children’s services quality assurance audit … · to achieve overall benefit to children’s...

- 1 -

CHILDREN’S SERVICES QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT (QAA)

CS 20060 V1.0 2013-04-05

WARNING! PLEASE NOTE IF THE REVIEW DATE SHOWN BELOW HAS PASSED THIS DOCUMENT MAY NO LONGER BE CURRENT AND YOU SHOULD CHECK THE

E-LIBRARY FOR THE MOST UP TO DATE VERSION

THIS DOCUMENT APPLIES IN THE FOLLOWING DIRECTORATES/ UNIT(S)

Children and Families THIS DOCUMENT AFFECTS THE FOLLOWING GROUPS OF STAFF AND / OR OTHERS:

• All staff working in the Children and Families unit of Children’s Services • All Managers and Supervisors working in the Children and Families of Children Services

(including Social Care Fieldwork, Fostering and Adoption Services and Children’s Homes). THIS DOCUMENT IS DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE THE FOLLOWING OUTPUT & OUTCOME:

• The output of the QAA Framework is that through a supportive and collaborative process involving regular feedback and supported learning staff compliance with agreed systems and processes is achieved and is evidenced in a robust reporting mechanism.

• The outcome is that children and their families who receive a service report positive experiences from service provision and improvements in their overall wellbeing.

Benefits A quality assurance audit framework informs senior management about:

• current service/practice issues;

• actual or emerging problems;

• areas of strength;

• allows for evaluation and determination of the effectiveness of training; and,

• demonstrates the organization's capacity to understand the services delivered and the ability to improve.

The principle outcome of an audit is to promote improvement and generate continuous feedback ensuring that the organisation's systems are in compliance with all internal policy/procedures and external legislative and regulatory requirements. The above policy fits with the principles espoused in the High Expectation, High Support and High Challenge, Ofsted, 2012.

- 2 -

CONTENTS

1. POLICY STATEMENT - 3 - 2. PROCEDURE - 3 - 3. PRACTICE GUIDELINE - 5 - Process - 5 - Systems - 5 - Compliance - 6 - Quality - 6 - Appendix 1 – Integrated QAAF and QAAF workflow circuit

- 10 -

Appendix 2 – Child Protection Service Standards and Audit Tool

- 11 -

Appendix 3 – Child and Family Support Services Standards and Audit Tool

- 19 -

Appendix 4 – Children Looked After Service Standards and Audit Tool

- 25 -

Appendix 5 – Children with a Disability Service Standards and Audit Tool

- 32 -

Appendix 6 – Triage and EDT Service Standards and Audit Tool

- 36 -

Appendix 7 – Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) Service Standards and Audit Tool

- 42 -

Appendix 8 – Fostering Services Service Standards and Audit Tool

- 52 -

Appendix 9 – Adoption Services and Service Standards and Audit Tool

- 53 -

Appendix 10 – Children’s Homes Service Standards and Audit Tool

- 54 -

Appendix 11 - ICS Operational Guidance on Electronic Audit Tool Management - 55 -

- 3 -

1. POLICY 1.1 Audit represents a central strand of organisational quality assurance. It underpins robust

management oversight of organisational activity to ensure there is compliance with agreed service standards, professional values are evident and organisational risk is identified and effectively managed. To this end all Children’s Services Directorate services will establish quality assurance audit as an integral part of operational day-to-day business.

1.2 The services delivered by Cumbria County Council Children’s Services are governed and

determined by legislative duties and regulatory requirements. This QAA policy has the organisational purpose and function of ensuring a quality assurance audit framework and process is embedded and has the capacity to deliver assurances that the organisation’s required operating systems are in place, fit for purpose and are being followed.

1.3 The primary aim is to ensure there is compliance with the organisation’s legal and regulatory

requirements in order to deliver a standard, consistent and best possible level of service to the service user. The objective of the audit framework is to identify areas requiring improvement and areas of good practice.

1.4 A successful quality assurance audit framework identifies and addresses risks/deficits in

operational practices and provides the organisation with a level of assurance that the agreed service standards are being delivered. To achieve overall benefit to Children’s Services quality assurance auditing will identify areas of good practice and provide evidence of compliance so that where necessary corrective action can be taken.

1.5 Through regular audit reporting areas of good compliant practice should be disseminated

across the service base, in this way, a quality service baseline is established leading to continual improvements in working practices across children’s services domains.

1.6 Cumbria County Council Children’s Services subscribe to the principles of inter-agency

collaboration espoused in Working Together to Safeguard Children, 2010. A key dimension of the single agency audit framework is how it integrates with the multi-agency QAA model (see: Appendix 1).

