Loading
There is no summary of this meeting yet. Summaries are written once the council publishes the minutes, which are its official record of what a meeting decided. They usually appear a few weeks after the meeting.
Apologies for absence were received from Committee Members County Councillors Gareth E Jones and Carol Robinson. From Cabinet Members County Councillors David Thomas and James Gibson-Watt and Officers Sharon Frewin, Amy Jones and Jackie Pugh.
Cllr Chris Walsh declared an interest in item 6 due to being an independent member of the Powys Teaching Health Board.
The Committee did not receive any disclosures of prohibited party whips which a Member had been given in relation to the meeting in accordance with Section 78(3) of the Local Government Measure 2011.
Nomination of Cllr Gareth E Jones proposed by Cllr Ange Williams and seconded by Cllr Benjamin Breeze. Committee Members present voted unanimously in favour of Cllr Gareth E Jones remaining as Vice Chair. Resolved Cllr G E Jones as Vice Chair for the ensuing year.
Minutes of the previous meetings held on the 12th of December 2025 were agreed by all to be a correct record of the meeting.
This item was postponed due to technical difficulties. It was agreed that the committee would share questions with PTHB Colleagues.
Background: • The Committee received the Quarter 3 (October–December) Performance Report, which had been approved by Cabinet on 24 March and was presented for post‑scrutiny. • It was noted that, due to the pre‑election period, this was the earliest opportunity for the Committee to consider the report. • The report provided an overview of the three wellbeing objectives against the Corporate and Strategic Equality Plan, including detailed commentary on measures identified as off‑track. • Members were advised that revised scrutiny arrangements were now in place, whereby each scrutiny committee considered performance relevant to its own remit, replacing previous joint scrutiny arrangements. • The role of the Committee was outlined as: • Reviewing performance and progress against objectives • Considering value for money • Providing constructive challenge within the health and care remit • Key performance highlights were summarised, including: • Improved outcomes in children’s services, particularly in keeping children closer to home and increased fostering activity • Positive developments in adult services, including increased domiciliary care capacity and reduced waiting times • Ongoing challenges in early help, foster‑friendly employers, and employment and volunteering outcomes for people with disabilities Issues Raised by the Committee: Responses Received: Members requested clarification on the fostering partnership scheme and how it was delivered. The scheme sought to encourage local businesses to become ‘foster‑friendly’, primarily by promoting fostering within their organisations and supporting employees who may wish to foster. Members noted that the foster‑friendly employers measure was off‑track and sought information on planned improvements. Officers advised that the initiative had commenced from a baseline of no participating organisations. Work was ongoing to increase engagement through business outreach, media campaigns and wider promotion, alongside encouraging the Council itself to act as a foster‑friendly organisation. Members sought clarity on what was expected of businesses becoming foster‑friendly. It was confirmed that there were no formal criteria; instead, businesses were encouraged to promote fostering, support staff with flexibility where appropriate, and raise awareness internally. Members asked whether engagement activities could be linked to increases in foster carer numbers. Officers advised that enquiries, assessments and approvals were monitored on a monthly basis. However, it was difficult to directly attribute increases to specific engagement activities due to time lags between awareness and decision‑making. Members queried whether children removed from the Child Protection Register continued to receive support. Officers confirmed that a care and support plan remained in place for a minimum of three months following removal from the register, with continued multi‑agency support for as long as required, including potential step‑down to early help services. Members sought clarification on sickness trends within health and social care services and whether any learning could be applied across the Council. Officers reported that sickness levels within Children’s Services had decreased and were relatively low. This was attributed to strong supervision arrangements, a focus on staff wellbeing, and access to support mechanisms including mentoring and psychological services. From an adult services perspective, it was noted that managing sickness remained resource‑intensive, and improvements were being explored through the use of digital tools and automation to support management processes. Committee made a recommendation that future quarterly performance reports provide explanations around sickness trends to share good practice and learning across service areas. Officers agreed that this would be beneficial, and it was indicated that future reporting could incorporate analysis of positive trends and opportunities for cross‑service learning. Members requested further information on the increase in domiciliary care providers, including the size of providers and their sustainability. Officers confirmed that there had been a positive increase in provider capacity and hours delivered, resulting in reduced waiting lists. However, detailed information regarding provider size was not available at the meeting. It was suggested that this area could be explored in greater depth in future scrutiny work. Members queried whether there were entry‑level or progression pathways to attract younger individuals into care roles. Officers acknowledged recruitment challenges within the sector but highlighted ongoing work, including school engagement, regional workforce initiatives and internal training programmes. The ‘grow your own’ social work initiative was noted as a significant success in reducing vacancies. It was noted that the North Powys Wellbeing Hub, when progressed, would include a care facility to support training, with partners at Neath Port Talbot College Group working to develop social care provision in the area. Members asked whether families were supported to access financial benefits and grants. Officers confirmed that financial support formed part of routine service delivery, with staff assisting families to access all eligible benefits and funding, including through Early Help Hubs. Members raised concerns regarding underperformance of the measure that sought for increased volunteering opportunities for people with learning disabilities. Officers explained that this was linked to the ongoing Day Opportunities Review, which aimed to expand community‑based opportunities. Progress had been slower than anticipated due to workforce changes; however, additional capacity was expected to be introduced, which would support improvements in future performance.
