• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Draft V6 DAG 050817 Next Review Date August 2018 Contents

Draft V6 DAG 050817 Next Review Date August 2018 1. Introduction

Introduction to the Quality Assurance Framework Achieving for Children (AfC) is committed to providing the very best services to children and their families and by doing so, increasing the life chances of those children so that they can live healthier, happier and safer lives.

In order to strengthen existing practice, AfC is adopting the Signs of Safety model. This is being implemented over a two year period starting in May 2017 and will need a further three years to fully embed after the implementation is completed in the Summer of 2019.

This AfC Quality Assurance Framework sets out our approach for monitoring the quality of our services and sets clear standards, explains how we will measure and monitor quality and impact, and describes how we will collect, interpret and use data and other information to drive innovation and improvement. We are integrating some of the Signs of Safety Quality Assurance System1 into our own framework to further enhance how we assure ourselves of what is working well, how we identify what we need to focus on further and what changes we need to make.

The framework will be used as a tool to support the consolidation and development of innovative and effective professional practice and to provide assurances that services are responsive, efficient and cost effective. Findings and outcomes will be used to further develop practice, policies and systems and inform future quality assurance activities.

A skill and motivated workforce, working within a learning organisation, is central to delivering high quality services. By providing effective induction, supervision, professional development and support to our workforce, we will sustain good standards of practice. We routinely test the effectiveness of our practice by listening to the views of children, young people and their families. And we listen to our staff and partners about what is working well and what needs to be developed further.

Alongside internal quality assurance systems, such as Practice Week and audit activities, this framework includes mechanisms for the external assurance of our services, including those of the Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB), elected member scrutiny, peer challenge and statutory inspection.

The Quality Assurance Framework is reviewed annually to ensure that it continues to be relevant and focused. The review is the responsibility of the Director of Improvement. National context The continuing developments and expectations of national policy and legislation relating to children and their families and the unprecedented reductions in public sector funding, present significant challenges to meet statutory requirements and deliver services efficiently and effectively whilst continuing to focus on improving outcomes for children, young people and their families.

Quality assurance is key in providing a framework for evidencing what is working well, what needs greater focus and what needs to change.

Purpose of the Quality Assurance Framework

1 Signs of Safety Quality Assurance System Version 1.0.0 2015-17, Munro, Turnell and Murphy Child Protection Consultancy

3 The purpose of the Quality Assurance Framework is to support children to reach their potential by improving outcomes and we do that by providing consistently high quality, effective and meaningful services by:

• embedding quality through clearly articulated practice standards • regularly monitoring and evaluating services against agreed standards • seeking regular feedback from children, young people and their families and carers • developing an organisational culture committed to quality and innovation • listening to, and valuing staff views and opinions • apply the learning from quality assurance activities to support continuous development and improvement across the organisation

The foundation of AfC’s Quality Assurance Framework is illustrated in the diagram below, identifying the importance of four key approaches to obtaining a holistic view in relation to the quality of practice and service delivery. The Framework can be simplistically shown as a square where the focus of seeking information and assurance is centred on four key areas:

Activities and processes supporting the framework

4 Children and families • Participation activities • View point used at child protection conferences and child looked after reviews • Focus groups • Practice Week • Corporate Parenting Board • Children in Care Council • Complaints and compliments

Practitioners voices • Staff Council • Practice Week • Annual survey • Exit interviews • Individual projects • Feedback to the Chief Executive and Senior Leaders • Drop in sessions

Quantitative data • Weekly Summary Reports • Monthly data set presented at Performance, Quality and Innovation Board • Collated data reports on key performance • Service, team, worker level data • Monthly performance reports to the AfC Board and the Council’s Operational Commissioning Group • Annual (year-end) performance reporting

Qualitative data • Practice Week • Reports from services and teams • Qualitative audit including peer audits, multi-agency audits and managers’ audits • Supervision audits • Direct observations of practice • Appreciative evaluation • Case and learning reviews

Principles of the Quality Assurance Framework

5 To ensure that the Quality Assurance Framework is effective, it is underpinned by a series of principles.

• AfC is adopting the Signs of Safety approach as its practice model and will focus Quality Assurance on how practice delivers outcomes, the way practitioners practice and AfC leads and manages services within the model. • Quality relates to children’s and young people’s experiences of our services and their individual progress and outcomes. • Quality can be improved and is part of a continuous improvement cycle. • A collaborative approach whereby everyone working in AfC has a role and responsibility in consolidating the quality of our services and improving it where necessary. • Services need to be flexible and responsive. • Quality outcomes are achieved and sustainable when there is a skilled and motivated workforce working in multi-agency partnerships. • Comprehensive policies and procedures must be in place and used to support practitioners and managers in meeting high standards and delivering quality services. • Quality assurance draws together information from a wide evidence base to provide an overview of quality and identify areas for consolidation, for development and for improvement.

Quality assurance and the double learning loop Quality assurance is a continual and dynamic process that forms part of AfC’s overall business cycle; it is central to consolidating what is working well and improving what is not.

It is the process by which data and information is collected, evaluated (against agreed criteria and set of standards), and analysed to produce intelligence. The intelligence enables AfC to identify good practice, disseminate learning and take action to develop and improve quality.

Underpinning the Quality Assurance Framework is an understanding that continual improvement depends on a culture of reflection in action and reflection following action (reflection during practice and in supervision, consultation or discussion). This is then fed into the double learning loop2 for the practitioner, service and organisation so that we can re-think, plan appropriately, consolidate and improve.

The feedback learning loop Collection of this wealth of information needs to be purposeful and useful in providing a feedback loop to improve practice and outcomes for children. We need to know where our strengths and areas of development are to respond to themes that emerge. The following are key when completing an overall analysis report.

• Patterns and themes to be clearly identified, provided in concise form and acted upon.

2 Double learning loop – adapted from Agyris and Schon1978

6 • In order to ensure the information collected is current, there will be a short time period between the quality assurance activity and summary reports being provided, usually within 10 working days. • When shortfalls in practice are identified in different parts of the service and for individual practitioners, contextual issues will be considered, for example staff shortages or other resource issues. • Good practice exemplars will be used to help less experienced staff understand the standard required and develop their own knowledge and competence. • Front line managers will be given detailed feedback about the judgments made about practice within their teams and shortfalls addressed within the spirit of learning and improving.

2. Infrastructure

Quality Assurance Annual Plan There is an annual plan that outlines the timetable for quality assurance activities for the business cycle April to March each year. This is informed by findings from Practice Week, audit activities, serious case reviews and local learning lessons and complaints. It is overseen by the Director of Improvement.

Learning and Improvement Plan The Learning and Improvement provides a single plan within which all objectives and actions identified from quality assurance activities, serious case reviews, learning lessons reviews, management reviews and complaints are collated. The plan is overseen by the Deputy Chief Executive who leads the Business Services. Performance indicators Compliance with legislation and statutory guidance and the overall performance quality of services is measured using a range of performance indicators contained within core datasets. These are reviewed on an annual basis to check that they are all complaint and providing the business intelligence required.

The performance data is primarily drawn from the electronic recording systems as well as locally developed performance trackers and progress measurement tools. Practice standards Whilst performance indicators are useful, they are not the only source of information about performance, progress, and the quality of services. Practitioners and managers working in AfC will be supported in the delivery of their work by a set of practice standards. These are set out in Appendix A.

7 The practice standards define good practice and make explicit what is expected of practitioners when providing services to children, young people and their families.

They are based on evidence about the elements of practice that are most likely to lead to high- quality services and positive outcomes for children and young people. These practice standards will be used to deliver, commission, manage, monitor and evaluate our services, and in other areas where an objective measure of practice is needed.

Supervision and the annual professional development scheme will be key mechanisms for managers to review individual practice against the practice standards. Any employee who does not meet the required standards will be given support to enable them to achieve these. If they continue to not meet the required standards the employee may be the subject of informal or formal capability procedures. Quality assurance methods In order to be reassured that services and practices within AfC are effective and make a positive difference to children, young people and their families there needs to be robust and meaningful monitoring and assuring on a regular basis. The key processes are collaborative case auditing, observations and conversations with children, families and staff.

Random selections of casework will be audited as part of Practice Week and the themed audit process, in accordance with the annual programme.

The Collaborative Case Audit3 offers a participatory methodology for reviewing and improving case practice assessment and planning which is designed to be undertaken thorough a participative learning process together with the practitioner (and managers as appropriate) responsible for the work since this consistently delivers a more robust and detailed picture of the practice, constructed from and with those who have the best intelligence about the case.

The audit process will also include multi-agency casework audits in partnership with health, police and probation services, led by the LSCB.

Observational quality assurance activities with practitioners and managers will be a key element of Practice Week and, as relevant, in themed audits. Again, the key here is that those being observed experience the activities being undertaken ‘with’ them in such a way that it is experienced as a partnership and a learning opportunity.

Obtaining feedback from children and their families and carers is fundamental to understanding what is working well and what is not working well. This will be done in a variety of ways including conversations, surveys and using tools.

The Business Service is responsible for collating and analysing the findings from the quality assurance activities and sharing these in a timely and effective manner with the Senior Leadership Team and to relevant bodies and meetings.

• identify aspects of practice and management that are working well, including learning from good practice

3 Signs of Safety Quality Assurance System Version 1.0.0 2015-17, Munro, Turnell and Murphy Child Protection Consultancy

8 • identify areas for improvement, evidencing the key issues with examples • identify emerging themes • identify learning and development needs for the workforce making recommendations for improvement

Monthly Performance, Quality and Innovation Board The PQI Board meets monthly and is chaired by the Director of Improvement supported by the Director of Social Care. The purpose of the Board4 is to:

• scrutinise and monitor data to identify areas for focus

• identify achievements and share good practice • review audit activity, analysis, and findings • reflect on performance in line with local context and messages from research • identify themes and improvement priorities and agree how these can be achieved • think innovatively about what we can do differently to improve the impact for children and their families. The Directors and Heads of Service are responsible for ensuring that the conclusions and recommendations of quality assurance activities are disseminated through their staff groups. Practice Week In April 2017, AfC adopted the ‘Practice Week’ methodology (Appendix C) as one of the key quality assurance methods. This incorporates a more holistic and collaborative approach whereby case discussions and practice activities are completed alongside the practitioner. Practice Week will take place over a course of one week – five working days and will occur two to three times a year.