1.7 The model is designed to co-ordinate the audit activity of Cumbria Local Safeguarding

Children’s Board (LSCB) and Children’s Trust Board (CTB) in order to provide data on the effectiveness of the overarching safeguarding system. The objective of this collaborative and coordinated approach is to provide an insight and understanding of the child’s and their family’s journey and experience along the service provision pathway (see: Multi agency Thresholds Guidance, 2013).

1.8 This policy seeks to promote a learning organisation approach to service improvements that

shifts away from the ‘blame culture’ that can often paralyse an organisation’s staff. This is not to say that dangerous unsafe practice should not be addressed emphatically but that effective audit should be identifying poor practice early and offering support to improve the situation.

2. PROCEDURE 2.1 Each individual Children and Families operational service area will establish QAA processes

as a central component of operational activity. 2.2 The responsible Children’s Services Senior Managers will draft and agree an annual

programme of audit work for their service area, that sets out:

• the nature and focus of the audit; • how often and by who;

- 4 -

2.3 It is the responsibility of the designated auditor to undertake assigned audit work within the timescale agreed.

2.4 The designated auditor must complete the standard audit tool/record document for the service

being audited during the audit process. 2.5 The record documents provide the feedback mechanism for both the organisation’s leadership

teams ands the individual and/or team whose work is beings audited. 2.6 The designated auditor will send an email alert to the individual/team whose work had been

audited that the audit record is available on ICS within 2 working days of completing the audit. 2.7 The number of audits undertaken in each service on a ‘year to date’ basis will be reported

monthly to the Extended Leadership Team (ELT) Performance Group meeting. 2.8 A quarterly review of all audits undertaken in the previous three month period will be

scheduled in each service led by the Service Manager supported by a nominated member of the Audit and Practice Development Team.

2.9 The timing of the quarterly review meetings will be set prior to the scheduled in month ELT

Performance Group meeting to facilitate the reporting process.

2.10 The review meeting will undertake an analysis of the audit output data and produce a quantitative and qualitative report that outlines emerging issues and trends.

2.11 The report will be reviewed by the Senior Manager of the service area for an overarching

commentary and sign off.

2.12 Each service Senior Manager will ensure a copy of the finalised quarterly report is forwarded to the Safeguarding and Quality Assurance Service to produce an aggregated report for the ELT Performance Group meeting.

2.13 Reports of LSCB and CTB scheduled multi-agency audit (see: Cumbria LSCB & CTB

Performance Management & Quality Assurance Framework) activities will be included in the aggregated data report to the ELT Performance Group.

2.14 Cumbria Children’s Services the audit outcomes and other relevant safeguarding data (eg.

IRO DRP data) will feed into the LSCB multi-agency audit framework.

2.15 The audit activity of the CLA teams and relevant other data (eg IRO DRP data) will feed into the multi-agency audit framework of the Cumbria CTB/MALAP.

2.16 Any CAF related data coming out of the Cumbria Children’s Services audit work will be shared

with the CTB to support their audit work on CAF performance. (See: Integrated Model Appendix 1).

2.17 The data emanating from the Dispute Resolution Process (DRP) undertaken by the

Independent Reviewing Service will also be considered by the Audit and Practice Development Team as part of the audit output data review mechanism.

2.18 This aggregated data will be complemented with any other available service user feedback

data, for example, representations and complaints, to provide an overall picture of service user journey and experience

2.19 It will be the responsibility of the Audit and Practice Development Team to ultilise the

aggregated audit data contained in the audit output reports to inform thinking on remedial actions and a programme of intervention. This work will include learning from identified good practice across the county. The Audit and Practice Development Team will undertake this in partnership with the relevant managers and staff.

- 5 -

2.20 The proposed intervention programme will be reported to the ELT Performance Group meeting by the Safeguarding and Quality Assurance Senior Manager for approval. The Audit and Practice Development Team will produce an Impact Report for ELT Performance Group meeting following each practice/service improvement intervention.

IMPORTANT

If the designated auditor identifies dangerous or unsafe practice at any point in the audit process, particularly if a child may be at risk of harm, then the service area service manager and senior manager will be informed immediately. Once alerted to dangerous or unsafe practice it is the responsibility of the service manager and senior manager to review the practice circumstances and take appropriate remedial action.

3. PRACTICE GUIDELINE

Process

3.1 The process of quality assurance audit is performed to verify, or not, conformance to service standards through review of objective evidence. In the context of Children’s Services it is essential that audit data demonstrates that the directorate is delivering services consistent with the legislative and regulatory requirements.

