a targeted focus, e.g. introducing the Philomena Protocol for missing children.
· Develop practise guidance to support peer on peer harm.
The Support Element continued to:
· Utilise feedback from intervention work to ensure the exploitation team continued to learn and develop.
· Ensure that the service continued to use data to support transitional safeguarding for young adults.
The Head of Children’s Services added that the Child Exploitation Strategy was an updated strategy which had an action plan attached.
Recognition and observation of children’s lived experiences of exploitation in Powys was increasing and the challenge of keeping up with changing methods of child exploitation was noted.
Issues Raised by Committee |
Answers Given |
Members requested links and information regarding the Parent and Community Internet Safety Sessions. |
ACTION - The Head of Children’s Services agreed to share this information with members.
|
The Committee asked what a Slavery and Risk Trafficking Order was. |
It was a disruption tactic used by Dyfed Powys Police to prevent wider risk to children and young people across the county. |
Had child exploitation increased due to children having access to the internet and mobile phones? |
Awareness and understanding of what exploitation looked like online had increased. During COVID an increase in online worries for children and young people had been noted. |
Were the connections made which led to exploitation mostly created using mobile devices and the internet? |
These were noted as contributing factors but were not being seen more than any other method used by perpetrators. |
Did the Child Exploitation Team use social media channels other than Facebook? |
No, but awareness training was planned to keep the team abreast of emerging social media apps and platforms and the team worked closely with the Youth Service who had an Instagram account where information could be shared.
It was noted that the Child Ambassador Programme being rolled out in high schools would provide information regarding how children and young people were accessing information which would then be utilised by the team. |
How did the team receive referrals? Could a member of the community raise a concern directly? |
All referrals came through the front door and could come from a community member. |
Was the team fully funded by Powys? |
The Child Exploitation Team was fully funded by Powys County Council within the Children’s Service’s budget. |
Could all members receive a members development session from the Child Exploitation Team?
|
ACTION - The Head of Children’s Services agreed that the Child Exploitation Team’s work would be added to the Members Development Session in November 2024.
The Child Exploitation Manager added that the team would be present for information at a Members’ Day in County Hall in October 2024. |
Were there any other ways of measuring impact? |
The Child Exploitation Manager would gain feedback from children, young people and families following interventions from the team.
Data sets would include what disruption tactics were used.
Within the strategy meetings triangulation was a routine theme and risks were consistently measured and evaluated.
Data would present outcomes and potential re-referrals. |
Could the number of children identified as ‘at risk’ and the data surrounding this be presented in the monthly performance reports to the Committee? |
The team measured this on a quarterly basis and produced annual reports.
ACTION - The Head of Children’s Services suggested that the annual report be brought to the Committee for information. |
Had the team identified certain areas where ‘children at risk’ were more likely to be located? If so, did the team provide targeted support to those areas? |
Spaces and places were identified as part of contextual safeguarding element of the plan. If a space or place was identified, tools could be utilised such as the Contextual Safeguarding Neighbourhood Assessment Toolkit.
This work would be done collaboratively with other agencies such as PCSOs and the Youth Service.
Referrals would then be monitored, and the work evaluated to understand results.
The Head of Children’s Services added that lots of prevention work occurred, and that in areas where ‘children at risk’ were more likely to be located, more focus would be given to prevention and disruption techniques.
If a hotspot had been identified with multiple children and perpetrators in one area, specific processes would occur. |
During member development sessions, could information be split into prevention and reaction work? |
The Head of Children’s Services agreed that this could be done and if there were any current hotspots the session could be used to share information with the goal of prevention. |
Supporting documents: