Children in the Care of the Nottinghamshire Councils
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Children in the care of the Nottinghamshire Councils Nottinghamshire the of care the in Children Children in Investigation Report Investigation the care of the Nottinghamshire Councils Investigation Report July 2019 July 2019 2019 Children in the care of the Nottinghamshire Councils Investigation Report July 2019 A report of the Inquiry Panel Professor Alexis Jay OBE Professor Sir Malcolm Evans KCMG OBE Ivor Frank Drusilla Sharpling CBE © Crown copyright 2019 The text of this document (this excludes, where present, the Royal Arms and all departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided that it is reproduced accurately and not in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the document title specified. Where third‑party material has been identified, permission from the respective copyright holder must be sought. Any enquiries related to this publication should be sent to us at [email protected] or Freepost IICSA INDEPENDENT INQUIRY. This publication is available at https://www.iicsa.org.uk/reports CCS0619509552 07/19 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled‑fibre content minimum. Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. The following amendment was made to this report on 1 August 2019: Pages 146 and 149: The core participant Michael Summers, formerly ciphered as F52, has previously waived his anonymity and references have been updated. Contents Executive Summary iii Pen portraits from children in the care of the Nottinghamshire Councils 1 Part A: Introduction 5 A.1: Background 7 A.2: Nature and extent of allegations of sexual abuse 9 A.3: Case studies 10 A.4: Methodology 11 Part B: Context 13 B.1: Introduction 14 B.2: Child protection issues in the early 1990s 14 B.3: Governance 15 B.4: Response to allegations of child sexual abuse 17 B.5: External inspections 21 B.6: Police approach to allegations of child sexual abuse 22 B.7: Crown Prosecution Service approach to allegations of child sexual abuse 26 B.8: Operations Daybreak, Xeres and Equinox 28 Part C: Case study: Beechwood 33 C.1: Introduction 34 C.2: Allegations of abuse at Beechwood 35 C.3: Residential care 36 C.4: Background to Beechwood 39 C.5: Beechwood: 1967–1980 40 C.6: Beechwood: 1981–1998 48 C.7: Continuing problems under the control of the City: 1998–2006 55 C.8: Response to allegations against staff at other homes 61 Part D: Case study: Foster care 71 D.1: Introduction 72 D.2: Allegations of abuse 72 D.3: Background 73 D.4: Developments in foster care 74 D.5: External inspections 78 D.6: Responses to abuse 79 i Part E: Casestudy:Harmfulsexual behaviour 95 E.1: Introduction 96 E.2: Allegations of harmful sexual behaviour in Nottinghamshire 96 E.3: Understanding harmful sexual behaviour 97 E.4: Policy and practice developments in Nottinghamshire 99 E.5: Institutional responses 106 E.6: Nottinghamshire Police and Crown Prosecution Service approach to non‑recent harmful sexual behaviour 116 Part F: Cross‑cutting themes 119 F.1: Barriers to disclosure 120 F.2: Recent responses to complainants 124 F.3: External inspections of children’s social care in the Councils 132 Part G: Conclusions and recommendations 135 G.1: Conclusions 136 G.2: Matters to be explored further by the Inquiry 141 G.3: Recommendations 141 Annexes 143 Annex 1: Overview of process and evidence obtained by the Inquiry 144 Annex 2: Glossary 156 Annex 3: List of convictions 158 ii Executive Summary This is one of three investigations by the Inquiry into the nature and extent of allegations of sexual abuse of children in the care of local authorities. The primary purpose of this investigation was to examine the institutional responses to such allegations of Nottinghamshire County Council, Nottingham City Council, and other organisations such as Nottinghamshire Police and the Crown Prosecution Service, and to consider the adequacy of steps taken to protect children from abuse. These two councils were chosen because of the high level of allegations of sexual abuse of children in their care over many years. The Inquiry received evidence of around 350 complainants who made allegations of sexual abuse whilst in the care of the Councils from the 1960s onwards, though the true scale is likely to be higher. This is the largest number of specific allegations of sexual abuse in a single investigation that the Inquiry has considered to date. For more than five decades, the Councils failed in their statutory duty to protect children in their care from sexual abuse. These were children who were being looked after away from their family homes because of adverse childhood experiences and their own pre‑existing vulnerabilities. They needed to be nurtured, cared for and protected by adults they could trust. Instead, the Councils exposed them to the risk, and reality, of sexual abuse perpetrated primarily by predatory