Appendix B Action Plan RECOMMENDATION Scope of recommendation Action to be taken Lead Agency Key milestones to recommendation Target date Progress indicator Agency response to recommendations Date of completion and outcome What is the recommendation? Local, regional, or national level? How relevant agency will make this recommendation happen? What actions need to From date of publication of report – 13 October 2016. Red Amber Green Recommendation 1: Any existing protocol that exists between GPs and The Trust for emergency referrals be reviewed and clarity communicated about expectations. Local Review existing current protocols for GP referral to mental health services Develop and agree language used for level of immediacy of referral and assessment Ensure clear and effective processes are in place for communicating referrals, level of concern and outcomes Michael Lozano, Patient Safety & Complaints Lead Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust Dr Ed Garratt, Chief Accountable Officer Review existing protocols Amendments as required Communication to all parties of new protocols Review effectiveness of new protocols By 31/12/2016 By 31/01/2017 By 31/01/2017 By 31/03/2017 Email dated 15/11/2016 from Michael Lozano – Patient Safety and Complaints Lead, Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust. Response: The Trust discussed this recommendation with the Clinical Commissioning Group as part of its monthly quality meetings, held on Response from the Board. Form has been amended and updated. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the revised form diarised for June 2017. 14/06/2017 – Action: To be updated at
Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) 11 November. account of the time this event occurred and the ongoing monitoring of the Trust’s performance it was acknowledged that the current referral process has been embedded into practice now for an additional two years. In this context it was considered whether a change of any language may increase the potential risk of confusion. there are four hour assessments being requested GPs have the option of ringing this through to the Trust’s Access and Assessment September meeting. 18/10/2017 Update received from Louis regarding the effectiveness of the revised form as follows: Lois Wreathall, West CCG, reported that there have no further issues or complaints since the revised form has been introduced. 18/10/2017 - COMPLETED
Recommendation 2: That the Local Safeguarding Children’s Board take steps to ensure that the range of support available is clear to all professionals who engage in work with children and families. Local Review current support services for families experiencing domestic violence Ensure all staff are aware of services available and have knowledge and understanding of how to access these services for families and offer these services Identify gaps in current provision and develop plan of how to address these gaps to maximise support to families and minimise risk to children and families Sue Hadley, Independent Chair Safeguarding Children’s Board List of support services available Publication / dissemination of above list to all relevant organisations Gaps in service identified Plan developed to address gaps By 01/12/2016 By 31/12/2016 By 31/12/2016 By 28/02/2017 Letter response from LSCB Chair, Sue Hadley dated 17/11/2016. Response: There is a new Domestic Abuse Strategy in Suffolk and the LSCB is supporting and monitoring this. The Suffolk Safer and Stronger Communities Group are overseeing this work and the Action Plan includes mapping commissioning of services to develop quality and consistency of service. The Action Plan also includes raising awareness of Domestic Abuse via a dedicated campaign and associated training across the partnership. The Safeguarding February 2017 – Further letter sent to LSCB Chair, Sue Hadley. The members have requested details of the leading on the Strategy and Action Plan in order to ensure that this work is being taken forward. 14/06/2017 – No response received. Action: Follow up response. 26/10/2017 Information provided
Children’s Board website provides a range of policies, procedures and guidance and the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub provides a dedicated Professional’s helpline to provide guidance and signposting to services. Recommendation 3: That the Local Safeguarding Children’s Board work in partnership with the County’s Education Department, C&YPS, the Courts and CAFCASS to review current processes in relation to Court Orders so that it properly supports the children and closes any potential safeguarding gaps. Local and Regional Review current protocols for information sharing for court orders Ensure protocols enable information to be shared when required to minimise risk to children Develop a partnership agreement as to how information is to be shared and how a lead professional in each organisation could be identified to work with the courts and child/young person to ensure effective and relevant information flow and provide support to the child/young person. Sue Hadley, Independent Chair, Local Safeguarding Children’s Board Current protocols reviewed processes for information sharing in place Partnership agreement in place By 31/12/2016 By 31/01/2017 By 28/02/2017 sent 12 August 2016 by Rebecca Dale, Safeguarding Administrator on behalf of Richard Green, Cafcass National Child Care Policy Manager. Response: The recommendation is to the LSCB and it is for them to decide whether and how to action it. However, as we previously explained, Cafcass is bound to comply with the Family February 2017 – Letter regarding sent to Adrian Orr, Assistant Director for Education. Response: I do not believe that it is within the sphere of influence of SCC Education and Learning to on
Procedure Rules regarding the sharing of information, other than where this is in the furtherance of child protection. Schools do not fall within that definition, so the permission of the court would be required. Letter response from LSCB dated 17/11/2016. Response: It was discussed that in this case, the schools knew there were private court proceedings but did not have a copy of the court order. Response: This is not the role of LSCB but a role for education and CYPS. Education will ensure that Court orders issued in the course of private law proceedings are routinely shared with schools. Currently, the responsibility sits with the child’s parent(s) to share a copy of any such Court order with the school where appropriate. As set out in the response from Cafcass, and included in the DHR overview report, it would require the permission of the Court to enable