There is a dual purpose to the week, the intention being to both assure the quality of work and also to influence front line practice by facilitating reflection on case direction, work undertaken and case recording. Comments and feedback is provided to the practitioners at the time in order to encourage learning and then the case discussion documents are uploaded on to the case records. The full documentation about Practice Week is included in Appendix C.

The findings from the Practice Week will inform a range of other quality assurance activities including themed audits, surveys, focus groups and observations. 3. Quality assurance processes

Complaints monitoring Complaints about children’s services are managed in line with Regulation 13 of the Children Act 1989 (Representations Procedure) 2006. The designated complaints manager monitors the complaints system and raises issues requiring immediate attention with the relevant team manager or service manager. All other complaints are managed in line with Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the corporate complaints procedure. The complaints’ manager will compile a quarterly report on children’s services complaints for the Director of Improvement.

4 Terms of Reference Appendix J

9 All responses to Stage 1 and Stage 2 complaints are sent to the Council’s complaints manager who will identify any themes from the complaints and the actions that have been taken to resolve the issues identified. The complaints manager will produce a quarterly report on corporate complaints for review by the Performance, Quality and Innovation Board. Feedback from children, young people and families Children in need and child protection When a decision is made to convene an initial child protection conference, children and their parents or carers are offered the opportunity to meet with the conference chair before the conference. The purpose of the meeting is to ensure that they are fully engaged in the conference process.

Every child over the age of 11 years is given a letter through their social worker which gives them a range of options available for them engage in the conference process. Each child over the age of 11 years old is given the opportunity to meet with the designed Viewpoint participation officer to discuss and collate their views using an online questionnaire. For children aged under 11 years, or those 11 years or more that do wish to attend, their views are represented at the conference by their social worker.

The cumulated results from the Viewpoint surveys will be reviewed and reported by the Child Protection Conferencing Service and IRO Service Managers on a quarterly basis as part of the IRO and CP Conference service quarterly QA report. Emerging Issues and themes will be reviewed quarterly by the Performance, Quality and Innovation Board and actions added to the Learning and Improvement Plans.

There are plans to expand Viewpoint for children in need over the next year so that they have the same opportunities to contribute as children who are receiving other services. When this is in place the results will be used in the same way as they outlined above.

Looked after children The participation officer takes responsibility for ensuring that the views and opinions of children looked after are listened to and reported to the IRO so that appropriate care planning takes place.

All children looked after are invited to attend their review meeting. Older children looked after will be invited to co-chair or chair their own review with the support of their independent reviewing officer.

As with the child protection conference process, quarterly report is provided which analyses the responses made by children and young people who have completed the Viewpoint online survey. The cumulated results from the Viewpoint surveys will be reviewed by the Performance, Quality and Innovation Board to ensure that individual issues and themes can be addressed as part of the improvement cycle.

Wider engagement of children and young people AfC’s Children’s Services Engagement Strategy sets out a clear commitment to engage children and young people in the development, planning, delivery and review of the services provided to them. The views, opinions, wishes, feelings and experiences of young people will be systematically collected, triangulated and analysed through use of a number of mechanisms, including:

• the coordination of participation groups such as the Youth Council and Children in Care Council

10 • facilitated focus groups to explore young people’s experiences of services • facilitated consultation on strategy, policy and service development via the Youth Scrutiny Panel

Feedback from practitioners and managers As already mentioned, a monthly Performance, Quality and Innovation Board is held on a monthly basis. The board is chaired by the Director of Improvement and attended by the associate directors, heads of service, and team managers across the division. It provides a forum for heads of service and frontline managers to actively reflect and contribute to service improvement.

Supervision is also an essential mechanism for obtaining the views of frontline practitioners and managers, such views are routinely and regularly fed into the quality assurance and improvement cycle. The Supervision Policy sets out that supervision should balance casework discussion, reflection on practice issues, and the identification of professional development needs. Audits of supervision records are undertaken and an annual survey of all practitioners is undertaken to assess the quality of supervision they receive. Child protection (CP) conference minutes and reports Child protection conference chairs have a central role to play in assuring the quality of child protection planning and review, and in recommending improvements to practice.

All records and reports from initial and review child protection conferences will be recorded on ICS. All records will be signed off by the relevant CP conference chair and the social workers reports will be signed off by the relevant team manager. Associate Directors and Heads of Service are responsible for undertaking dip-sampling of records and reports for quality at regular intervals.

If a child protection conference chair becomes aware of a practice concern that may place a child or young person at risk of harm, they will escalate the matter using the Escalation Protocol. Independent Reviewing Officer records and reports Independent Reviewing Officers have a central role to play in assuring the quality and appropriateness of services to children looked after, and in recommending improvements to practice.

All records and reports from children looked after reviews will be recorded in the ICS system.

If an Independent Reviewing Officer becomes aware of a practice concern that may place a child or young person at risk of harm, they will escalate the matter using the Escalation Protocol. Performance information A core dataset collates the key performance information needed to measure service activity and compliance. It is important the organisation receives business intelligence that can support the organisation in managing its overall performance, and quality assure its services.

Performance data is presented in as follows.

• Weekly performance reports detailing some key steps in the journey of the child including contacts, referrals, assessments, case allocations, numbers of children subject to child protection plans, number of children looked after, timeliness of visits and case closures.

11 • Weekly summary reports are written using the weekly performance reports to provide a focused view on what is working well, what is not working as well and what needs to happen. The summary reports are sent to the Director of Children’s Service, the Children’s Service Director, the Associate Directors and the Head of the Intelligence Service. The expectation is that the reports will be used at the weekly performance meetings or huddle by the Children’s Service Director to identify key actions with their management groups. • Monthly performance reports detailing referrals, case allocations, assessments, child protection planning, children looked after and care leavers. These reports will include year-on-year comparative data to map performance trends. The data will be scrutinised in the Performance, Quality and Innovation Board to develop a fuller understanding of service performance and to ensure there is a proactive approach to identifying common themes or specific issues requiring action. • The LSCB will produce a quarterly multi-agency dataset detailing performance information and data analysis from children’s social care, health services, the police and the probation service. The data will be presented to the LSCB Quality Assurance Group and scrutinised at the full LSCB meeting to develop a fuller understanding of multi- agency performance in safeguarding and to ensure there is a proactive approach to identifying common themes or specific issues requiring multi-agency or single-agency action. • The quarterly performance reports presented to the Operational Commissioning Group will provide a full analysis of performance and progress against the agreed contractual indicator set, including year-on-year comparative data to map performance trends. This performance summary will form a key part of the annual report and it will be presented to the LSCB, and the elected member scrutiny committee. • Annual data returns, for example child in need census, will be reported externally to the Department for Education. Serious case reviews The criteria for conducting a serious case review (SCR) are contained in Working Together to Safeguard Children (2015). The independent chair of the LSCB is responsible for initiating a serious case review when a child or young person dies or suffers a serious injury or impairment, and abuse or neglect is known or suspected to be a factor. An SCR must also be carried out when a child or young person dies in police custody, in a youth offending institution, in a secure training centre, or where the young person was detained under the Mental Health Act 2005.

The independent chair, through the LSCB Professional Advisor, is responsible for appointing an independent chairperson and overview report writer for the SCR. Each SCR must include an individual management review (IMR) from each agency involved with the child or young person, setting out how appropriately and effectively the agency met its responsibilities and developing an action plan to implement improvements. The action plans from each IMR will be reviewed by the Director of Children’s Social Care and collated into a composite action plan by the LSCB Professional Advisor.

Challenge and quality assurance is provided by the AfC Deputy Chief Executive supported by the Director of Improvement. The LSCB is responsible for monitoring implementation of the composite action plan, holding agencies to account for making the required improvements, and for ensuring that learning from the SCR is fully embedded across the multi-agency. The issues raised in the IMR and SCR will inform the LSCB multi-agency audit programme. Audit

12 The purpose of audit is to provide a structured framework for the process of casework audits, creating a culture in which the quantitative and qualitative aspects of case management are routinely examined and reported in a systematic way to improve our understanding of what is working well, what is not working so well and what needs to happen or change to improve the outcomes for children, young people and their families. Although these two aspects of auditing can be conducted independently, they are both necessary to ensure a total quality management approach.

Quantitative auditing considers whether the record is up-to-date, that it contains all the relevant documentation, and that the documentation has been properly completed within timescale.

Qualitative auditing considers the quality of the information and recording on the child’s or young person’s file, the quality of the decision making process, risk assessment and analysis, and whether the decision-making and actions reflect good practice.

It is important that activities such as casework auditing are not a one-off event or stand- alone activity, but are a continuous cycle to plan, action and review services to improve outcomes for children by developing knowledge and professional practice. The audit process will be used to recognise areas of good or outstanding practice, as well as to identify areas for improvement, or where action is required to correct poor practice.

In addition to formal casework audit, all managers and staff are responsible for reviewing case records on a regular basis, and ensuring they take prompt action to address gaps in information.

Supervision is a key tool in ensuring accountability and support, learning and professional development across the children’s social care workforce. An important element in reflective supervision is enabling staff to question their practice, critically analyse and evaluate their experiences, and debrief after challenging or stressful encounters.

A systematic approach to quality assurance, coupled with a cycle of continuous learning and constructive challenge, will support an open learning culture across the organisation which will help to develop confident practitioners who take pride in the work they do.

(1) Routine Peer Audit Cases will be randomly selected by the performance team from the case management system, as agreed. The performance team will ensure that those cases selected for each audit have not been audited within the preceding 12 months.

All audits will be evidence-based, requiring the auditor to evaluate the information available in line with the practice standards, making a judgement about the overall quality of the case work (based on the last 12 months’ activity) using the four point Ofsted grade scale.

Whilst the audit tools include focused questions relating to the practice or service area, all auditors are required to consider:

• the extent to which the child or young person has been assessed and responded to with appropriate help and protection • the impact and effectiveness of the support and services being provided and the impact these are having • how the views of the child and young person have been ascertained and used to inform their plan • the quality and timeliness of management oversight and decision making

13 • the extent to which the lead professional is working in partnership, including effectiveness of information sharing

On completion of the audit, the auditor will provide the worker and their manager with a copy of the completed audit record and arrange to meet with them to discuss the findings of audit. The meeting provides an opportunity for the auditor and the worker to hold a reflective discussion which should highlight areas of good practice as well as those areas identified for improvement. The allocated worker’s manager is responsible for recording the agreed actions and timescales on the case record, within the case management or supervision section of the electronic recording system. The manager is responsible for ensuring the actions are completed within timescale, to completion, and for the ongoing qualitative checking of the case record. The case reflection sheet should be held by the worker as part of their personal continual professional development record.