• The Committee received the Corporate Safeguarding Board Activity Report, with a focus on the most recent meeting held on 12 March 2026. • An update on Regional Safeguarding Board activity was received, including National Safeguarding Week, safer sleeper guidance, and ongoing work priorities. • The Board was updated on the Gwynedd Child Practice Review, noting that Children’s Services had submitted a detailed response to Welsh Government via the regional board. • Concerns were raised regarding police checks, with actions discussed. • Significant discussion focused on responding to the Gwynedd Child Practice Review recommendations, particularly the importance of hearing the voice of the child. And existing policies, guidance, and tools supporting child-centred practice were reviewed, alongside recent audit findings demonstrating progress. • Ongoing work to promote participation and engagement, including youth forums and child protection conferences, was highlighted, with training identified as a key priority. • The Board recognised the scale of safeguarding activity and agreed to receive a further progress update once the new national strategy had been embedded. • Safeguarding in education was considered, including trends in elective home education, exclusions, and attendance. • Improvements in exclusions were noted, with a 25.5% reduction overall and a 51% reduction in exclusion days compared to the previous year. • Safeguarding training compliance was reviewed, with strong progress noted, though further improvement was required in some service areas. • The importance of governance and oversight by schools and governors was emphasised, and the safeguarding toolkit for governors was highlighted as effective. • Mandatory safeguarding training data was considered, with follow-up action identified for areas below the corporate average. • An update on the DRIVE programme noted concerns regarding capacity and workforce pressures. • The Future Focus action plan was reviewed, with updates received on progress, including contributions from Human Resources. • Work to refresh the volunteering policy was discussed, including improving access to training and central management of volunteer information. · The Board confirmed it would continue to oversee the action plan as a standing item. • Routine updates were received from Adult Social Care, Children’s Services, and Housing. The Portfolio Holder for a Caring Powys thanked officers for their comprehensive response regarding the North Wales Child Practice Review. It was noted as a significant piece of work that provided reassurance that, while further improvements were required, the associated risk had been identified and was considered to be significantly reduced as a result of the measures implemented. Issues Raised by the Committee: Responses Received: Members raised concerns regarding references in the report to increased demand, poor recording practices and issues relating to pressure damage within care homes. Clarification was sought on actions taken to address these concerns and whether they had been resolved. Officers advised that concerns identified through safeguarding data were escalated through commissioning arrangements and addressed directly with providers. This could be picked up by PTHB and where necessary: • Providers were supported through training and guidance, including input from health professionals. • Issues were reviewed through safeguarding and governance mechanisms. • Where patterns or themes were identified, targeted interventions could be implemented. • In cases of continued non‑compliance, corrective action plans, restrictions or potential suspension of placements could be applied. It was further clarified that these actions formed part of ongoing monitoring and improvement processes. Members sought clarification on the reference to a “rapid response process” within the report and whether this related to internal Council processes or external provider arrangements. Officers clarified that the rapid response element referenced a separate process to the care home concerns. The issues regarding recording and pressure damage related specifically to provider performance and were addressed through commissioning and safeguarding oversight arrangements. How would emerging risks relating to social media and digital platforms be addressed, monitored and reported on within safeguarding policies and practices going forward. Officers acknowledged that this was an evolving area and confirmed that: • Further national guidance was anticipated. • The issue could be considered at future Corporate Safeguarding Board meetings. • A coordinated response would be developed across services and with regional and national partners. It was recognised that safeguarding risks associated with social media were complex and would require a multi‑agency and cross‑service approach. The Committee made a recommendation that the implications of emerging risks relating to social media and online safety be brought to the next meeting of the Corporate Safeguarding Board for discussion, monitoring and future action.
Committee noted the items scheduled for their meeting on the 24th of June 2026. It was noted that the meeting of the 10th of July may have to be rescheduled due to Committee member availability.
Committee noted the Cabinet response to scrutiny recommendations.
Committee chose not to enter confidential session due to not needing to discuss the confidential Cabinet response to scrutiny recommendations in detail.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.