3.2 Before starting a quality assurance audit, the designated auditor should review and become familiar with the procedures, work instructions, service standards and specifications underpinning the service to be audited.

3.3 Using a quality checklist (audit tool) during an audit enables the designated auditor to stick to the facts, be clear and accurate with any documented evidence (See: Appendix 2 – Child Protection, Appendix 3 – Child and Family Support, Appendix 4 - Children Looked After, Appendix 5 - Children with a Disability, Appendix 6 – Triage and EDT, Appendix 7 Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) , Appendix 8 – Fostering, Appendix 9 – Adoption, Appendix 10 – Children’s Homes

3.4 While conducting the audit, the designated auditor should keep an open mind, avoid bias, be patient, and refrain from correcting individuals during the audit.

3.5 The auditor should avoid confrontation and remind all participants that the purpose of the audit is to promote continuous improvement.

3.6 This insight and approach allows the designated auditor to undertake the audit process from a position of objectivity when reviewing systems, compliance and quality. It is imperative that the designated auditor understands this tri-dimensional requirement; systems, compliance and quality.

Systems

3.7 Children’s Services have various systems in place to facilitate service delivery across a spectrum of service areas, for example, child protection and children looked after systems. Each service area has sub-systems or processes which when combined create a whole system. If there is a breakdown in the way sub-systems/processes interact/inter-relate it can dilute the overall output effectiveness of the complete system.

3.8 A systems audit can be undertaken on a number of inter-related sub-systems/processes or the complete system to ascertain if the system is fit for purpose in achieving a common goal.

- 6 -

3.9 A single process might also be audited over several cycles to ascertain consistency in approach. For example, the professional supervision process is the lynchpin of organizational accountability and practice insight. An audit that reviews a range of supervisors would determine how consistent the process is being delivered (e.g. Are actions agreed in a session reviewed at the next session) and inform remedial action around standardisation.

Compliance

3.10 The majority of the Children’s Services operational systems/processes are derived from central government legislation and regulatory guidance underpinned by agency and multi-agency policy and procedure.

3.11 An essential component to meeting these legal and regulatory requirements is management and practitioner compliance with procedural processes.

For example, Working Together sets the timescale for the occurrence of ICPCs and RCPCs. The electronic data base (ICS) provides the designated auditor with the data around occurrence dates so that compliance with timescales can be measured.

3.12 Although this is a quantitative measure the audit process can help to identify if there is a

trend of non-compliance with agreed timescales in an individual’s practice or a culture within a team or a countywide issue. The identification of non-compliant practice informs remedial action. Once practice deficits are addressed it will require planned re-audit to ensure future compliance is embedded.

Quality

3.13 It may well be the case that systems and compliance are not significant issues coming out of

an audit exercise, however, the quality of the practice in service delivery may fall short of expected standards.

3.14 A quality service is one that is safe in responding to risk, effective in meeting assessed needs

and sustainable within existing resources.

3.15 Social care service provision is complex by its nature and will never be completely error free. Service provision will be strongly influenced by the assessment process, particularly risk assessment, and policy directives to inform and undertake the least invasive intervention when working with children and their families.

3.16 Consequently the quality of practice in this complex service arena is critical to minimizing

error.

For example, how a practitioner sets about collating assessment information and undertaking risk and needs analysis on the basis of this information is a critical quality issue as this will determine the service response. Equally how a practitioner progresses agreed tasks within a child protection or care plan is a quality issue that will determine the outcome for a child and their family following a service intervention. It ultimately determines the child’s experience which is the most important measure of all.

3.17 It is essential therefore that a designated auditor is properly prepared with the right level of

knowledge and understanding of the audit subject. Equally he or she must have a sound understanding the inter-relatedness of Systems, Compliance and Quality.

3.18 Each service delivery domain within Cumbria Children’s Services Directorate has developed a set of Service Standards. These service standards support the statutory duties and responsibilities for each service delivery domain. The service standards are contained in a standardised document in order to achieve consistent presentation.

- 7 -

3.19 The service standard documents are located at Appendix 2 – Child Protection, Appendix 3 – Child and Family Support, Appendix 4 - Children Looked After, Appendix 5 - Children with a Disability, Appendix 6 – Triage and EDT, Appendix 7 Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO), Appendix 8 – Fostering, Appendix 9 – Adoption, Appendix 10 – Children’s Homes of this document and form the reference point for undertaking an audit for each of the services.

