Agenda item

To receive an update on domestic abuse within the Wokingham Borough

The Committee considered a report, set out in agenda pages 15 to 20, which gave an update on instances of domestic abuse within the Borough.

The report outlined a number of progress updates within the Domestic Abuse Strategy, including an increasing awareness of safe accommodation choices, provision of an inclusive range of accommodation options, provision of support for victim-survivors in safe accommodation, strengthened partnership working to drive and improve outcomes, and support for individuals to help them to begin rebuilding their lives.

Narinder Brar (Community Safety Manager) and Steve Moore (Interim Director of Place and Growth) attended the meeting to answer member queries.

During the ensuing discussion, members raised the following points and queries:

·         The Committee thanked Narinder Brar and her team for a great deal of hard work in providing an essential service;

·         Was a detailed breakdown of where instances of domestic abuse took place within the Borough available? Officer response – A more granular breakdown was being worked on for the future, which would be reported on a quarterly basis.

·         Would the strategy be taken to the residents’ equality forum? Officer response – There was a real drive to reduce any barriers to accessing services where possible, and it was key to not homogenise different communities. The residents’ forum was one area which could be included more in the future to help achieve these aims.

·         Would a range of KPIs and their performance be available for the Committee to view at a later date? Officer response – A full suite of KPIs were being developed, and these could be reported to the Committee in future.

·         Could officers confirm that no-one escaping domestic abuse within the Borough had been turned away? Officer response – This was correct. There was a 3-bed refuge available within the Borough, whilst housing and homelessness legislation was in place as a safety net to allow safe accommodation to be provided by Wokingham Borough Council (WBC).

·         Was there an update on the 2021 Community Safety Partnership contract which included provision of services to schools to work with children who had seen or suffered domestic abuse? Officer response – This was quite a specialised area of work, and Cranstoun had recruited a young people’s worker who was now on maternity leave. Plans were in motion to get play therapy, one to one counselling, drama therapy and counselling therapy back on track and delivered.

·         What successes had been realised in the perpetrator intervention programme to help to address abusive behaviours? Officer response – There had been a number of challenges at the start of this programme, and more details on uptake and successes would be circulated to the Committee.

·         How had the independent domestic violence advocate service been working? Officer response – Advisors were allocated to an individual once they had been risk assessed. Advisors would work flexibly with victims dependent on their individual needs, with face to face meetings or advice given via phone call in a way that was safe. This strategy was front and centre of the overall service provided by WBC.

·         It was noted that a list of the 30 and above partner organisations that worked alongside WBC to support the strategy would be circulated to the Committee.

·         What additional actions, facilities and interventions would be put in place to ensure that Ukrainian refugees being housed within the Borough were being kept safe from domestic abuse? Officer response – Officers were working closely across departments and organisations on a number of different projects in relation to the introduction of a number of Ukrainian refugees locally, for example tying this in with the modern slavery agenda to ensure there was no abuse of power. Information was being translated to allow refugees to understand and access information first-hand, whilst there were pieces being circulated around education on what is culturally acceptable within the UK. Detailed training was being provided to case workers who would be working directly with guests to make them more acutely aware of indicators around all forms of abuse. Information was being provided to let refugees know that they can trust and talk to the police and WBC officers kin case they were in need of help.

·         It was agreed that an update report be provided in 6 months’ time to update to Committee on any domestic abuse interventions that have had to take place, and any additional resources required to support Ukrainian refugees.

·         What percentage of victims returned to their abusers, and what percentage of abusers were serial abusers? Officer response – Data was not currently being collected in relation to how many victims returned to their abusers, however national and global research was being undertaken within this area. Whilst a huge amount of work was being carried out with perpetrators in order to break the cycle of abusive relationships and harmful behaviours in relationships, the data around it was not currently available locally. Unfortunately the sad truth was that individuals who experienced domestic abuse as children tended to repeat that behaviour, either as an abuser or a victim, in their adult life. Children were now recognised as victims within their own right, which resulted in dedicated services and support being put in place for children to help break the cycle.

·         Where were most referrals received from, and how quickly were they actioned? Officer response – Most referrals were received from the police and social care, whilst a number of self-referrals were also received. The new domestic abuse contract had introduced new SLAs which had increased the speed at which victims were contacted. Performance against these SLAs would be circulated to the Committee.

·         How much did the service cost to provide, and how much of this was funded by central Government? Officer response – An overall contract breakdown and the total cost of the service would be circulated to the Committee.