residential staff and foster carers. In residential care, there were poor recruitment practices, few qualified staff and little in‑service training. This was compounded by overcrowding and low staffing ratios. It was as if anyone could carry out the important work of being a substitute parent to damaged children. In some instances, a sexualised culture existed in residential homes, with staff behaving wholly inappropriately towards children, paving the way for sexual abuse. Whilst set standards of conduct and child protection procedures were put in place, there was little proper training provided to help staff understand their employers’ requirements, nor action taken against those who did not comply. Staff ignored these standards and procedures with impunity. Nevertheless, it must be borne in mind that, regardless of all other considerations, the sexual abuse of children should have been regarded by all staff as a criminal offence. Residential care carried little priority with senior managers, even when they were aware of escalating numbers of allegations of sexual abuse. Whilst there were some improvements over time, with awareness of the problem improving, directors of social services and children’s social care failed to fully address the issue in both residential and foster care. Nor were elected members informed of the scale of the abuse. Neither of the Councils learned from their mistakes, despite commissioning many reviews which made clear what changes were needed in their care systems to stop the sexual abuse of children. iii Children in the care of the Nottinghamshire Councils: Investigation Report During the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, physical violence and sexual abuse occurred in many of the Councils’ children’s homes and in foster care. This included repeated rapes (vaginal, anal and oral), sexual assaults, and voyeurism. Harmful sexual behaviour also occurred between children in both settings. Between the late 1970s and 2019, 16 residential staff were convicted of sexual abuse of children in residential care, 10 foster carers were convicted of sexual abuse of their foster children, and the Inquiry is aware of 12 convictions relating to the harmful sexual behaviour of children against other children in care. The offences in residential care took place in Beechwood and a number of other children’s residential units, including the following 12 establishments: Hazelwood, Skegby Hall, Edwinstowe, Sandown Road, Wollaton House, Hillcrest, Risley Hall, Greencroft, Beckhampton Road, Woodnook, Amberdale and Three Roofs. Some of the convicted offenders are detailed below: Two offenders, Norman Campbell and Christopher Metcalfe, were convicted of sexual assaults against children in both residential care and foster care. Patrick Gallagher was convicted of 55 counts of sexual abuse committed between 1998 and 2010 against 16 children, seven of whom were in care. He was given 13 life sentences, with a minimum of 28 years’ imprisonment. Robert Thorpe was convicted in 2009 of several counts of indecent assault and unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under 13 who was being fostered by his friends. He was given five years’ imprisonment. Dean Gathercole was convicted of six counts of indecent assault and three counts of rape of two residents at Amberdale in the late 1980s. He was given a prison sentence of 19 years in 2018. Accounts of abuse include: L17 was raped on “four or five occasions” by staff member Colin Wallace, who was later convicted. She was made to masturbate Wallace in a communal lounge in Beechwood, where other children and staff were present. P2 was in foster care in the 1960s, and was raped by her foster father on camping holidays. P13 was sexually abused between 1979 and 1981 by the 21‑year‑old brother of his foster mother and was forced to masturbate him and perform oral sex. A76 spent 16 years in care in 21 placements. She was abused by older boys in several children’s homes and was the victim of rape and sexual assault. Over the years, as local authority boundaries changed, responsibility for some of the services referred to in this report moved between the County and the City. The Inquiry selected three case studies to examine in detail the responses of institutions to sexual abuse of children in the care of the two councils. iv Executive Summary Beechwood Beechwood operated for 39 years, from 1967 to 2006, and was run for periods by the City and County. It was run first as a remand home, then as an observation and assessment centre, and later a community home. In common with residential care across England at the time, it was poorly resourced and managed. Care staff were predominantly unqualified and received little, if any, training. Even with these similarities, however, no other residential homes in Nottinghamshire have had the level of allegations of sexual abuse which have been made about Beechwood staff.