safeguarding concerns. Schools are strongly recommended to sign up to this agreement. 26/10/2017 - COMPLETED Recommendation 4: That the Safeguarding Children’s Board work with the local Education Authority to review the policy about recording of incidents such as this within its schools with a view to ensuring all unexplained injuries are recorded and what steps are taken to seek explanation. Local Review current protocols for recording all unexplained injuries as noted by schools. Amend and update the above aforementioned protocols as required Ensure all schools are made of any changes and their role in recording and reporting any unexplained injuries and that this is disseminated to all staff Ensure all staff have suitable level of safeguarding training and awareness of when and how to report any safeguarding concerns Sue Hadley, Independent Chair Local Safeguarding Children’s Board Current protocols reviewed Protocols updated Information communicated to all Suffolk schools with clear guidance on informing staff All staff have up to date safeguarding training By 31/12/2016 Letter response from LSCB Chair dated 17/11/2016. Response: The current protocol has been reviewed and the current guidance is clear and adequate. It is felt that the school acted appropriately. Response: Clear and appropriate guidance is given to schools detailing how to record all unexplained injuries. Schools are well informed of the process to refer February 2017 – Letter regarding sent to Adrian Orr, Assistant Director for Education. Response: The DfE has issued statutory guidance to all schools, ‘Keeping Children Safe in Education’ which makes it clear that all staff members
on concerns and where to access additional advice. Schools are monitored through S175/S157 audits by the Designated Safeguarding leads. There is a robust overview system to ensure staff have safeguarding training and are aware of safeguarding concerns. within school should be aware of systems within their school or college which support safeguarding and that these should be explained to them as part of staff induction. The guidance makes it clear that all staff should receive appropriate safeguarding and child protection training which is regularly updated. The guidance further sets out an expectation in the section headed ‘Record keeping’ that ‘All concerns, discussions and decisions made and the
Area Quality Reviews; dip sampling by senior managers etc. We are not persuaded currently that a further formal review is required. Can we suggest therefore that the recommendation is removed? Recommendation 6: That the Home Office consider adding CAFCASS as a statutory body within the meaning of the Act. National For the Home Office to review role of statutory bodies within the Act and whether CAFCASS should be an addition Christian Papalleontiou, of the DHR Quality Assurance Panel Home Office 30/11/2016 Letter sent to Mr Christian Papalleontiou, Chair of the DHR Quality Assurance Panel at the Home Office. Although the Lead Agency for Recommendation 6 is the Home Office, a letter from LSCB Chair dated 17/11/2016 has included a response to this 13/01/2017 – Response received from Chair of the Home Office DHR Quality Assurance Panel – Christian Papaleontiou. The Home Office have discussed CAFCASS involvement and in relation to DHRs, CAFCASS seeks the court’s permission for
Recommendation. Response: Section 13 of the Children Act 2004 sets out those organisations who must be included on LSCB membership as a statutory partner. Cafcass are included on this Statutory list. Although this is a Cafcass recommendation, on reading the DHR and considering the current Serious Case Review undertaken by the LSCB, a question has arisen to be put to Cafcass. ‘When an immediate disclosure is made and/or immediate Child Protection concerns are identified, is it clear to all Cafcass staff that in addition to completing their disclosure on a case by case basis. The Home Office are keen to ensure that the resources CAFCAS have available are primarily invested in Serious Case Reviews. CAFCASS will not to be included as a statutory body within the meaning of the Act for DHRs, although the Home Office will keep this under review. 14/06/2017 - COMPLETED
assessment as agreed in the LSCB should be made to the Local Authority, CYPS?’ Recommendation 7: That a clear partnership governance structure be established for the strategic leadership of domestic abuse within Suffolk Regional Identify and gain agreement of key organisation required to develop a county wide strategic leadership approach Develop a governance arrangement for strategic leadership for domestic abuse across Suffolk Identify for domestic abuse within each organisation Develop clear terms of reference for strategic roles to enable each organisation to understand their role and function within the county in preventing and reducing harm caused by domestic abuse. **Chair of Community Safety Partnership to co-ordinate with Police and Crime Commissioner ** Following the WSCSP meeting on 15 November 2016, WSCSP members agreed that the Lead Agency for this is incorrect and should be amended to the Health and Wellbeing Board being the Lead Agency. Ian Gallin, Chair of Suffolk Health and Wellbeing Board By 31/01/2017 Letter sent 14/12/2016 to Chair of Suffolk Health and Wellbeing Board, Tony Goldson. Response: 28/01/2017 Letter received from Cllr Tony Goldson, Chair Health and Wellbeing Board providing an update on progress in relation to each of the actions listed in the DHR action plan and, where we feel more clarity is needed in order for us to accurately respond. 06/06/2017 Contacted DHR Author GG for clarification on Action 4 regarding clear terms of reference for strategic roles. GG advised that since the action plan was produced at the time of writing there was no clear governance for multi-agency strategic development of DA across the county. Part rested with the police, part with the police and crime commissioner, part with the
Identify and gain agreement of key organisations (Action 1) Response: Agreement made by all HWB members in September 2016 for them to take the strategic responsibility for DA in Suffolk and for the SSCG to be responsible for the implementation following the Suffolk Domestic Abuse Interim Review. SDAP will be the partnership. Develop a governance arrangement (Action 2). local authority. When GG asked what was the governance for DA across the county no-one could say. However, since then this work is being progressed County Wide and a Domestic Abuse Interim Report has been produced. 14/06/2017