(2) Thematic Audit The primary purpose of a thematic audit is to identify and develop understanding in respect of a service, area of practice or issue, in order to assess the quality of practice. A thematic audit will follow an area of work across different teams or services and will examine a particular theme over a period of time and include a variety of methods, such as file audits and direct interviews or focus groups with staff across the relevant service and with other key stakeholders. The desired outcomes of a thematic audit are to: • identify areas of good practice for dissemination • identify areas of developmental need for further targeted improvement work or intensified management direction • provide evidence-based robust assessment of critical areas of service An audit specification or brief will be agreed by the Director of Improvement, the director of the service and the auditor, prior to the audit commencing. This will include the audit scope, objectives, agreed outcomes, timescale for completion, and process for reporting back the findings.

(3) Observational Audit Learning at and through work is an essential means of employee development. Direct observation involves a manager or supervisor observing a worker, carrying out a task, evaluating their practice and performance and providing structured feedback. Every worker will be observed at least once a year by their manager. This may include a visit to a child or young person and their family or carer, a network or core group meeting, a child or young person’s review meeting, a child protection conference or a looked after child’s review.

An observational audit is a pre-arranged process and needs to be clearly differentiated from supervision and appraisal. Direct observation will involve the observer being in the same room as the worker and the child, young person, family or carer. The observation may focus on specific tasks, skills, or capabilities.

The aim of direct observation is to support staff to develop within a learning environment, which will help to:

• identify strengths and share good practice • improve individual and organisational performance

14 • achieve greater consistency; • enhance the quality of service provided In the context of improved learning and performance, direct observation provides an opportunity for the manager to check a worker’s perception of their practice by comparing their observations with the workers recollections. It is therefore not only a powerful quality assurance tool, but also an important part of the learning process in terms of developing competence and professional capability.

The observer will complete a record of the observational audit, which should be shared with the worker and their manager, who should reflect on the identified strengths and any areas for development in the next supervision meeting.

(4) Mid-way Audits – IROs and Child Protection Chairs Child Protection Conference Chairs (CPCCs) and Independent Reviewing Officers play a key role in planning and assuring the impact and quality of work undertaken by children’s social care. Their role is to check the quality of the work on a single and multi-agency basis that performance indicators and procedural requirements are met, and that plans for children and young people are outcome- based and meet the individual needs of the child or young person.

Each IRO and CPCC undertakes at least one mid-way audit a month. The purpose of the mid-way audit is for the IRO or CPCC to check that the child or young person’s plan is being progressed effectively by the multi-agency partnership and to ensure that the child or young person’s wishes and feelings are being given full consideration.

The audit will identify areas of good practice as well as any action required or areas that need to be improved. A copy of the mid-way audit will be shared with the social worker and their manager, and uploaded by the IRO or CPCC to the child’s electronic record. The allocated worker’s manager should discuss the audit findings in supervision and agree any action (including timescale) that is required. A record of this should be made by the manager in the supervision notes.

The Child Protection Conferencing Manager’s and Independent Reviewing Manager’s report on child protection conference and Children Looked After review activity to the Performance, Quality and Innovation Board on a quarterly basis. In addition, monthly liaison meetings are held with the operational service areas and attended by the IROs and CPCCs. The purpose of this meeting is to assure quality of practice, share learning and best practice and agree action required.

The Child Protection Conferencing Manager and Independent Reviewing Managers observe all IROs and CPCCs at least once a year to quality assure the approach and effectiveness of the chairing and safeguarding issues and care planning are appropriately addressed. A sample of child protection records and children looked after review reports are reviewed annually to quality assure them, that the conference or review has considered the relevant information, the quality of multi-agency decision making and threshold application.

Feedback from children, parents, carers and professionals is collected through a questionnaire, following a conference and is analysed quarterly for quality assurance and review. An annual report is published on the activity and review of the IRO service and child protection conference service, for presentation to the corporate parenting panel, AfC Board and Members.

A multi-agency sub-group of the Local Safeguarding Children’s Board undertakes quality audits of cases where there are two or more agencies working with a family. The core membership of this

15 group is based on social care, education, health and the police, with other agencies are involved where relevant.

These audits are agreed and commissioned annually by the LSCB quality assurance sub- group, with the findings reported via the LSCB to the independent chair.

4. Quality assurance roles and responsibilities

Service roles and responsibilities All staff are responsible for improving outcomes for children and young people and their families through effective assessment, care planning and review. All staff are individually responsible for understanding and operating to our practice standards, ensuring that their own work is of a consistently high quality and conducted in line with statutory requirements and local policies. It is equally important that frontline practitioners and managers are engaged in the process of quality assurance. A summary of the key service tasks relating to quality assurance are set out in Appendix C.

Those managers involved in quality assurance work share responsibility for encouraging and facilitating staff to be actively engaged in the quality assurance process. It is important that everyone plays a part in consolidating what is working well and developing better recording, systems and practice in those areas that are not yet as good as we want them to.

All staff All staff are responsible for:

• having a clear understanding of the operational objectives and standards of the service • complying with statutory requirements and guidance, and local policies and procedures • seeking and acting on feedback from children, young people and their families about their practice and service provided • meeting agreed practice standards and developing their individual performance • undertaking a critical evaluation of their work • maintaining accurate and timely case records • taking appropriate and timely action to respond to key objectives agreed in supervision and their personal development scheme

Team Leaders and Heads of Service Team managers are responsible for:

• mentoring and coaching newly-qualified and less experienced staff in the team • providing advice on the consistent application of thresholds

16 • providing clarity about the operational objectives and standards of the service • contributing to quality assurance work • seeking and acting on feedback from children, young people and their families about the team • resolving, responding to and reporting comments, compliments and complaints about their team • ensuring continuity in case management if the allocated practitioner changes • directly observing the practice of each team member at least twice a year • providing effective, high quality reflective supervision and performance management across the team • managing staff development through supervision and the personal development scheme

Associate Directors Associate Directors are responsible for:

• maintaining the overall quality, consistency and standards of the work delivered by the service • supporting team managers to resolve problems in meeting operational objectives and standards • promote a culture of performance and quality assurance is embedded in the operation of the service • providing advice on the consistent application of thresholds • providing clarity about the operational objectives and standards of the service • providing high quality reflective supervision and performance management across the service • reviewing, challenging and scrutinising casework and decision-making • seeking and acting on feedback from children, young people and their families about the service • being a reviewer in Practice Week and being part of other quality assurance work as requested • reporting strengths and areas for development to the relevant director • promote a culture whereby staff within the service are able and encouraged to contribute to quality assurance work.

Directors The Directors are responsible for: • providing clarity about strategic direction and the operational objectives and standards of services • monitoring the overall quality, consistency and standards of the work delivered by services • supporting Assistant Directors to resolve problems in meeting operational objectives and standards • promoting a culture of performance and quality assurance is embedded in the operation of services • providing high quality reflective supervision and performance management across the service • include the voices of children, young people and their families in service development • being a reviewer in Practice Week and being part of other quality assurance work as requested

17 • reporting on the quality of services to the LSCB and Corporate Parenting • promote a culture whereby staff within the service are able and encouraged to contribute to quality assurance work

Internal challenge and quality assurance Business Services are responsible for leading internal challenge and scrutiny of all services within AfC including early help and intervention services, and children’s social care, health and education services. They take a proactive approach to assuring the overall quality of work and compliance with legislation, statutory guidelines, practice standards and agreed priorities. The service is led by the Deputy Chief Executive with responsibility for coordinating quality assurance work taken by the Director of Improvement and Associate Director of the Intelligence and Systems Service. Other key quality assurance posts within Business Services are the Assistant Director of Quality and Assurance and Review, Assistant Director of Business Planning, Assistant Director of Children’s Workforce Development, Independent Reviewing Officers, Child Protection Conference Chairs and the Designated Officer. A summary of Business service key tasks in relation to quality assurance are set out in Appendix C.

Independent Reviewing Officers The primary focus of the independent reviewing officers is to quality assure the care planning and review process for children looked after and to ensure that their current wishes and feelings are given full consideration.

Within the Quality Assurance Framework, the independent reviewing officers are responsible for:

• reviewing the effectiveness of individual care plans for children looked after and reporting areas of poor practice • actively involving children, young people and their families in their review process and championing their views and wishes • giving prompt feedback to practitioners so that they can update care plans resulting from reviews • resolving any concerns with care plans informally, and implementing the dispute resolution process when required • undertaking mid-way casework audits

Child protection conference chairs Within the Quality Assurance Framework, the child protection conference chairs are responsible for:

• ensuring children subject to a child protection plan have an effective plan, that is being progressed within timescale, and reporting areas of poor practice • actively involving children, young people and their families in their review process, ensuring they have the opportunity to express their views and wishes through the conference process

18 • resolving any concerns with progress being made against the key objectives within the child protection plan informally, and implementing the dispute resolution process when required • undertaking mid-way casework audits

Child Protection Conferencing Manager and Independent Reviewing Manager Within the Quality Assurance Framework, the Child Protection Conferencing Manager and Independent Reviewing Managers are responsible for:

• maintaining an accurate and up-to-date dispute resolution policy and tracking system, escalating any issues of concern about care or child protection plans to the Director of Children’s Social Care where concerns continue • producing quarterly management reports identifying good practice in care planning, and child protection, identifying good practice and making recommendations for improvement • providing an annual report on the quality of care planning and review for Corporate Parenting Panel • facilitating IROs and Child Protection Conference Chairs to fulfill their requirements in the Quality Assurance Framework

Associate Director for Intelligence and Systems The AD for Intelligence and Improvement is responsible for:

• developing, implementing and reviewing the strategy and policy framework for all quality assurance work • commissioning and monitoring an annual programme of casework, themed and multi-agency audits

• checking that all quality assurance work considers and produces recommendations for improvement, providing quarterly reports to analyse findings from audit, and to identify areas for improvement • providing peer challenge based on performance information, practice standards and service priorities • monitoring the progress of improvement set out in the services learning and improvements plans, following casework audits

