The Children, Families and Skills Scrutiny Committee met to discuss the Principal Social Worker's annual report, the Family First programme, and the committee's work programme for the coming year. The committee agreed to receive updates on the Family First programme at future meetings and to focus on the impact of local government reorganisation in future discussions.

Principal Social Worker's Annual Report

The committee received the Principal Social Worker Annual Report, which highlighted successes in workforce planning, vacancy reduction, and staff retention within Lancashire's children and family services. The report noted a reduction in social work vacancies from 158 to 23, and a decrease in the use of agency social workers, resulting in savings of over £3 million. The report also noted that 86% of newly qualified social workers stay with Lancashire County Council beyond two years of their initial employment.

Tonya Harrison, the Principal Social Worker, explained that the report covered the previous three years and showed significant achievements, with vacancy and agency worker reduction well below national levels. She highlighted the success of centralised, targeted, and international recruitment efforts, as well as training and partnerships with universities that have created ring-fenced student pathways and a leading social work apprenticeship programme.

Councillors praised the report, with County Councillor Simon Evans, Cabinet Member for Children and Families, describing the low turnover rates as nothing short of miraculous . Councillor Prof. Michael Lavalette noted that the headline figures were astonishingly good compared to other parts of the country.

Questions from the committee included:

• Agency Workers: Councillor Lavalette asked about the use of agency workers, specifically whether they were being brought in for specialist areas or to cover easier work. Harrison responded that agency workers are used for bespoke work or to cover posts, including a recent team manager position. She added that a small number of agency workers had been used to free up experienced social workers to comply with changes to statutory guidance around the Family First Partnership[^2]. [^2]: The Family First Partnership is a national initiative launched by the government as part of its broader children's social care reform strategy. It aims to transform how support is delivered to families by promoting early relationship-based help through integrated services.
• Student Recruitment: Councillor Lavalette questioned the number of student positions against the number of students being trained, asking how the partnership addresses this. Harrison explained that the Greater Lancashire Teaching Partnership trains more students than it recruits, with the knowledge that Blackburn and Blackpool benefit from some of their students.
• Support for the Whole Family: Councillor Lavalette asked about support for families with multiple needs, and whether they would have multiple social workers. Louise Anderson, Director for Children Social Care, explained that the family safeguarding model uses a whole family approach, with children's social workers and adult workers within multi-disciplinary teams. She added that if a parent had eligible adult social care needs, they would still be referred to adult social care.
• Agency Cost Savings: County Councillor Peter Buckley asked if the £3 million savings on agency costs was an annual figure. Anderson clarified that the saving was made in the first year, with sustained savings every year since.
• International Recruitment: County Councillor Samara Barnes asked about international recruitment, specifically where people were coming from and how they were being supported. Harrison explained that practitioners had been recruited from South Africa in three waves, with updated policies and an international social work academy to support them. Anderson added that Lancashire County Council is no longer recruiting internationally and doesn't foresee the need to.
• Agency Fees: County Councillor Samara Barnes asked about the reduction of hourly fees for agency workers and whether this affected the quality of staff. Harrison explained that Lancashire County Council had reduced fees ahead of the introduction of regional pay caps by the Department for Education (DfE). She added that a number of agency staff have since decided to take on permanent employment with Lancashire County Council, and that there are currently 24 CVs per agency vacancy, allowing the council to consider the most suitable person for the role.
• Apprenticeships: County Councillor Mackenzie Ritson asked for more detail on the apprenticeship pathway, and whether more apprentices were desired. Harrison explained that Lancashire County Council offers both internal and external routes, with a commitment of 20 social work apprenticeships a year. She added that a master's opportunity has been introduced this year. Anderson added that there are challenges around having too many apprentices, as there need to be enough practice educators to give them the best experience.
• Alternative Provision: County Councillor Mackenzie Ritson asked about the use of alternative provision from schools. Anderson said she would have to refer to Paul, the director of education, for the data, but that children with a social worker have above average attendance at school in Lancashire.
• Career Progression: County Councillor Mackenzie Ritson asked about career progression for social workers. Harrison referred to a document that sets out the routes from basic employment to senior leadership roles.
• Agency Conversion Fees: County Councillor Mark Wade asked if there was a fee payable to agencies when agency staff are converted to full-time staff. Anderson replied that if Lancashire County Council actively sought to convert them, they would be liable for fees, but that these are choices made by the agency social workers.
• Alternative Provision in Colleges: County Councillor Mackenzie Ritson asked if there were people with alternative vision attending colleges. Anderson replied that there were, but that there were also other alternative provisions, such as football clubs and voluntary sector organisations.