3.20 Audit tools for each service are located with the service standards in the appendices and on

ICS. 3.21 The responsible Senior Manager for the service will produce an audit plan that details the

audit requirements for that service. The plan will outline the following;

1. The nature (themed and generic audit);

2. Scope of the audit work (the number of audits to be completed in a given period) to be undertaken;

3. Who is responsible for undertaking the audit work the designated auditor (s);

4. The frequency for undertaking audit work;

5. The method for reporting the output of the audit work.

3.22 Based on the audit activity output data the Senior Manager for the service domain may direct

a specific focus of audit at a particular point in the annual audit cycle, for example, a themed audit of the quality of assessment and analysis.

3.23 The audit process will be completed by the designated auditor in line with the service audit plan programme specific requirements.

3.24 The designated auditor will complete the relevant audit tool on ICS or download the audit tool from ICS then complete this as a record of the audit activity.

3.25 Once completed as a word document the audit tool will be uploaded on ICS (see: Appendix

11- ICS Audit Tool Guidance). 3.26 Once the audit process is completed on ICS, the designated auditor will send an ‘audit

completed’ alert email to the audited worker and to the Team Manager responsible for the worker within 2 working days.

3.27 The responsible Team Manager will use the audit data to inform discussion around good

practice and/or practice/service improvement as part of individual professional supervision and team meetings. Service Managers will use this data to inform service-wide improvements.

3.28 Each service audit plan programme will include provision for audit data review sessions, and

who will be responsible for organising and co-coordinating the meetings. These will occur quarterly as a minimum but a Senior Manager may agree more regular meetings if the audit process reveals a concerning or persistent trend.

3.29 The objective of the review meeting process is to undertake a quantitative and qualitative

exercise that evaluates and analyses the available audit data from the previous 3 month period to identify areas for improvement and to set actions to achieve this improvement, also to highlight good practice and disseminate the learning.

3.30 The review group will produce a report to be sent to the service Senior Manager for comment

and sign off. The service Senior Manager will forward the report to the Safeguarding and Quality Assurance Service to be aggregated with other service domain audit data reports to provide an overarching QAA report to the ELT Performance Group.

3.31 The aggregated data report will outline audit trends and recommend remedial actions on a

quarterly basis.

- 8 -

3.32 The agreed format for the service QAA report will be designed to fit with the reporting

requirements of the LSCB and CTB Performance Management Quality Assurance Framework. This process facilitates the safeguarding audit data being utilised to populate the areas of the multi-agency audit tool relevant to Children’s Services.

3.33 The Audit and Practice Development Service will develop a practice/service improvement

programme based on the analysis of the audit data and emerging trends. 3.34 This intervention programme should include support for individual practitioners and teams but

might also develop countywide practice intervention for more widespread trends, for example, facilitate ‘good practice’ sessions in each locality.

3.35 The Audit and Practice Development Service will include other sources of data from

LSCB/CTB multi-agency audit activity coming out of the joint PMQA framework, DRP activity, complaints and representations and service user feedback surveys.

3.36 The Audit and Practice Development Service will develop mechanisms for eliciting service

user experiences, for example, a telephone survey of a group of service users whose cases have been recently audited. The objective is to create ‘pen picture’ examples of a child’s or young person’s experiences, for example, a child’s journey and experience through the child protection system.

3.37 This should include an analysis of the outcome for the child. The pen pictures provide

tangible evidenced based examples of positive and poor practice outcomes which can be used for both reporting and practice improvement interventions.

3.38 Appendix 1 provides a more detailed understanding of the Integrated QAA Model in the

context of operational guidance around the responsibilities and the activities undertaken by the three audit and reporting strands of the QAA framework; children’s services, inter-agency partnerships (LSCB/CTB PMQA framework) and Audit and Practice Development service.

- 9 -

RELATED DOCUMENTS

RELATED 3Ps Children’s Services Policy

OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS None

LEGISLATION OR OTHER STATUTORY REGULATIONS

APPENDICES ATTACHED (these will be read-only in the E library)

Appendix 1 –Integrated QAAF and QAAF workflow circuit Appendix 2 – Child Protection Service Standards and Audit Tool Appendix 3 –Children in Need Service Standards and Audit Tool Appendix 4 – Children Looked After Service Standards and Audit Tool Appendix 5 – Children with a Disability Service Standards and Audit Tool Appendix 6 – Triage and EDT Service Standards and Audit Tool Appendix 7 – Independent Reviewing Officer Service Standards and Audit Tool Appendix 8 – Fostering Services Service Standards and Audit Tool Appendix 9 – Adoption Services Service Standards and Audit Tool Appendix 10 – Children’s Homes Service Standards and Audit Tool Appendix 11 - ICS operational Guidance on Electronic Audit Tool Management

DOCUMENTS SUPERSEDED BY THIS 3P

none

APPROVAL AND REVIEW

Approved By: (Assistant Director/Senior Manager)

Charles Proctor, Senior Manager Quality Assurance and Safeguarding

Date Originally Published: 10/05/2013

Date of Next Review: 10/05/2013

DOCUMENT CHANGE HISTORY

Version No Date Issued by Reason for change

v1.0 2013-02-11 Brian Brown

1st version of document

- 10 -

Appendix 1: Integrated QAAF Model and QAAF Workflow Circuit.