Associate Director for Strategy and Transformation The Associate Director for Strategy and Transformation is responsible for: • supporting the re-design of services to ensure they are effective, efficient and lead to improved outcomes • reviewing the overall quality of service-led strategies, policies, procedures and business plans • monitoring the overall quality of service-led equalities impact and needs assessments • ensuring children and young people are actively engaged in strategy, policy development and planning

Associate Director for HR, Workforce and Organisational Development

19 The Associate Director of Workforce Development is responsible for: • developing systems to collect and analyse the learning or development needs of practitioners and managers • producing an annual children’s workforce development plan based on a thorough analysis of need • commissioning and/or delivering learning and development to meet the needs of practitioners and managers • commissioning and/or delivering multi-agency safeguarding training on behalf of the LSCB • ensuring all practitioners and managers are supported to be compliant with HCPC requirements • implementing tools to track and measure the impact of learning and development on practice

Director of Improvement Within the Quality Assurance Framework, the Director of Improvement is responsible for: • providing strategic direction and agreeing the priorities for quality assurance work • allocating adequate resources to assure the quality of services and drive service improvement • ensuring a culture of performance and quality assurance is embedded in the management of services • resolving conflicts relating to quality assurance with internal services and multi-agency partners • leading peer challenge based on performance information, practice standards and service priorities • supporting and reviewing the effectiveness of external challenge and scrutiny bodies such as the LSCB • reporting quarterly to the Director of Children’s Services on all quality assurance activity • providing an annual report • reporting on the quality of services to the LSCB, Corporate Parenting Panel and scrutiny committees. Director of Children’s Services The Director of Children’s Services is responsible for: • maintaining a strategic overview of the consistency and effectiveness of all children’s services • being accountable for all strategic decisions relating to the quality of services for children and young people • championing the interests of children, young people and their families • focusing on the effectiveness of its safeguarding arrangements • monitoring how Achieving for Children maintains a clear focus on the effectiveness of early help and intervention • being mindful about the allocation of adequate resources to assure the quality of services and drive improvement • supporting the local authority to demonstrate high standards of corporate parenting • checking the effectiveness of external challenge and scrutiny arrangements such as the LSCB.

External challenge and scrutiny Local Safeguarding Children Board

20 The Children Act 2004 requires every local authority to establish a Local Safeguarding Children Board. The LSCB is the key statutory mechanism for ensuring that relevant organisations in the local authority area work together to safeguard and promote the welfare of children and young people. An independent chair of the LSCB provides appropriate and independent challenge to all member agencies to ensure that both single-agency and multi-agency work in child protection is of a high standard. Within the Quality Assurance Framework, the LSCB, led by the independent chair, is responsible for:

• developing multi-agency thresholds, policies and procedures on safeguarding children and young people • monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of local services provided by the multi- agency partnership • commissioning multi-agency audits and implementing action plans to address areas requiring improvement • undertaking serious case reviews and implementing action plans to address areas requiring improvement • scrutinising performance information and challenging areas of under-performance • target setting • identifying and providing multi-agency safeguarding training to improve the skills of the children’s workforce

Whilst Ofsted examines the work and effectiveness of the LSCB as part of its inspection arrangements for the protection of children, it is important that the Director of Children’s Services, the local authority’s Chief Executive and the Lead Member for Children’s Services hold the LSCB to account for its compliance with its statutory duties, the quality of its planning, the effectiveness of its challenge to multi-agency partners, and the delivery of its agreed objectives. The work of the LSCB will be evaluated through its annual review of the LSCB Business Plan.

Lead Member for Children’s Services In line with the Children Act 2004, the Lead Member for Children’s Services is politically accountable for ensuring the local authority fulfils its legal responsibilities for safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children and young people. The Lead Member will primarily achieve this through membership of the Local Safeguarding Children Board and the Corporate Parenting Panel, and through a rolling programme of visits to services, and meetings with directors and the chief executive.

Within the Quality Assurance Framework, the Lead Member for Children’s Services is responsible for:

• being politically accountable for all council decisions relating to services for children and young people • championing the interests of children, young people and their families • ensuring Achieving for Children maintains a clear focus on the effectiveness of its safeguarding arrangements • championing early help and intervention in the provision of services for children and young people • providing political leadership that focuses on the importance of reducing child poverty

21 • ensuring the local authority demonstrates high standards of corporate parenting.

Corporate Parenting Panel The purpose of the Corporate Parenting Panel (CPP) is to monitor and scrutinise the effectiveness and impact of services being provided for children and young people in care and care leavers and that they are delivered to a high standard and fulfill statutory requirements. The CPP is responsible for ensuring that action is being taken to address any shortcomings in service provision, particularly in respect of safeguarding service and in improving outcomes for children looked after.

The CPP is also responsible for holding to account all local authority services and partner agencies in relation to their corporate parenting duties. This includes housing providers, leisure services, health services and the police. The panel also supports elected members in being aware of their corporate parenting responsibilities and that all local authority services are mindful of the needs of children in care.

The Corporate Parenting Panel is responsible for:

• monitoring the stability of care placements for children looked after • monitoring the performance of the adoption and fostering services • monitoring the educational attainment and achievement of children looked after • championing the views and opinions of children looked after and care leavers • checking that children looked after have opportunities to achieve good health and emotional wellbeing • monitoring the quality of services available to care leavers, including housing, education and employment Elected Member scrutiny In Richmond, elected member scrutiny is carried out by the Scrutiny Committee. In Kingston, it is carried out by the Adults and Children’s Committee. The committees take a ‘continuous improvement’ approach by scrutinising AfC’s children’s services strategic direction, policy development, decision-making and service delivery. The committees will achieve this through their regular programme of scrutiny meetings, and by establishing time-limited task groups to scrutinise specific issues, programmes or policy developments.

The committees are responsible for:

• scrutinising proposals for strategy, policy and service developments • scrutinising proposals for spending, commissioning and investment in services • scrutinising the overall performance of services by regularly reviewing performance information • scrutinising children’s, young people’s and families’ experience of the services they receive • scrutinising the progress made in delivery action plans resulting from audits, reviews and inspections

Youth Scrutiny Panel Elected member scrutiny is supported by a Youth Scrutiny Panel. The panel, comprising trained members of the Youth Council and Children in Care Council, is responsible for raising awareness of

22 young people’s needs and experiences of using services, and also informs Achieving for Children’s policy development, commissioning intentions and service delivery.

The Youth Scrutiny Panel is responsible for:

• scrutinising and ‘youth-proofing’ proposals for strategy, policy and service developments • informing proposals for spending, commissioning and investment in services • seeking out and representing the views and experiences of children and young people • leading on research with children and young people to support task group reviews

23 Appendix A: AfC practice standards

The AfC Practice Standards define good practice and make explicit what is expected when providing a service to children, young people and their families. They are based on strong evidence about the individual elements of practice that are most likely to lead to quality services and positive outcomes for children and young people. Each practice standard includes a statement that describes the good practice alongside criteria that can be used to assess whether or not the standard has been met. The practice standards are used to commission, monitor, evaluate and audit services and social care practice, and in the supervision and management of practitioners and managers.

Standard 1: Children and young people’s best interests will be of primary consideration in all areas affecting them

Criteria • Children and young people are safeguarded from harm in accordance with agreed policies and procedures. • Children’s and young people’s needs are identified and assessed using agreed processes at all stages. • Children and young people are supported to achieve and enjoy their ambitions and full potential. • Children’s and young people’s wishes and feelings are heard, respected and taken into account. • Children’s and young people’s rights are championed and promoted.

Standard 2: Work is carried out in partnership with the child and young person through meaningful engagement

Criteria

• Children and young people are seen, observed and communicated with according to their developmental need. • Engagement with children and young people is seen, by them, as a positive and inclusive experience. • Engagement with children and young people respects their language, religion, culture and identity. • Children’s views and feelings are recorded accurately and in ways that are appropriate to be shared with them. • Children and young people are engaged in the planning, delivery and review of the services they receive. • Children’s and young people’s views are considered in deciding how information about them is used or shared.

24 Standard 3: Work is carried out in partnership with parents and carers to enable them to meet their responsibilities and achieve optimum outcomes for children and young people

Criteria

• Parents and carers are actively engaged in their child’s assessment, care planning, review and case closure. • Parents and carers are treated with respect and encouraged to express their views, wishes and feelings. • Parents’ and carers’ views and opinions are listened to and taken into account in issues relating to their child. • Parents and carers are engaged in the planning, delivery and review of the services they receive; • Where conflict is identified it is mediated and managed to minimise any adverse impact on a family’s life. • Care planning promotes the child’s upbringing within the family or a community network wherever possible. • Plans are up-to-date and are shared with the family so they are clear about shared objectives and actions. • Parents and carers have clear information about the reasons for decisions and the actions that are being taken.

Standard 4: Work with children, young people, and their family is carried out within community networks and between agencies to achieve optimum outcomes

Criteria

• Assessments, plans and reviews reflect the professional opinion of all partner agencies that know the child, young person and their family. • Services are planned holistically and use the resources of the wider family network and all partner agencies. • Communication and the working relationship with multi-agency partners are professional and responsive. • Information-sharing between multi-agency partners is clear, timely and proportionate to the child and young person’s needs. • Active steps are taken to quickly resolve or escalate any conflicts that may arise between partner agencies.

25 Standard 5: Work with children and young people is undertaken within the legislative framework and optimises best practice guidance

Criteria

• Practice complies with legislation and statutory guidance. • Practice complies with the local policy and procedural framework, protocols and threshold criteria. • Practice is evidence-based and is informed by research, service-user reviews and best practice. • Practice is in accordance with the principles of delivering good value for money.

Standard 6: Work with children, young people, parents, and carers consistently promote social inclusion

Criteria

• Practices and cultures that contribute to discrimination and disadvantage are appropriately challenged. • There is strong advocacy with and on behalf of children, young people and their families to enable them to access help and support. • Children, young people and their families are supported to address and overcome social exclusion. • Strategies are developed and implemented to manage complex ethical dilemmas and potential conflicts.

