FRONT DOOR (including early help duty desk, dv triage and MASH) Evaluation Strengths Areas for improvement the effectiveness of out-of-hours provision at managing risk of harm through effective information sharing, referral and assessment (including the provision of emergency accommodation for children that go missing). (Some agencies rarely use out of hours provision).Police provide 24 hour service. PPU cover 7am -10pm with on call overnight. Ofsted – recognise LA as good practice, EDT working effectively, Children do not enter care unnecessarily out of hours. There is some confusion about adult mental health provision out of hours. Need to improve how we respond to children in police stations overnight. the impact of strategy discussions and any subsequent section 47 enquiries on actions taken to protect children and young people Significant improvement with MASH Not all agencies involved in Strategy discussions (eg Hospital, adult mental health). Perhaps LA to invite as needed and partner agencies. Once case goes to CAT-decision making can change, or step down, partners not always informed and unclear about rationale. How do we convey outcome of S47 to health agencies if they are not the referrer? the quality of management oversight, including: effectiveness of senior management audits of how well workers manage risk of harm through effective referral and assessment Independent audits - Ofsted auditing service and multi-agency audits Effective-Routine audit and oversight of cases in all agencies and include good practice. Some agencies assessments need sign off by management to include risk of harm to the child and hidden harm. EH & Social Care audits – improvement required for consistency Needs continuous improvement Need to audit Need to do some dip sampling audits. risk assessment and prioritisation of referrals Referrals sent in good time Built in to assessment process. Working effectively in MASH, improvements in screening seen. Need to re-audit regularly. case allocation and workload management Front Door- quick and cases are responded to in a timely manner. Caseload weighting includes safeguarding children factors. Performance meetings and Daily oversight (Police and social care) the quality and effectiveness of direct supervision, support and challenge Strong evidence – working across all partner agencies. Continue to embed
FRONT DOOR (including early help duty desk, dv triage and MASH) Evaluation Strengths Areas for improvement the effectiveness of the arrangements for informing and involving senior managers in decision-making Escalation and info sharing – senior managers are notified. Exec is hands on Senior managers “heavily involved” in safeguarding work Engagement in LSCB sub-groups and case audit. Middle managers need more time to disseminate information and quality assure. the effectiveness of escalation arrangements Clear processes. Not involving senior managers too early. Raising awareness of the process Is the procedure too complicated? Collate and review themes from disputes. how well leaders and managers know and understand what is happening at the ‘front door’ for their services Good understanding across all partners, Regular in-house briefings LSCB newsletter disseminated Good relationship with MASH Strengthening links with EH, Front door. Partners understanding which route to take – knowledge of the front door Staff understanding of front door, variable. how effectively leaders and managers use their knowledge to challenge and support practitioners and promote continuous improvement Leaders and Managers are knowledgeable. Good challenge – regarding practice and decision making through audits and improvement plan. Ofsted – recognised this as strength. Senior management meetings are focused to challenge performance and practice. Partners understanding which route to take – knowledge of the front door whether the LSCB actively monitors, promotes, coordinates and evaluates the work of the statutory partners that help, protect and care for children in the local area.” Escalation procedure is clear Actively monitoring performance from LA. CSE information supports LSCB in decision making processes. Guidance for schools is unduly procedural – needs to be clearer and shorter. Early Help safeguarding challenge. DA triage data sharing to enable effective decision making.
LSCB neglect workshop second exercise 28TH March 2017 Standard What are we doing well? What are we worried about? What needs to happen? How will we know we have got there? LSCB training should be available to all involved in safeguarding. Training is well received and evaluated Not always getting the right people Is training being implemented? LSCB should hold agencies to account re: who should attend. Individuals and agencies also need to take responsibility. When all people involved in safeguarding receive appropriate training. Parenting to be available Solihull Approach has been well evaluated Parenting strategy Not enough facilitators Not enough classes available Not a huge uptake Parents to be training facilitator Raise up take More facilitators need to be sourced Classes being available to more… Signs of safety being used across safeguarding Good feedback from SOS and professionals Training/support to professionals Briefings to other agencies. Support to use the model to be rolled out e.g. group supervision. Templates aligned to SOS When other agencies are able to use danger statement scaling and three columns confidently. Working together to support the issues for the child and family Good professional relationships. Skills across Solihull have improved through training. CP system working well. Some professionals can be complacent. Level 3 families, practitioners require more structure- processes-procedures, planned time to meet Section 11 Procedures for level 3 Escalate Process in place Review
LSCB neglect workshop second exercise 28TH March 2017 Standard What are we doing well? What are we worried about? What needs to happen? How will we know we have got there? Shared understanding through assessment using Graded Care Profile CP Graded Care Cumulative effect of neglect Perception of circumstances Consistency of approach ‘refer-assessment need to provide evidence to support decision makingIf to be sought by CS Consistent processes Wider use of graded care profile Evidence from GCP Referrals-quality will improve Make decisions with the them. Communication, advice and guidance Listen and get to know families Engage families well most of the time Good skills and persistence in engaging with families Families consent to gather and share information can stop practitioners sharing with each other Services not accessible Long term commitment of practitioners Solution focussed approach to family taken part in next steps/actions Continuity of care Get it right from the beginning be committed-confident-effective Parents will be able to identify for themselves areas of need Child tells their life is better Keep the child as the focus. The child’s voice and experience to be understood. Listen to the child Awareness to understand the child’s voice. Adult led services-support to look at views/experience of the child within the home. A measured approach Case audits Evidence improvements for children.
LSCB neglect workshop second exercise 28TH March 2017 Standard What are we doing well? What are we worried about? What needs to happen? How will we know we have got there? “Scrutiny compliance” professionals to recognise when parents are performing well under scrutiny. Beginning to recognise that parents are not engaging well. Dependency on professionals Challenge Prof not always sure what to do when parents are not engaging Use history/assessments to see if change is sustainable Look at trends Speak to other professionals Sustainable changes Duty under Section 11 around prioritising safeguarding children Processes compliant Processes not always compliant, esp at level 3 DRIFT and paralysis Structures and processes for children at level 3 neglect. Written structured procedures for level 3 Consistent arrangements in service provision Consistent language CP Frequent changes and ??? Consistent services and language Parents and professionals will have a shared understanding of services.