The Children and Young People's Scrutiny Panel met jointly with the Adults & Health Scrutiny Panel to discuss proposals for a new integrated Transitions Programme. The programme aims to support young people aged 14-25 as they transition into adulthood, focusing on maximising independence and developing resilience. Members provided feedback and recommendations on the proposals, requesting further detail on key performance indicators, costs, and the programme's engagement and communication strategies.

Transitions Programme

The joint meeting received an update on the development of a new Transitions programme in Haringey designed to support young people aged 14-25 in their transition to adulthood. The programme, which will adopt a strengths-based approach, aims to foster independence and resilience, ultimately reducing reliance on Adult Social Services and lowering overall life costs. The Haringey Integrated Transitions Programme is envisioned as a cross-agency service, collaborating with partners in Housing, Health, Adults, Education, and the Community Sector, including faith leaders.

Beverley Hendricks, AD for Safeguarding & Social Care, and Vicky Murphy, Service Director for Adult Social Services, introduced the report and presentation. Ann Graham, Director of Children's services, Dennis Scotland, Head of Children in Care and Placements, and Councillor Brabazon, Cabinet Member for Children, Schools, and Families, were also present.

During the discussion, officers assured the panel that each child's unique situation would be addressed holistically, with opportunities to work closely with the Cabinet Member outside the programme. Bespoke aids and adaptations for children with specific needs were cited as examples of the service's work. Officers also highlighted the establishment of subgroups to manage the day-to-day tasks of clearing pathways and implementing improvements.

Concerns were raised about the lack of a joined-up approach in the past, and officers explained that the Transitions programme would establish a dedicated group to better understand the psycho-social needs of young people. The importance of flexibility within the system to accommodate changing individual or family circumstances was emphasised.

Regarding housing, officers noted that Adult Social Services had undertaken significant work on a locality model to ensure clear pathways for young people to access support at various developmental stages. While no specific housing budget is attached to the Transitions programme, the service will seek representation from the corporate capital programme for new housing to support dedicated provision for young people with specific needs. The St. Ann's site was mentioned as an example that would include some supported housing provision.

The panel sought clarification on differing intervention thresholds for children and adults. Officers explained that the Care Act sets clear thresholds for adult social care, and not all young people transitioning to adulthood at 18 would meet these. However, a range of early intervention and prevention activities, supported by a locality model, would provide additional support. Under Section 2 of the Care Act, the local authority has a responsibility to prevent the need for care and support through early intervention.

Assurances were sought regarding support for the existing cohort of 14-25 year olds who might not directly benefit from the new service. Officers stated that the locality model is accessible to everyone across the borough, reinforcing a No Wrong Front Door approach.

The Chair inquired about how the programme would improve communication with residents. Officers outlined that Duty/Screening Officers would be the initial point of contact, guiding individuals to appropriate support services. Leads for each area would coordinate responsibilities and ensure advocacy and support provision.

Questions were raised about the governance structure of the Transitions Board and the decision-making powers of its constituent bodies. Officers confirmed that the Board, chaired by the Director of Children's Services, would have overall control, supported by specialists and a Strategic Operational Group that would make recommendations.

Regarding the legislative framework, officers noted that due to the diverse needs involved, a range of legislation is relevant, with the Care Act being primary.

The Cabinet Member acknowledged concerns about central government funding and the tough choices facing local authorities. They highlighted the programme as a significant social policy focus for the Council.

Officers agreed to provide a note from Housing colleagues regarding the regulatory framework and proposed legislation. The panel requested more detailed proposals, particularly on how improvements would be achieved, and acknowledged that granular details were still being developed. Further information on community housing design was also requested.

The Cabinet Member discussed the national challenge of the privatisation of residential care facilities and the resulting high costs for local authorities.

The Chair of the Adults Panel requested more detailed information on how the Council could reduce its dependence on costly private sector placements.

In relation to financial risk, the Director of Children's Services emphasised that the absence of a dedicated transitions service meant opportunities to improve outcomes and reduce costs were being missed. The Business Case for the programme was recommended for a fuller understanding of its assumptions.

The panel sought clarification on the number of individuals within the cohort who might not require significant support. While specific figures were unavailable, the modelling used for the programme is detailed in the Business Case. The Director acknowledged that the service would not be a panacea, given the increasing needs of young people, particularly in mental health and neurodiversity. Cost reductions could be achieved through a shift to supported community housing.

Regarding the task and finish groups, officers explained they were integral to the programme and would address complex issues and unblock pathways. These groups would be led by professionals and would involve stakeholders such as parents and carers.

Concerns were raised about the lack of specific housing-related work in the proposals, with officers confirming housing service representation in task and finish groups and other forums, including the Independent Living and Housing group.

The importance of co-design and incorporating the voices of service users was stressed. Officers confirmed that the input of children and young people was imperative, with examples including the role of Aspire and feedback mechanisms through special school heads.

The panel highlighted the need for accessible housing provision and suggested increasing the proportion of accessible new build council homes. They expressed hope that the new service could positively impact mental health and wellbeing, though officers cautioned against expecting a direct impact on suicide rates, noting the Council operates within a wider system.

Members provided the following points of feedback and recommendations:

• A request for baselines and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for overarching outcomes.
• A need for more information on the core membership of Task and Finish groups, including senior officers and service user involvement (co-design).
• A request for a breakdown of costs, specifically separating housing costs from care needs.
• A suggestion for a mapping exercise to identify suitable accommodation and a strategy for developing property.
• A request for a further update in approximately one year's time.
• The future update should include the programme's engagement strategy and details on communication with parents and carers.
• The future update should address improvements in information sharing between services.
• The future update should refer to staff training and how service users will be directed to the correct pathways.
• Colleagues from Housing, Health, and Education should be invited to the follow-up session.
• Further details on projected savings, including how they will be identified and the meaning of 'cost avoidance', should be provided.
• Assurances regarding the financing of staffing posts, including housing staff and locality teams in Adults, should be included.
• Further information on how service users will be signposted to the correct services under the 'No Wrong Door' approach.
• Details on how communication with residents is progressing, how it is being measured, and how services will learn and improve as a result.