Standard 7: Records and reports are accurate, complete, accessible and up to date, and demonstrate the decision making process

Criteria

• Records demonstrate the purpose and outcome of contact and discussion concerning a child or young person. • Records are concise, analytical, distinguish between fact and professional opinion, and are accessible. • Assessments, plans and review are recorded, signed and circulated in accordance with agreed procedures. • There is a complete chronology for every child and young person receiving a service. • Information is stored and shared in accordance with data protection legislation and local protocols. • Recorded information meets organisational requirements for performance management and quality assurance.

26 Standard 8: Work with children, young people, and their families is managed and supervised to achieve best possible outcomes

Criteria

• Work is allocated to qualified and trained practitioners who understand the task and have capacity to undertake it • Supervision takes place regularly in line with the supervision policy, and outcomes and decisions are recorded. • Management accountability is evidenced at all stages of work with the family, from referral to case closure. • Managers audit case file records on a regular basis and require action to be taken where required. • Managers maximise opportunities for practitioners to develop their practice, knowledge, skills and abilities.

27 Appendix B: Operational Services – key quality assurance tasks

Practitioners Task Purpose Review the quality and timeliness of casework and recording in A critical self-evaluation to ensure that assessments, plans, reports and relation to assessments, plans, reports and reviews prior to reviews are completed to a good standard in line with practice standards, completion. procedures and timescales.

Review the quality of casework and recording prior to case A critical self-evaluation to ensure that agreed objectives are met, transfer or closure. chronologies are reviewed for gaps and trends, key data is accurately recorded, and the overall quality of work and practice is good. Team Leaders and Heads of Services Task Purpose Audit case files using the agreed audit tool. An assessment of the overall quality of casework and recording using the agreed audit tool.

Sign-off the practitioner’s assessment of the quality of casework and An assessment of the overall quality of casework to ensure that recording at case closure or transfer. objectives are met, chronologies are reviewed for gaps and trends, key data is accurately recorded, the overall quality of practice is good.

Sign-off the practitioner’s assessment of the quality and timeliness of An assessment of the quality of casework to ensure that assessments, casework and recording in relation to assessments, plans, reports and plans, reports and reviews are completed to a good standard in line reviews at completion. with agreed procedures and timescales. Conduct supervision across the team in line with the Supervision Ensure that supervision is in place for all team members and is held in Policy and guidelines. accordance with agreed policy. Ensure that all supervision is recorded, monitors case progression, manages risk, and reviews actions. Monitor key performance data and trends. Take appropriate action to address performance issues in relation to referrals, case allocations, case closures, and the timeliness of assessments and reviews. Meet with children, young people and their families to obtain Ensure that the views of children, young people and their families inform feedback on services. practice and lead to service improvement. Observe the practice of each practitioner within the team at Monitor the quality of practice to identify the practitioner’s least twice annually. strengths and development needs, and provide appropriate support. Associate Director/Head of service Task Purpose Audit case files using the agreed audit tool. An assessment of the overall quality of casework and recording using the agreed audit tool. Conduct supervision of team managers in line with the supervision Ensure that supervision is in place for all team managers and is held in policy and guidelines. accordance with agreed policy. Ensure that all supervision is recorded, monitors case progression, manages risk, and reviews actions. Undertake observational supervision audit of team managers supervised (minimum two a year). Monitor key performance data and trends. Take appropriate action to address performance issues in relation to referrals, case allocations, case closures, and the timeliness of assessments. Directors Task Purpose Audit case files using the agreed audit tool. An assessment of the overall quality of casework and recording using the agreed audit tool.

Conduct supervision of heads of service in line with the Supervision Ensure that supervision is in place for all service managers and is held in Policy and guidelines. accordance with agreed policy. Ensure that all supervision is recorded, monitors case progression, manages risk, and reviews actions.

Monitor key performance data and trends. Take appropriate action to address performance issues in relation to referrals, case allocations, case closures, and the timeliness of assessments. Actively contribute to the LSCB. Provide scrutiny and challenge to partner agencies to ensure the quality and effectiveness of multi-agency safeguarding practice.

Report on key issues to elected member scrutiny committees. Provide advice and assurance to the scrutiny committees on the effectiveness of early intervention, safeguarding and services to children looked after. Appendix C: Business Services – key quality assurance tasks

Assistant Director of Quality Assurance and Review Task Purpose Review the quality and effectiveness of child protection Determine the overall quality and effectiveness of the systems and planning and Children Looked After planning. processes for child protection planning and Children Looked After planning, and identify areas for improvement. Produce a quarterly management report on the work of the Identify good practice and areas for development, provide an annual Independent Reviewing Officers and Child Protection Conference overview summary of the quality and effectiveness of care planning for Service; produce an annual report that cumulates findings from the Children Looked After and child protection conference process. quarterly reports. Head of Intelligence Team with Director of Improvement Task Purpose Analyse the results of casework, themed and multi-agency audits. Ensure that common themes and issues arising from casework, themed and multi-agency audits are identified and appropriate action is taken to address practice issues. Commission the annual programme of themed and multi-agency An assessment of the quality of services and multi-agency audits, and monitor delivery. arrangements with clear terms of reference and using agreed audit tools. Ensure the effectiveness of the Integrated Children’s System for Ensure the ICS effectively and efficiently supports social care practice. casework recording and reporting. Review the Quality Assurance Framework and supporting policies and The Quality Assurance Framework is an effective tool for managing the guidelines. overall quality of services. Director of Improvement Task Purpose Manage the delivery of corrective action plans resulting from Recommendations to improve services are clear; corrective action audits, IMR, SCR and external inspections. plans have SMART objectives and progress is tracked and reported.

Report on the quality of services to the LSCB, Corporate Parenting Provide advice and assurance to the scrutiny committees on the Board and elected member scrutiny committees. quality and effectiveness of early intervention, safeguarding and services to children looked after. Appendix D: Guidelines on quality audit gradings Referral and response Outstanding Good Requires improvement Inadequate Critical

The referral is high The referral shows a The referral gives The referral has some The referral requires quality, contains clear understanding of sufficient evidence to gaps with vital an immediate excellent analysis and when it is appropriate to show it is appropriate information missing, or response to safeguard applies a correct refer to social care. to refer to social care. the referral should have the child or young understanding of the been made at an earlier person from significant threshold criteria. stage. harm. The referral is in the The referral is in the The referral is in the The referral is not in the agreed format with all agreed format with all agreed format but not agreed format and relevant information, relevant information all the relevant important information is good analysis and clarity and clarity regarding the information is recorded. missing, or there is no regarding the referral referral reason. consent when it would reason and desired have been appropriate. outcome. The referral has been The referral has been The referral has been The referral has not responded to promptly responded to promptly responded to been acted on promptly (within 24 hours) and (within 24 hours) and promptly (within 24 and there is no evidence there is clear evidence there is some evidence hours) and there is that decisions are that decisions are that decisions are limited evidence that appropriate to the appropriate to the appropriate to the decisions are identified need(s). identified need(s). identified need(s). appropriate to the identified need(s). Outstanding Good Requires improvement Inadequate Critical

Decision making takes into Decision making takes There is some evidence There is no evidence to account previous referrals into account previous that indicates indicate that consideration and contacts and provides referrals and contacts. consideration has been has been given to previous analysis of the impact of given to previous referrals referrals and contacts. these. and contacts.

The risk analysis and The risk analysis and There is some evidence There is no evidence that decision rationale is fully decision rationale is that consideration has consideration has been evidenced. This includes evidenced. been given to risk given to risk analysis. evidencing why the analysis. decision is proportionate to the referral information and history.

There is evidence recorded There is evidence recorded There is evidence There is no evidence on the ICS which on the ICS which recorded on the ICS which recorded on the ICS which demonstrates that the demonstrates that the demonstrates that the demonstrates that the case case was allocated to a case was allocated to a case was allocated to a was allocated to a qualified qualified practitioner qualified practitioner qualified practitioner. practitioner; or there was promptly and discussion promptly and clear delay in the allocation or has taken place setting expectations for the case was not allocated. and agreeing clear progression are recorded. expectations for progression.

Assessment Outstanding Good Requires improvement Inadequate Critical

The assessment is high The assessment is good The assessment contains The assessment does not The assessment requires quality, cites research and quality and contains some analysis of needs, provide analysis of needs, an immediate response to contains a detailed analysis analysis of needs, risk risk factors and protective risk factors and protective safeguard the child or of needs, risk factors and factors and protective factors, and includes key factors. It does not include young person from protective factors, and factors, and includes all members of the child or key members of the child significant harm. includes all members of members of the child or young person’s household or young person’s the child or young person’s young person’s household and family. household and family. household and family. and family.

The assessment sets out a The assessment identifies The assessment identifies a The assessment does not clear and high quality a clear plan to address all plan to address the outline a clear plan to outcome focused plan identified needs, risk majority of identified address identified needs, which responds factors and protective needs, risk factors and risk factors and protective appropriately to all factors. The objectives in protective factors. There factors. The plan is identified needs, risk the plan are SMART and are appropriate objectives difficult to understand. factors and protective easy to understand. in the plan, which are easy factors. The objectives in to understand. the plan are SMART and easy to understand.

The assessment provides The assessment The assessment includes There is no multi-agency good analysis of the multi- includes information limited information from context to the assessment agency context and uses from other agencies. other agencies. despite a clear indication this to inform decision that other agencies are making. involved.

Outstanding Good Requires Improvement Inadequate Critical The child or young person The child or young person The child or young person The child or young person The child or young person has been seen alone (where has been seen has been seen alone (where has not been seen alone has never been seen alone this is appropriate), and alone (where this is this is appropriate) but there (where this is appropriate), (where this is appropriate) their views and wishes have appropriate) and their is limited evidence of their and their views and wishes and their views and wishes been recorded, reflected in views and wishes have views and wishes recorded, have not been recorded, have not been recorded the assessment and taken been recorded, reflected in reflected in the assessment. reflected in the assessment nor reflected in the into account as far as the assessment and Appropriate tools have been and or taken into account as assessment and not taken possible. taken into account as far as used to communicate with far as possible. into account as far as There is a good sense of possible. the child or young person. There is no sense of the possible. the child or young person Appropriate tools have been child or young person in Appropriate tools have in the assessment. used to communicate with the assessment. never been used to Appropriate tools have the child or young person. Appropriate tools have not communicate with the been used to been used to child or young person. communicate with the communicate with the child or young person. child or young person. The assessment has been The assessment has been The assessment has been The assessment has not reviewed and authorised reviewed and authorised reviewed by the manager been reviewed not by the manager within by the manager within within timescales. authorised by the manager. timescales. There is strong timescales. There is some evidence of quality evidence of quality assurance and analysis of assurance and analysis of the decision-making with the decision- making with feedback to the feedback to the practitioner. practitioner.

