To receive an update on the Young People’s Drug and Alcohol Service.

The Cabinet Member for Children’s Services - Councillor Bye, Director of Children’s Services - Nancy Meehan and the Youth Hub Manager – Jessica Tucker, provided an overview of the submitted report regarding the Young People’s Drug and Alcohol Service and responded to questions.  Key points included:

·        Positive progress following new arrangements, with improved young people’s engagement;

·        Working towards a target of 130 young people;

·        Part of a wider focus on early relationship-building with young people;

·        Team expanding from 2 to 3 workers (June), strengthening delivery;

·        Partnership with the College supporting access and coordination;

·        Ongoing work to maintain engagement and shape next steps, informed by young people’s views; and

·        Recognising increased summer risk, with Public Health collaboration to promote safety messages.

Members asked questions in respect of the following:

·        Was the data on the age and gender profiles of young people receiving treatment locally compared with national data?

·        How did the service engage with young people who were not in school?

·        Were alternative locations available for young people who might not have felt comfortable engaging within the home?

·        Why were there no referrals from Checkpoint, and how could communication have been improved with partners such as paediatrics?

·        How common was the use of opioid substitute treatment among young people?

·        Did opioid use include both heroin and prescription medication?

·        Was a 33% conversion rate into structured treatment in line with expectations?

·        How did the service respond to referrals that were not appropriate for structured treatment?

·        Would future reports include comparative data over time?

·        Why were referrals not consistently received through GPs or paediatrics, particularly where young people had presented at emergency departments?

·        Could future updates have included detail on alternative pathways into support?

·        How was co-production with young people being used to shape the service?

·        How were services adapted to support children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND)?

·        How did the service consider neurodivergence in relation to substance use?

The following responses were received:

·        The data formed part of ongoing analysis, with early indications suggesting identifiable patterns within the local cohort;

·        Engagement with young people who were not in education remained a significant challenge.  As they could not be accessed through school settings, practitioners undertook outreach work, including home visits;

·        The service worked with partners, including the Youth Justice Team and community organisations, to provide neutral and familiar spaces for engagement;

·        Discussions with paediatrics services were scheduled, and opportunities to strengthen partnership working with Checkpoint were explored, including at joint events to improve communication and referral pathways;

·        This was currently uncommon, with very few cases locally.  However, there had been a shift in substance use trends towards synthetic and mixed substances, and work was underway with health partners alongside preventative activity;

·        Opioid use included both heroin and prescribed medications;

·        This was consistent with national benchmarks.  Work was ongoing to improve conversion rates through a personalised, relationship-based approach, although some referrals were not always appropriate;

·        All referrals were followed up.  While performance measures focused on structured treatment, wider engagement remained important, with the service maintaining contact and keeping pathways open, including through peer mentoring;

·        Reporting was provided on a quarterly basis, enabling comparison and ongoing monitoring;

·        This was explored further with health partners to better understand referral pathways.  Consideration was also given to refining performance measures to distinguish between referral routes;

·        Future updates included additional detail on alternative pathways and how these operated;

·        Peer mentoring was being developed as a key approach.  Young people helped shape the service, including developing harm reduction materials and digital content, although challenges remained in reaching those outside established access points;

·        Where Education, Health and Care Plans were in place, these were reviewed and treatment approaches were adapted to meet individual needs; and

·        Substance use could act as a coping mechanism for some neurodivergent young people. The service focused on prevention and worked with partners to address underlying factors affecting wellbeing.

Resolved (unanimously):

1.    that the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Board note the Young People’s Drug and Alcohol Service report;

2.    that the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny sub-board request that the Director of Children’s Services formally write to NHS Devon to seek clarification as to why referrals are not being consistently received by drug and alcohol services for children and young people who present at Accident and Emergency departments under the influence of substances;

3.    that future six-monthly updates to the Sub-Board include detailed information on any proposed or implemented alternative referral pathways for children and young people being influenced by drugs and/or alcohol, including what these pathways would look like in practice, the roles of partner agencies, and how outcomes will be measured and monitored; and

4.    that for future reporting for the Youth Justice Team, that Key performance data, information be detailed into the young people who are accessing as part of drug prevention order compared to those accessing through the Prevent Service.