Integrated QAA Framework.

Extended Leadership Team Performance Management Group.

Ofsted Inspection Framework

Safeguarding & QA (A&PD) Service –

collates QAA, LSCB/CTB PMQA

Service User Feedback, Complaint Representation Data.

Maintained required

data base

LSCB & CTB QAA

Framework

(Multi-agency safeguarding/

CLA data)

Children’s Service

Domains QAA Framework

(Single service domain audit

data)

SERVICE DOMAIN AUDIT PLAN

ICS – AUDIT TOOLS

AUDIT SUBJECT

SERVICE DOMAIN QUARTERLY REVIEW –AUDIT EVALUATION &

ANALYSIS GROUP ‐ REPORT

AUDIT FEEDBACK LOOP –2 WORKING DAYS

AUDIT TOOL DOWNLOAD

AUDIT TOOL UPLOAD

QRTLY AUDIT ACTIVITY DATA FEEDBACK LOOP

MTHLY AUDIT ACTIVITY FEEDBACK LOOP ELT PERFORMANCE GROUP

SERVICE DOMAIN SENIOR MANAGER ‐ REPORT

COMMENTARY & SIGN OFF

QRTLY REPORT FEEDBACK LOOP

SAFEGUARDING & QA SERVICE – QRTLY AUDIT ACTIVITY AGGREGATED DATA

REPORT DRAFTED

SDSM FEEDBACK LOOP

LCSB/CTB ‐MULTI‐AGENCY AUDIT FRAMEWORK

AUDIT DATA EXCHANGE

CHIDREN’S SERVICES & MULTI‐AGENCY QRTLY AUDIT REPORT & A&PD REPORT FEEDBACK LOOP

AUDIT & PRACTICE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE

AUDIT DATA FLOW ‐INTERVENTION PLANNING &

IMPACT REPORT

CHILDREN’ SERVICES ‐SERVICE DOMAINS

A&PD INTERVENTIN & IMPACT FEEDBACK

LOOP

QAAF: WORKFLOW, ACTIVITY & REPORING CIRCUIT

- 11 -

Appendix 2: Child Protection Service Standards and Audit Tool.

Our approach to assessment, care planning and interventions with children and their families across children’s social work is based on our Needs Lead/Outcome Focussed four stage approach. Needs - stated in specific terms (not in terms of a universal need, an assessment or a service) Seriousness – “what would happen if we did nothing” involves a judgement about the severity of need based on evidence, knowledge and research Outcomes – negotiated and agreed, these enable a shared recognition of what needs to be achieved, provide measures of success and indicators of what success looks like Services – delivered or commissioned only to meet stated needs, prioritised by level of seriousness and where outcomes or clearly defined Child Protection Teams deliver specific responsibilities placed on the local authority within this context. Their primary responsibilities are outlined in guidance and procedure along with necessary standards delivered principally from:

• Working Together to Safeguard Children (DSCF 2010) (Statutory Guidance) and linked legislation

• Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families (DOH 2000) (‘NAF’)

• Preparing for Care and Supervision Proceedings (MoJ/DCSF 2009) and linked Practice Directions and guidance

• Cumbria LSCB Procedures • Children’s Services Policy, Procedure and Practice Guidelines

Guidance

1. Initial Assessment (WT 5.38 – 5.47, NAF 3.9 and 3.10) 2. Protecting children from significant harm (WT 5.50 – 5.55) 3. Strategy Discussions (WT 5.56 – 5.61) 4. S.47 Enquiries (WT 5.62 – 5.69 and 5.71 – 5.81) 5. The Initial Child Protection Conference (WT5.82) 6. Information for a Child Protection Conference (WT 5.91 – 5.93) 7. Acting as a lead professional (WT 5.113 – 5.119) 8. Undertaking Core Assessments (WT 5.120 and 5.121) 9. The Child Protection Plan (WT5.122 – 5.127) 10. Preparing for and undertaking legal action to protect children (PCSP Chapter 2)

* Where a child is looked after the Standards for a Looked After Team also apply

Note: Service Standards to be added.