The assessment has been The assessment has The parents and/or carers The assessment has not shared with the young been shared with the have been informed of the been shared with the person and parents and/or parents and/or carers outcome of the parents and/or carers. carers promptly and their promptly. assessment. feedback has been sought and included. in the assessment.

Children protection including s.47 enquiries Outstanding Good Requires Inadequate Critical Improvement The referral has been The referral has been The referral has been There has been a delay in An immediate response is responded to promptly responded to promptly responded to with action responding to the referral required to safeguard the with action taken to with action taken to taken to ensure the child and there is insufficient child or young person from ensure the child or young ensure the child or or young person’s evidence to demonstrate suffering significant harm. person’s immediate safety young person’s immediate safety. that decision making was and to respond to their immediate safety. focused on the child or wider needs. young person’s immediate safety. The rationale for the The rationale for the The decision to progress to The decision to progress to decision to progress to a decision to progress to a a strategy discussion is a strategy discussion is not strategy discussion is strategy discussion is appropriate but the appropriate, or the well evidenced and appropriate and well rationale for the decision rationale for the decision is decision making is evidenced. should have been more not evidenced. focused and high quality. effectively evidenced.

Outstanding Good Requires Improvement Inadequate Critical The strategy meeting or The strategy meeting or The strategy meeting or The strategy meeting or The strategy meeting or discussion is held within discussion is held within the discussion is held within discussion was not held discussion was not held the timescales appropriate timescales appropriate to the the timescales appropriate within the timescales despite being identified as to the referral information referral information (within to the referral information appropriate to the referral needed. (within 24 hours of the first 24 hours of the first referral (within 24 hours of the first information (within 24 hours referral and 15 days and 15 days thereafter). The referral and 15 days of the first referral and 15 thereafter). The meeting meeting or discussion thereafter). The meeting or days thereafter). There was or discussion includes all includes all relevant agencies discussion includes Police only a telephone discussion relevant agencies and and professionals. and Children’s Services. with the Police. The professionals, and ensures The discussion identifies an The discussion identifies an discussion did not identify an engagement even where appropriate robust interim appropriate interim plan of appropriate interim plan of difficulties have occurred. plan of protection for the protection for the child or protection for the child or The discussion identifies a child or young person. young person. young person. SMART and robust interim plan of protection for the child or young person. The Section 47 enquiry is The Section 47 enquiry is The Section 47 enquiry is The Section 47 enquiry is The Section 47 enquiry is multi-agency, rigorous carried out in accordance carried out in accordance not carried out in multi-agency, rigorous and holistic. It is carried with the plan, with with the plan and covers accordance with the plan, and holistic. It is carried out in accordance with appropriate timescales all the key areas but was or is significantly delayed, out in accordance with the plan, within and covers all key areas. outside of planned or lacks focus on the key the plan, within timescales and timescales. areas of risk and need. timescales and demonstrates robust demonstrates robust decision making. decision making.

Outstanding Good Requires Improvement Inadequate Critical The decision to progress to The decision to progress to The decision to progress to The rationale for the child protection was child protection was child protection was decision to progress to appropriate and the appropriate and the appropriate, but should an Initial Child Protection rationale for decision rationale for decision have provided better Conference is unclear; making is very well making is evidenced. The evidence. The Initial Child the decision to progress evidenced. Initial Child Protection Protection Conference was to a conference is Conference was held held promptly although not inappropriately delayed The Initial Child Protection within 15 days of the within 15 days of the and the interim actions Conference was held strategy discussion where strategy discussion to safeguard the child or within 15 days of the the decision was made and because the child’s or young person are not strategy discussion where an appropriate focus was young person’s needs adequate. the decision was made and a maintained on indicated delay may be robust focus was safeguarding the child or appropriate. maintained on young person. safeguarding the child or young person.

Outstanding Good Requires Improvement Inadequate Critical Child protection Child protection Child protection Child protection conferences are highly conferences are effective, conferences are effective, conferences are not held effective, held regularly, held regularly, analyse usually held regularly, consistently and provide analyse needs and risks, needs and risks, engage analyse needs and risks, insufficient analysis of engage parents and parents and professionals, engage parents and needs and risks. professionals, and set out and set out clear plans professionals, and set out clear plans with with measurable clear plans with measurable timescales. timescales. The child’s or measurable timescales. The child’s or young young person’s wishes The child’s or young person’s wishes and and feelings are well person’s wishes and feelings are well evidenced evidenced and fully feelings are recorded. and fully considered considered throughout throughout the the conference. conference; the child or young person is enabled to participate in the conference. The core group always The core group always The core group meets The core group does not meets in accordance with meets in accordance with regularly and is attended meet regularly or is not the child protection plan, the child protection plan, by most agencies and effective in engaging with with good attendance by with attendance by professionals. There is parents and/or carers to agencies and agencies and key some engagement with reduce risk to the child or professionals, and professionals, and parents and/or carers young person. engagement with parents engagement with parents focused on reducing risk. and/or carers focused on and/or carers focused on reducing risk and reducing risk sustaining positive change. The child’s views are well evidenced.

Outstanding Good Requires Improvement Inadequate Critical There is strong evidence to There is good evidence to There is some evidence There is a lack of evidence demonstrate that the child demonstrate that the child to demonstrate that the to demonstrate sufficient protection plan is being protection plan is being child protection plan is progress in relation to the driven forward in a timely driven forward in a timely being driven forward. actions set of child manner, is having a manner and is evaluated protection plan. There is a positive impact and is and amended as required. lack of progress and focus. evaluated and amended as required.

The social worker or The social worker or The social worker or The social worker or The social worker or practitioner make visits in practitioner make visits in practitioner make visits in practitioner does not make practitioner make visits in accordance with the child accordance with the child accordance with the child visits in accordance with accordance with the child protection plan, speaks to protection plan, speaks to protection plan, speaks to the child protection plan, protection plan, speaks to the child or young person the child or young person the child or young person. and does not speak to the the child or young person on their own, and has built on their own, and has child or young person on on their own, and has built a strong relationship with built a good relationship their own where this is a strong relationship with the child or young person with the child or young expected. the child or young person that enables them to be person that enables them that enables them to be safeguarded. to be safeguarded. safeguarded. Child in need

Outstanding Good Requires Improvement Inadequate Critical

The decision to progress to The decision to progress to The decision to progress The decision to progress a child in need meeting a child in need meeting to a child in need to a child in need was appropriate and in was appropriate and in line meeting was meeting was not line with the threshold with the threshold criteria. appropriate and in line appropriate and not in criteria. The rationale for There rationale for the with the threshold line with the threshold the decision is strongly decision is evidenced. criteria. The rationale criteria. There is lack of evidenced. for the decision is not evidence to demonstrate well evidenced. a rationale for involvement by children’s social care. The child in need meeting The child in need meeting A child in need meeting There was a significant was booked in good time, took place promptly after was held after the delay in the child in need invites sent out and took the assessment concluded. assessment concluded. meeting taking place. place promptly after the assessment concluded.

The child in need meeting The child in need meeting The child in need meeting The child in need meeting is highly effective, held is effective, held regularly, is held regularly, analyses is held infrequently, has regularly, analyses needs analyses needs and risks, needs and risks, engages insufficient focus on the and risks, has child’s has child’s contribution, parents, carers and analysis of needs and risks, contribution, engages engages parents, carers professionals, and sets out are not well attended by parents, carers and and professionals, and sets a plan that is appropriate agencies and professionals, and sets out out a clear plan that is to the identified needs and professionals, and do not a clear, outcome-focused appropriate to the risks – the plan is not engage parents and plan that is appropriate to identified needs and risks; SMART. carers. Plans are unclear the identified needs and the objectives in the plan and so do not sufficiently risks; the objectives in the are SMART. address needs and risks. plan are SMART and easy Timescales are not to understand. meaningful. Outstanding Good Requires Improvement Inadequate Critical

There is strong evidence to There is good evidence to There is some evidence to There is a lack of evidence demonstrate that the child demonstrate that the child demonstrate that the child to demonstrate sufficient in need plan is being driven in need plan is being driven in need plan is being progress in relation to the forward in a timely manner forward in a timely manner driven forward. actions set out in the child and is evaluated in relation and is evaluated and in need plan. There is a to impact on the child and amended as required. lack of progress and focus. amended as required.

The social worker or The social worker or The social worker or The social worker or practitioner make visits in practitioner make visits in practitioner make visits in practitioner does not make accordance with the child accordance with the child accordance with the child visits in accordance with in need plan, speaks to in need plan, speaks to the in need plan, speaks to the the child in need plan, and the child or young person child or young person on child or young person but does not speak to the child on their own, and has their own, and has built a not on their own. or young person on their built a strong relationship good relationship with the own where this is with the child or young child or young person that expected. person and their families enables them to be that enables them to be safeguarded. safeguarded. The voice of the child is strong within the records. Children in Care

Outstanding Good Requires Improvement Inadequate Critical

The care plan is The care plan is up-to- The care plan is up-to- There is no up-to-date An immediate response is comprehensive and date and addresses all the date and addresses the care plan and/or some required to safeguard the regularly updated to ensure identified needs of the needs of the child or elements of the plan are child or young person it addresses all the child or young person young person (placement, missing (placement, from suffering significant identified needs of the child (placement, education, education, health and education, health, and/or harm. or young person health and permanence permanence plans). permanence plan). (placement, education, plans). It is based on a health and permanence clear assessment of the plans). It is based on a child or young person’s comprehensive multi- needs. agency assessment and has a strong child focus with clear contributions from the childThe .care plan shows The care plan shows The care plan is reviewed The care plan has not evidence of a thorough evidence of a good regularly and within been reviewed. understanding of the understanding of the statutory timescales. child or young person’s child or young person’s needs and how these will needs and how these be met within clear will be met within clear timescales and has a timescales. strong child focus with clear contributions from the child.

Outstanding Good Requires Improvement Inadequate Critical A pathway plan is in A pathway plan is in place A pathway plan is in place There is no pathway plan place (where this is (where this is appropriate) (where this is appropriate). (where this is appropriate). appropriate) showing showing how the young how a multi-agency person’s transition to approach will be taken to adulthood will be achieving and supporting achieved and supported the young person’s and demonstrates input transition to adulthood from the young person. and demonstrates a strong input from the young person.