·         Would central Government funding likely be reviewed in future? Officer response – Officers had expected a three-year funding settlement, however only a one-year settlement was agreed. £250k was agreed this year, and a similar figure was expected this year.

·         What was the occupancy level at the WBC refuge? Officer response – A sharp increase in people accessing the service was expected during the pandemic, however this was not quite realised in Wokingham, however since restrictions had been relaxed a steady increase in demand had been realised. Occupancy levels would be circulated to the Committee, however the refuge was almost always full and quite often full of people from neighbouring Boroughs as it was not always safe to access a refuge within your home Borough, whilst reciprocal arrangements were in place with other local authorities.

·         What coverage was in place for single points of failure, for example the single officer working with schools? Officer response – This was a commissioned service for one children and young people worker, and a temporary member of staff would provide cover for the maternity period. Additional demand was being placed on this service than was originally anticipated. It was incumbent on the supplier to provide support to ensure that one full-time-equivalent member of staff was carrying out the work as required by the contract.

·         Were figures available detailing how many victims were being housed via social services or homelessness provision? Interim Director response – From a relatively low base, those fleeing domestic abuse had quadrupled in Wokingham in the past 6 months. Demand was being met through a variety of appropriate provisions, whether that be the dedicated refuge or WBC owned housing.

·         A number of questions were provided to officers prior to the meeting. Written answers to the below questions would be circulated to the Committee.

1) Who has been consulted and given input into this report?

2) The report acknowledges the need for more data and to compare it with the census results to check for representation. Of the 2700 women and 1500 men affected annually, what else do we know e.g. age, disability, LGBTQ+, ethnicity etc. How do these demographics impact the needs of the victims?

3) What are the different needs of male and female victims (and other demographics)? Are they being met? We heard from Cranstoun the difficulties in getting ethnic minority women to come forward. Later in the report it suggests that men are under-represented when it comes to accessing services but why is this? Perhaps their needs are different.

4) Refuge provision - It is clear that there is a need to get a long term strategy in place for this which considers current provision and future needs. Currently there is no local refuge provision for families or those with complex needs. This is a gap which we heard from Cranstoun and I've also heard this from Berkshire Women’s Aid previously. How are we currently meeting the needs of these victims?

5) Data and demographics - we are funding a pilot for a support worker for older people. How do we know this is a priority and best use of available funds?

6) Could additional information be provided in relation to the "networking group that has regular attendance by 30+ representatives of local DA services". What is this group, how often does it meet, who attends, what is the purpose and impact?

7) Are Cranstoun delivering according to what they are contracted for? Also, what specifically are the gaps on top of currently commissioned services - what's the process to find this out?

·         How did the reciprocal arrangements with other local authorities work in practice? Officer response – There was a national data pool of refuge provision that professionals had access to, which allowed matches to take place between victims and refuge provision. Provision was often sought where a victim had existing support, for example near family or friends, whilst allowing the victim to shop at a different supermarket but still often close enough to complete a school run or attend work. Each placement was carried out on a case-by-case basis dependant on the victim’s individual needs. This was a flexible and victim orientated service, and just because Wokingham only had a three-bed refuge did not mean that is all it could access elsewhere.

·         Once a victim had left the Borough to be placed in another area, did WBC officers remain in contact with the victim? Officer response – Liaison was undertaken for a period of time between local authorities, and if a placement was more permanent then a period of handover was undertaken with a variety of agencies including children’s services, MARAC, and the local domestic abuse provider.

·         Was there a standard level and quality of accommodation provided across the country? Officer response – The quality and standard of accommodation varied, however officers did visit accommodation within other Boroughs and also visited purpose built accommodation to see examples of best practice.

RESOLVED That:

1)      Narinder Brar and Steve Moore be thanked for attending the meeting;

2)      A detailed breakdown of where instances of domestic abuse took place within the Borough be provided at a future meeting of the Committee;

3)      The full suite of KPIs currently being developed be reported at a future meeting of the Committee;

4)      Details on the uptake and successes of the perpetrator intervention programme be circulated to the Committee;

5)      An update report be provided in 6 months’ time to update to Committee on any domestic abuse interventions that have had to take place, and any additional resources required to support Ukrainian refugees;

6)      Performance against SLAs be circulated to the Committee;

7)      An overall contract breakdown and the total cost of the service be circulated to the Committee;

8)      Occupancy levels of the Wokingham refuge be circulated to the Committee;

9)      Written answers be provided to the list of seven questions sent into officers and detailed within the minutes.