DUTIES IN REGULATION AND GUIDANCE

- 12 -

Cumbria Children’s Services Audits – Child Protection

This audit tool is part of the Cumbria Children’s Services Quality Assurance Audit Framework (QAAF). The Designated Auditor should read and understand the QAAF Policy/Procedure requirements prior to undertaking a case audit.

Name of practitioner and team being audited.

Name and Job Title of Designated Auditor

Date Audit conducted

ICS Number of case audited

1.Child Basic Details recorded on ICS

Y N Auditor Comments

Name DoB, Age & Gender Address Religion Identity (ethnicity & Nationality)

School or Nursery Child’s Legal Status Family Composition Professionals involved

2.History of involvement Y N Auditor Comments 2.1 Has there been previous CAF/TAC activity by universal services, if so was this an effective intervention?

2.2 If there has been no CAF/TAC activity with the child and family should this have occurred?

2.3 Has there been any previous Children’s Services intervention, if so was this an effective intervention?

2.4 If there has been no prior Children’s Services intervention should a referral have been made at some earlier stage?

3. Referral Y N Auditor Comments 3.1 Was the referral information accurately processed and appropriately sent to the CP service?

3.2 Did the response to referral demonstrate prompt and appropriate action?

3.3 Was there early analysis of risk against the referral information and other checks?

3.4 Was the referral

- 13 -

appropriately allocated? 3.5 Following receipt of the referral were LSCB procedure followed - statutory checks made, appropriate agencies consulted (eg Police), checks with previous Local Authorities, police checks on adults in the household and regular visitors?

3.6 Did a supervisor agree and record a timescale for an assessment to be completed with the child’s timescales?

3.7 Was a strategy discussion held within timescale and which appropriately reflected the urgency of the case?

3.8 Were the right agencies, at an appropriate level of seniority, in attendance at the strategy discussion?

3.9 Did the attendees make appropriate decisions about next actions?

3.10 If progressing to s47 were actions agreed to safeguard the child?

3.11 If not progressing to s47 were appropriate alternative action(s) agreed and undertaken?

3.12 Were the decisions of the strategy discussion recorded and shared?

4. S.47 Enquiry & Early Assessment


4.1 Was the s47 enquiry completed in procedural timescale?

4.2 Were the actions/tasks agreed at strategy meeting completed?

4.3 Was the s47 outcome recorded on ICS in procedural timescale?

4.4 Did the social worker see the child alone?

4.5 Is there evidence that the child’s wishes and feelings have been taken into account?

4.6 Did the S.47 Enquiry evaluate the risks to the child (and siblings), and consider how those risks should be managed?

4.7 If the s47 enquiry outcome decision was not to convene a child

- 14 -

protection conference, were appropriate alternative actions taken? (eg. agreed actions/tasks on how to meet the child and family’s needs, in order to avoid potential re-referral at a later stage) 4.8 Was the child safeguarded (risk minimised) at the conclusion of the s47 enquiry?

4.9 As part of the assessment was a risk assessment and analysis outlined?

4.10 Did the assessment consider the family history and previous agency involvement with particular consideration given to the parent’s own experience of being parented?

4.11 It there a genogram/ eco-map to aid understanding of the family?

4.12. Is there evidence of the voice of the child in the assessment?

4.13. Is there evidence that the child’s identity needs have been considered in the assessment?

4.14 Is there evidence of managerial oversight, including risk analysis review, recorded in supervision notes on ICS?

4.15 Did the assessment adequately inform the Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC) decision making?

4.16 Was the assessment of sufficient quality to inform the draft outline CP Plan?

5.Initial Child Protection Conference


5.1 Did the social worker complete the inter-agency and parent/carer ICPC invite details document (part of the s47 process on ICS) and send to IRO Service administration in timescale to allow the invites to be sent out?

5.2 Was the ICPC convened in procedural timescale?

5.3 Did the social worker

- 15 -

provide a written report to ICPC in timescale? 5.4 Was the social worker report shared by the social worker with parents/ carers and the child (where appropriate) at least 2 working days prior to the ICPC?

5.5 Is there evidence of the child’s voice in the social worker ICPC report?

5.6 Is there evidence of parents/carers views in the social worker report to ICPC?

5.7 Is there evidence of the child’s identity needs being considered in the report?

5.8 Is there evidence of Strengthening Practice materials being used in the assessment?

5.9 Is there evidence of managerial oversight of practitioner report and activity recorded in supervision notes on ICS?

5.10 Did the IRO and ICPC consider the need for any further elements of assessment and make appropriate recommendations as part of the CP plan?