There is evidence that There is evidence that the There is evidence that the There is no evidence that innovative approaches child or young person has child or young person has the child or young person have been used to involve been involved in the been provided with a copy has been involved in the the child or young person development and of their care plan. development and in the development and implementation of their Objectives are SMART and implementation of their implementation of their care plan. Objectives are easy to understand. care plan. Objectives are care plan. Objectives are SMART and easy to not SMART nor easy to SMART and easy to understand. understand. understand. Outstanding Good Requires Improvement Inadequate Critical

The implementation of the The care plan is The care plan is The care plan is not care plan has led to progressing and progressing and meeting progressing and is not significant improvements in meetings all the some of the identified meeting the identified the outcomes for the child identified needs of the needs of the child or needs of the child or young or young person. child or young person. young person. person.

The social worker or The social worker or The social worker or The social worker or practitioner has built a practitioner make visits in practitioner make visits in practitioner does not make strong relationship with accordance with statutory accordance with statutory visits in accordance with the child or young person. guidelines and is guidelines and is statutory guidelines. Visits are made in responsive to the needs responsive to the needs accordance with statutory and wishes of the child or and wishes of the child or guidelines and are young person. Case file young person. responsive to the needs records are good and has and wishes of the child or considered the longer- young person. Case file term function of the case records are good and has file as a means of the considered the longer- young person accessing term function of the case their historical information. file as a means of the young person accessing their historical information. Supervision and management oversight Outstanding Good Requires Improvement Inadequate Critical

Supervision has been Supervision has been Supervision has been Supervision has not been An immediate response is taking place in accordance taking place in accordance taking place in taking place in accordance required to safeguard the with the supervision with the supervision policy accordance with the with the supervision child or young person from policy, is reflective and is and is responsive to social supervision policy. policy. suffering significant harm. responsive to social workers practice and workers practice and development needs. development needs. There is evidence to show that supervision has made a significant difference to the development of the social worker or practitioner and the outcomes they have been able to achieve. Case supervision records Case supervision records Case supervision records There is no case are included on the child or are included on the child are included on the child supervision records on the young person’s electronic or young person’s or young person’s child or young person’s case file on the ICS. There is electronic case file on the electronic case file on the electronic case file on the strong evidence of ICS. There is evidence of ICS. There is limited ICS. Supervision records do reflection and analysis reflection and analysis but evidence of discussion, not provide an outline of about what is working well, limited evidence to reflection and analysis. decision making and there barriers to progress and demonstrate that There is limited evidence is no evidence of casework impact for the child and supervision has been used that to show that discussion, reflection and family. to progress casework or to supervision has been used analysis. There is no address practice concerns. to progress casework or to evidence to show that address practice concerns. supervision has been used to address practice concerns. Appendix D: Annual Quality Assurance Plan: Social Care and Early Help Weekly Suite of data reports for social care Monthly Routine Case File Audit - SPA and MASH Performance, Quality and Innovation Board - Children’s Social Care - Prevention and Early Help Operational Commissioning Group Thematic Qualitative Audit Quarterly Complaints statistics and learning bulletin Child Protection Conference Report & Viewpoint Independent Reviewing Officers Report & Viewpoint Missing, Child Sexual Exploitation and Return Home Interview Reports Six Monthly Practice Week – case discussions with practitioners, observations of practice and conversations with families / carers Qualitative Supervision Survey Staff Exit Interviews Themes report Principal SW Report Learning Lessons and Serious Case Reviews Annual Social Worker Heath check - workforce well-being check Virtual School Report Bi-Annual staff survey CIN Census LADO Report LSCB QA Sub Group – Multi-agency Audits Adoption Panel Chair Report Fostering Panel Chair Report Conference Service Annual Overview report Children’s Annual complaints report

48 April 2017 May 2017 June 2017 July 2017 Weekly suite of Intelligence Weekly suite of Intelligence Weekly suite of Intelligence Weekly suite of Intelligence reports reports reports reports Routine Audit in SPA and MASH Routine Audit in SPA and MASH Routine Audit in SPA and MASH Routine Audit in SPA and MASH

Children’s Services Performance Children’s Services Performance Children’s Services Performance Performance, Quality and Board Board Board Innovation Board Chair: Chair: Chair: Chair: Operational Commissioning Operational Commissioning Operational Commissioning Operational Commissioning Group Data Set Group Data Set Group Data Set Group Data Set Thematic Audit Thematic Audit Thematic Audit Thematic Audit Subject: Subject: Subject: Lead: Lead: Lead: Complaints statistics and Learning bulletin Practice Week – case discussions with practitioners, practice Lead: Lead: Lead: observations and discussions with families or carers Lead: Adoption Report CIN Census Fostering Report

49 August 2017 September 2017 October 2017 November 2017 Weekly suite of Intelligence Weekly suite of Intelligence Weekly suite of Intelligence Weekly suite of Intelligence reports reports reports reports Routine Audit in SPA and MASH Routine Audit in SPA and MASH Routine Audit in SPA and MASH Routine Audit in SPA and MASH Performance, Quality and Performance, Quality and Performance, Quality and Performance, Quality and Innovation Board Innovation Board Innovation Board Innovation Board Chair: Chair: Chair: Chair:

Operational Commissioning Operational Commissioning Operational Commissioning Operational Commissioning Group Data Set Group Data Set Group Data Set Group Data Set

Thematic Audit Thematic Audit Thematic Audit Thematic Audit: Subject: Subject: Subject: Subject: Lead: Lead: Lead: Lead:

Practice Week – case discussions with practitioners, practice observations and discussions with families or carers Lead: Adoption Panel Chairs Report CIN Census Fostering Panel Chairs Report

50 December 2017 January 2018 February 2018 March 2018 Weekly suite of Intelligence Weekly suite of Intelligence Weekly suite of Intelligence Weekly suite of Intelligence reports reports reports reports Routine Audit in SPA and MASH Routine Audit in SPA and MASH Routine Audit in SPA and MASH Routine Audit in SPA and MASH Performance, Quality and Performance, Quality and Performance, Quality and Performance, Quality and Innovation Board Innovation Board Innovation Board Innovation Board Chair: Chair: Chair: Chair:

Operational Commissioning Operational Commissioning Operational Commissioning Operational Commissioning Group Data Set Group Data Set Group Data Set Group Data Set

Thematic Audit: Thematic Audit: Thematic Audit: Thematic Audit: Subject: Subject: Subject: Subject: Lead: Lead: Lead: Lead:

Lead: Lead:

Supervision survey

Adoption Panel Chairs Report CIN Census Fostering Panel Chairs Report

51 Appendix E: Practice Weeks Information and templates

52 1. Practice weeks

During practice week, case discussions and practice activities are completed alongside the practitioner. This also includes consultations with other relevant professionals as well as the family and young people (where achievable) to provide a rounded view of what is working well and what might be changed. Practice week occurs between two and four times a year.

There is a dual purpose to the week, the intention being to both assure the quality of work and also to influence front line practice by facilitating reflection on case direction, work undertaken and case recording. Comments and feedback is then provided to practitioners at the time in order to encourage learning and all case discussions and audits are then uploaded on to the case record.

The week also includes accompanying practitioners on visits, child protection conferences, children looked after (CLA) reviews, supervision and other activities of staff. Any observation of activity with children and their families will be agreed by the child or family in advance.

The feedback learning loop Collection of this wealth of information needs to be purposeful and useful in providing a feedback loop to improve practice and outcomes for children. We need to know where our strengths and areas of development are to respond to themes that emerge. The following are key when completing an overall analysis report.

 Patterns and themes to be clearly identified, provided in concise form and acted upon.  In order to ensure the information collected is current, there will be a short time period between the quality assurance activity and summary reports being provided, usually within 10 working days.  When shortfalls in practice are identified in different parts of the service and for individual practitioners, contextual issues will be considered, for example staff shortages or other resource issues.  Good practice exemplars will be used to help less experienced staff understand the standard required and develop their own knowledge and competence.  Front line managers will be given detailed feedback about the judgments made about practice within their teams and shortfalls addressed within the spirit of a learning and improving. This report will be shared across the services in order to provide insight at the front line.

2. Multi-agency audits

Multi-agency audits are commissioned by the LSCB Quality Assurance (QA) subgroup as part of a rolling programme offering insight and scrutiny of practice across agencies. The QA subgroup maintains a regular programme of audits, to examine the effectiveness of multi- disciplinary working to achieve improved outcomes for children.

A bespoke audit tool is designed for each audits to ensure relevance across agencies and to capture pertinent information.

53 3. Thematic audits

In line with borough priorities or areas identified for closer scrutiny, audits will be completed on specific focus areas within Children Services to provide insight and understanding into practice. This includes both areas for development and strengths in practice. These reports will be shared to contribute to practice across Achieving for Children.

4. Responsive audits and case reviews

Audits are completed on cases where required if a specific issue has been identified of concern. This may initially be completed on one case but may lead to a wider audit including partner agencies to understand whether issues occur in isolation or are representative of practice.

5. Learning and Improvement Framework report

The above areas all result in individual reports. However, elements and key messages from the audit practice contribute to an overview framework report that is completed twice per year. This also includes learning from complaints, compliments, additional data analysis, service user views and general updates across the service. This is circulated to all of Family Services to provide them with an accessible update covering a six month period.

54 Appendix F: Template for Senior Leaders

The case audit will be undertaken on the basis of discussion with practitioners and looking at the case file. Start the hour with a verbal summary from the practitioner, then probe with the questions below. Look at the case record alongside the practitioner so that they can show you the relevant records. Depending on the area of service being audited, some questions or sections may not be relevant and can be omitted.