Families First Programme

The committee received a report on the Family First programme, a DfE-funded initiative to transform children's social care. Louise Anderson, Director for Children Social Care, presented the report, outlining the programme's three core components: family help, multi-agency child protection teams, and family group decision making. She explained that Lancashire County Council had received just over £5 million to implement the programme.

Anderson explained that the programme was related to the government's Keeping Children Safe, Helping Families Thrive policy, the Independent Review of Children's Social Care (2022), and the Children and Wellbeing Bill¹. She said that the programme aims to provide early, relationship-based help through integrated services, reducing the stigma around having a social worker. Anderson outlined the strengths, challenges, opportunities and threats to the programme:

• Strengths: A mature social work model and leading multi-agency responses to extra familial harm.
• Challenges: Changes within the council and limited availability of senior officers to implement the programme.
• Opportunities: New funding and the opportunity for innovation and expansion of successful practices and services, and the use of AI and digital tools.
• Threats: Funding difficulties being faced by health services.

Anderson explained that the programme would be co-designed with children, parents, health, the voluntary sector, and the police. She added that Lancashire County Council is moving towards local government reorganisation, and so needs to consider what this might look like in two years and work with Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwin to create a model that will be able to go forward.

Questions from the committee included:

• Police Buy-In: Councillor Ash asked how confident Anderson was that Lancashire County Council had police buy-in and could guarantee that police officers would be ring-fenced. Anderson responded that the police had their own child safeguarding review last year and are creating a vulnerability hub. She added that she was confident that Lancashire County Council would get dedicated police, and that she would like to have co-location as well.
• Single Case Management System: County Councillor Samara Barnes asked about the single case management system and whether the single identifier would sit with the child no matter where they went in the country. Anderson confirmed that it would, and that it was likely to be the NHS number.
• Local Government Reorganisation: County Councillor Mackenzie Ritson asked about the risk associated with local government reorganisation and whether any risk association work had been done. Anderson replied that this would be part of the general work in terms of handing over children's social care, and that there were lessons to be learned from Cumbria.
• Home Tutored Children: County Councillor Mrs Marion Atkinson asked how the council knew the number of children who are not attending school or are home tutored, and how they would overcome the issue of children being hidden from care visitors. Anderson replied that she did know the number, but that it sat in Paul's area. She added that the Children and Families Wellbeing Bill would give the local authority more power to see children who are being educated at home, and that if a child is subject to a child protection plan, the local authority would have to agree for that child to be schooled at home.
• Support for Family Workers: Youth Council Representative 1 asked what kind of support would be given to family workers who would stay with families for longer. Anderson replied that there would be an enhanced training offer, social work oversight and supervision, and potentially a kinship resource in terms of financial support.
• Use of AI: Youth Council Representative 1 asked how the council was planning to manage the risks associated with using AI in social work. Anderson replied that there was tight governance around how AI was used, and that it would be used to strengthen work, not to do the work for social workers. She gave the examples of AI being used to record meetings and to mine information in the systems.
• Percentage of Children at Risk: County Councillor Mark Wade asked about the statistic that just 10% of children are at risk of abuse by family members, and whether Anderson could give an actual number. Anderson clarified that this was 10% of children that social workers work with, and that there wasn't any large research on this.

Councillor Ash requested that the committee receive updates on the key milestones of the programme.

Children, Families and Skills Scrutiny Committee Work Programme 2025/26

The committee considered the work programme for 2025/26.

Councillor Lavalette suggested that a Family First update be added to the work programme on 15 April, and that this should include a focus on local government reorganisation. This was agreed.