6. Child Protection Plan, Core Group Activity & Assessment.


6.1 Did the social worker convene the core group within procedural timescale following the ICPC?

6.2 Did the social worker lead the core group to draft the Child Protection Plan to reflect the assessment and agreed ICPC actions/ recommendations?

6.3 Is there evidence of the voice of the child being considered in the CP planning process undertaken by the core group?

6.4 Is there evidence of the child’s identity being considered in the CP planning process undertaken by the core group?

6.5 Has the social worker scheduled the core group to meet at the frequency

- 16 -

agreed by the ICPC? 6.6 Is there evidence of parents/carers involvement in the core group?

6.7 Is there a parents/carers written and signed agreement in place that articulate the expectations of parents/carers to work within the CP Plan?

6.8 Is there evidence that the social worker has coordinated the activities of the core group to progress the CP Plan?

6.9 Has the social worker ensured that the records of core groups are circulated to core group members (including those unable to be present at meeting) in timescale?

6.10 Has the social worker undertaken CP statutory visits in line with agreed ICPC recommendation and the child been seen on each occasion alone?

6.11 Does the recording of CP statutory visits demonstrate that the social worker has complied with the requirements of the statutory visit?

6.12 Has an effective working relationship been established with the child and family to influence positive change and reduce risk? If not, has appropriate action been taken if this has not been possible?

6.13 Where required was any additional elements of assessment completed jointly by the core group?

6.14 Was any additional assessment of sufficient quality (information collated and analysis) to facilitate an informed process of developing the CP plan objectives to meet the needs of the child including reducing risk and outcome focused?

6.15 Is there evidence of managerial oversight, including review of risk, recorded in supervision notes on ICS?

6.16. Is there evidence of Strengthening Practice materials being used in the case plannig process?

- 17 -

7. Review Child Protection Conference.


7.1 Was the RCPC convened in timescale?

7.2 Was the RCPC attendee invite document submitted by the case social worker to the IRO administrative service in timescale to ensure invites were sent out?

7.3 Did the social worker produce a written report for the RCPC in timescale?

7.4 Was the written report shared with parents/ carers at least 10 working days prior to the RCPC?

7.5 Was the quality of the social worker report sufficiently detailed and analytical to inform the RCPC members of the progress made by the core group against the CP plan?

7.6 Has the social work report presented a current evaluation and analysis of risk to the child sufficient to inform RCPC membership decision making on required future actions/tasks?

7.7 Does the social work report explicitly include the ‘voice of the child’?

7.8 Does the social work report explicitly include the child’s identity issue(s)?

7.9 Has the social work report demonstrated sufficient detail to show that the child has been effectively safeguarded since the last CP conference?

7.10 If the CP plan has progressed sufficiently to lead to a decision to cease the CP plan, has the social worker ensured that appropriate follow-on support been planned for the child and family as a child in need, or if ‘stepped-down’ to a multi- agency team around the child?

7.11 Is there evidence of managerial oversight recorded in supervision notes on ICS?

Note: The process of RCPC audit is repeated for subsequent RCPCs (copy and paste the section).

- 18 -

8. Case Management. Y N Auditor Comments 8.1 Are the ICS records kept for this child complete, up to date and show the work undertaken and the progress made to address the risk to the child?

8.2 Is the ICS chronology updated regularly by the social worker/team manager to show significant case events and key decisions?

8.3 Is there evidence of managerial oversight recorded in supervision notes on ICS?

8.4 Does the supervision process address risks and threats to the social worker in order that the worker can appropriately challenge the family?

8.5 Has there been management sign-off of all decisions made on this case?

9. Case Work Output Y N Auditor Comments 9.1 Has the work undertaken by the social worker protected and safeguarded the child?

9.2 Has the work undertaken had an impact on improving the outcomes for the child? If so, how?

Auditor recommendations (Areas of good practice to promote learning or on how work on this case can be improved):

- 19 -

Appendix 3: Child and Family Support Service Standards and Audit Tool.