Area Questions Yes, No, Comments or questions to assist the practitioner in reflection Partially

Narrative or 1. Can the practitioner talk  Have you included all the key history knowledgeably about the significant incidents or periods child or children and when explaining what has family? happened for this child or 2. Is the chronology of children? significant events only  How well do you know the child (check case record)? or children? 3. Is the chronology up-to-  Is it clear that they have spoken date? with the child or children and knows their wishes and feelings?  A good, brief chronology can be an excellent analytical tool for reflection about past behaviour and planning for the future – do you use the chronology in this way? Assessment 4. Is there a clear description  If there is a difference between and analysis of the risk factors? the verbal and written 5. Is there a clear description presentation, explore this with of protective factors and the practitioner. Emphasise the the strengths of the need for a good written analysis family? to help with planning and to provide evidence to other 6. Is there evidence of professionals. reflection on past behaviour and events in  Discuss the opportunities for order to plan for the reflection and challenge to future? hypotheses - does this happen in supervision? If not, then how 7. Is there evidence of a could we facilitate such summary analysis on opportunities? record?  Were there key times when you reflected on the assessment or plan and changed direction?

55 Planning 8. Does the practitioner have  What is the purpose of work with this a clear plan of intervention family, what do you hope to achieve? in place for how we will  How do you know that the family help this child or family? fully understand what is expected of 9. Is the plan clear to the them? child?  Explore how the plan was drawn up:. 10. What the parents and is it on the basis of knowing that a family are expected to specific intervention will work, has achieve? worked with someone else in the 11. What the practitioner will past, or is it just what was available? do?  Do you think it is a realistic plan? 12. What other practitioners or agencies will do? 13. Does the plan identify outcomes or objectives 14. Does the plan have clear timescales? Intervention 15. Is the intervention  If you feel stuck with the case, discuss working: is it achieving the what has been tried, what new ideas identified outcomes for the you have had and why it isn’t child or family? working.  Are you clear about statutory responsibilities?  Are you aware of a range of interventions with children and families?  Do you think about using a methodology in your work? Relationship 16. How many practitioners  Do you think you have gained the has this child or family trust of this child or family? had? How do you know? 17. Is there evidence of a good  Have the family been hostile or rapport, trust and unwilling to work with you? openness between worker If so, how have you overcome this? and child or family? Outcome 18. Has there been significant  What difference do you think you change for this family as a have made for this child or family? result of the intervention?  Is it easy to see what has changed? 19. Is the impact of the work  How will you know when sustainable evidenced on the case file? change has been achieved?  Do you believe you have helped to build the resilience of this child or family?  If you have not been able to evidence the impact of your work on the case record, can you think of how you might do this? Case 20. Does the practitioner think  What happens in supervision? they are receiving good Supervision  How often might you talk about each 56 case supervision and case? direction about how to  Are there opportunities for critical work with this family? reflection (inside one to one 21. Is supervision taking place supervision or in other ways)? on a four weekly basis?  What else do you need to support 22. Is there evidence of you do effective work with this supervision on the case family? record? 23. Are you able to constructively challenge managers in the organisation? Any further comment about the work undertaken, action to be taken or suggestion that this case should be used as a good practice example.

These sheets will be copied to the Team Manager.

57 Appendix G: Case template for Child Protection Conference Chairs and Independent Reviewing Officers

The case audit will be undertaken on the basis of discussion with the IRO and CPCC. Start the hour with a verbal summary from the practitioner, then probe with the questions below.

Area Questions Yes Comments or questions to assist the /No practitioner in reflection

Narrative / 1. Can the CPCC or IRO explain  Have you included all the key significant history what has happened with this incidents or periods in talking about this family? family?

 Have there been times over the duration of this case when have challenged your original hypotheses and changed direction? Assessment 2. Can the CPCC or IRO clearly  Discuss the opportunities for reflection and and analysis identify the risk and challenge to hypotheses - does the protective factors for the CPCC/IRO have opportunities to examine child? their work? 3. Do the minutes of either the CP case conference or the CLA review include a summary analysis of key issues? Planning 4. Has the CPCC or IRO  What is the purpose of work with this provided a clear plan of family, what can be achieved? intervention for how we will  How do you know that the family fully help this child or family? understand what is expected of them? Is the plan clear to the child or  Explore how the plan was drawn up i.e. is it family in relation to: on the basis of knowing that a specific 5. What the parents and family intervention will work, has worked with are expected to do? someone else in the past, or is it just what 6. What the practitioner will was available? do?  Do you think it is a realistic plan? 7. What other practitioners or agencies will do? 8. Is the plan realistic? 9. Does the plan identify outcomes or objectives? Intervention 10. Does the CPCC or IRO think  If the case is stuck, what have you done to that the intervention is help in understanding what has been tried working@ is it achieving the and the reasons it isn’t working. identified outcomes for the  Are you aware of a range of interventions child or family? with children and families? 11. If not, has the CPCC or IRO  Do you help practitioners to identify use of taken action to progress the specific research and methodologies? plan for example, used escalation procedures? Relationship 12. Is there evidence of good  Do you feel you have gained the trust of this communication between 58 CPCC or IRO and the child or child or family? family?  Have the family been hostile or unwilling to work with you? If so, how have you overcome this? Outcome 13. Has there been significant  What difference do you feel you have made change for this family as a in your role as CPCC or IRO for this child or result of the intervention? family?  Is it easy to see what has changed? How do you know any change is sustainable?  If you have not been able to evidence the impact of your work, can you think of how you might do this? Supervision 14. Does the CPCC or IRO think  What happens in supervision? they are getting good  Are there opportunities for critical supervision and direction? reflection (inside one-to-one supervision or 15. Is supervision taking place on in other ways)? a four weekly basis? Any further comment about the work undertaken, action to be taken or suggestion that this case should be used as a good practice example.

These sheets will be copied to the line manager for the CPCC or IRO.

59 Appendix H: Discussion points for observation or when accompanying practitioners

Home visits

 What was the purpose to the visit and that the child or family understand what that purpose is  Does the child or family understand where this visit fits within the overall plan of work or intervention?  Evidence of good communication – clear, questioning, explorative, open and honest, straightforward discussion  Does the practitioner remain child-focused in the discussion?  Evidence of trust from child or family to practitioner, for example, that they believe what is being said, that what was agreed by practitioner has happened  Visit isn’t too short, too long, or with no obvious outcome  Does the practitioner discuss next steps? What will be happening? Future plans?  Following the visit does the practitioner show ability to analyse what happened and how it fits with the plan or affects future work?

Professionals meetings including child protection conferences, core groups, permanency planning meetings, children looked after reviews and other planning meetings

 The meeting is well led – clarity of purpose, the chair facilitates involvement of all participants and is able to communicate well and summarise  If child or parent is present, are they treated respectfully, helped to understand what is going on, made to feel comfortable and able to contribute?  Is the meeting too long, too short?  Is there evidence of a good discussion, where there is challenge if needed and progress in defining how a child or family have been helped and will be helped in the future?  If there is conflict or disagreement, how is it resolved?  Are next steps clearly outlined and agreed  Date, time and place of next meeting agreed? Supervision

 Does the supervisor create a positive and nurturing environment?  Does the supervisor provide clear case direction?  Does the supervisor challenge, reflect on hypotheses or plans of intervention with the child or family?  Is the discussion purposeful?  Does the supervisee provide good information about the child or family?  Is there a sense that there is a shared understanding about the family and the direction of work?  Does there appear to be a trusted relationship between supervisor and supervisee?  Is there an opportunity to talk in detail about cases?  Is it rushed?  Are decisions recorded on the case file?  Does the supervisor take contemporaneous electronic notes?

60 Appendix I: Questions for families

Agreement to speak to a parent or family member must be sought with the practitioner before the phone call is made. The choice of which children or families to speak to must be made with sensitivity to their current situation and their consent obtained. Please put a case note on file which confirms consent has been obtained, with whom and when. The letter template is attached as Appendix F.

Each senior manager will be expected to have five telephone conversations with family members during the week. It will be important to explain to the parent or family member the purpose of the conversation and seek their agreement to share their thoughts and experiences with practitioners and managers.

Questions yes/no Comments from parent or family member

1. What is working well?

2. Is there anything you are worried about or that is not working well?

3. Anything you would like to change?

4. Anything else you would like to share?

61 Appendix J: Performance, Quality and Innovation Board Terms of Reference

Chair of the Board Director of Improvement

Purpose To monitor that we are doing the right things at the right time to consolidate or improve outcomes for our children, young people and their families by thinking together, learning together and improving together. This will be achieved by:  examining, challenging, and scrutinising performance and effectiveness in meeting objectives set out in the learning and improvement plan and the business plans  ensuring that performance management is co-ordinated and analysed in a consistent way  evaluating the success of service delivery, ensuring that in-year service performance is tracked against target and quality assurance findings  ensuring the timely production of performance data that is required for internal performance reporting and external statutory assessment(s) and inspection  ensuring that effective data quality processes are in place so that data provided is of the highest integrity and accuracy  reviewing audit findings and analyses to determine strengths and improvement areas  reviewing findings from serious case reviews, learning lessons reviews, children act complaints and feedback from children, young people and families to determine strengths and improvement areas  identifying successes and share examples of effective and innovative practice, and evidence-based research  considering local practice in relation to the child’s journey and the transition between universal, targeted and specialist services

62 Membership Director of Children’s Social Care Associate Director for Identification and Assessment Associate Director for Safeguarding Associate Director for Permanency Associate Director for Family and Youth Support Associate Director for Quality Assurance and Review LADO/Principal Social Worker Head of Performance Head of Systems Head of SPA Heads of Referral and Assessment Teams Heads of Child Protection Teams Head of Permanence Head of Leaving Care/UASC Head of Fostering Head of Adoption Head of Family and Youth Support Head of Youth Resilience Service Team Manager DCT Adolescent Response Team Manager Case Progression Officer Frontline Managers Professional Development Lead for Social Care Virtual School Head Frequency The Performance, Quality and Innovation Group will meet monthly with each meeting scheduled for three hours. Attendance Other than for leave, members are expected to attend all meetings so that their knowledge, skills and experience can be shared and colleagues can learn from one another. Additional members of staff or key stakeholders may be invited to attend for specific items. Administration The board will be supported by the PA to the Chair of the Performance, Quality and Innovation Board.

 The administrative duties will include: Agreement of agenda

 Agenda and papers to be circulated minimum of 3 working days in advance of meeting

 Maintaining an up to date Forward Plan

 Taking the minutes and recording of matters arising and updates.

 Monitoring and follow up of decisions and agreed actions. Any reports for consideration by the board will be required from authors at least three working days before the meeting. Paper and Agenda and papers will be circulated at least three working days in advance. distribution Minutes of the board will be circulated within seven working days of the Board.

63

Load more

  64

Copy Link