DUTIES IN REGULATION AND GUIDANCE Our approach to assessment, care planning and interventions with children and their families across children’s social work is based on our Needs Lead/Outcome Focussed four stage approach. Needs - stated in specific terms (not in terms of a universal need, an assessment or a service) Seriousness – “what would happen if we did nothing” involves a judgement about the severity of need based on evidence, knowledge and research Outcomes – negotiated and agreed, these enable a shared recognition of what needs to be achieved, provide measures of success and indicators of what success looks like Services – delivered or commissioned only to meet stated needs, prioritised by level of seriousness and where outcomes or clearly defined Early Intervention Teams deliver specific responsibilities placed on the local authority within this context. Their primary responsibilities are outlined in guidance and procedure along with necessary standards delivered principally from:

• Early identification, assessment of needs and intervention – The Common Assessment Framework (CAF) for children and young people: A guide for practitioners (2009)

• National Quality Framework (CAF) Process (2009) • Working Together to Safeguard Children (DCSF 2010) (statutory guidance) and

linked legislation • Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their families (DOH 2000)

(’NAF’) • Cumbria LSCB procedures • Children’s Services Policy, Procedure and Practice Guidelines

Guidance

1. Initial Assessment (WT 5.38 – 5.47, NAF 3.9 and 3.10) 2. Recognising areas of risk for children subject to CAF/TAC (WT 5.12) 3. Planning an assessment (NAF 3.37 – 3.40) 4. Communicating with children (NAF 3.41 – 3.45) 5. Analysis, judgement and decision making (NAF 4.1 – 4.31)

The Child in Need Plan (NAF 4.32 – 4.37)

- 20 -

NOTE: Service Standards to be added.

Cumbria Children’s Services Audits - Children and Family Support

This audit tool is part of the Cumbria Children’s Services Quality Assurance Audit Framework (QAAF). The Designated Auditor should read and understand the QAAF Policy requirements prior to undertaking a case audit.





1.Child Basic Details recorded on ICS


Name DoB & Gender Address Identity (ethnicity & Nationality)

Religion School or Nursery Child’s Legal Status Family Composition Professionals involved Other relevant involvements

2.History of involvement Y N Auditor Comments 2.1 Has there been previous CAF/TAC activity by universal services, if so was this an effective intervention?

2.2 If there has been no CAF/TAC activity with the child and family should this have occurred?

2.3 Has there been any previous Children’s Services intervention, if so was this an effective intervention?

2.4 If there has been no prior Children’s Services intervention should a referral have been made at some earlier stage?

3.Response to Referral Y N Auditor Comments 3.1 Was the referral

- 21 -

information accurately processed and appropriately sent to the C&FS service? 3.2 Did the response to referral demonstrate prompt and appropriate action?

3.3. Was the referral appropriately allocated?

3.4 As part of the allocation process was a pre allocation case outline (early risk assessment, immediate required case actions and timescales by the allocated practitioner) provided by the team manager/senior practitioner?

3.5 Where a referral was not or is still not allocated is there a risk review system in place and operating?

4. Assessment Y N Auditor Comments 4.1 Did a supervisor agree and record a timescale for an assessment to be completed in the child’s timescale?

4.2 Was the child seen as part of the assessment?

4.3 Was the assessment of sufficient quality to facilitate an informed decision about future case direction (e.g. NFA, CAF/ TAC or further assessment)?

NOTE: numbers 4.3, 4.4, & 4.5 will be removed once single assessment is implemented.

4.4 Is there evidence of manager agreement and sign off of the assessment?

4.5 Was the decision making based on the assessment recorded and appropriate?

4.6 Was the assessment completed in the required timescale?

4.7 Does it include an assessment of the nature and level of any risks to the child?

4.8 Did the assessment involve all professionals concerned with the child’s welfare?

4.9 Is the assessment needs led and outcome focused?

4.10 Is there evidence of the voice of the child (the child was seen and contributed to the assessment process)?

4.11 Is there evidence of

- 22 -

the child’s identity needs informing the assessment? 4.12 Has any disability or special need been properly addressed?

4.13 Was the assessment of sufficient quality to facilitate an informed decision making process around the development CIN Plan objectives and outcome focused?

4.14 Following the assessment was the allocation of the case reviewed appropriately (ie. Reallocated to a CFW)?

4.15. Is there evidence of Strengthening Practice materials being used in the assessment process?

4.16 Is there evidence of manager oversight, including review of risk analysis, and sign off of the assessment?

5. Planning Y N Auditor Comments 5.1 Is there a current CIN Plan in place?

5.2 Does the CIN Plan demonstrate inter-agency working together to meet need?

5.3 Does the plan set clear objectives and timescales based on the child’s identified needs from the assessment, including any risk?

5.4 Does the CIN Plan reflect the voice of the child?

5.5 Does the CIN Plan reflect the child’s identity?

5.6 Are desired outcomes included in the CIN Plan?

5.7 Does the CIN Plan include a visiting schedule to see the child and family? If so has this occurred?

5.8 Does the CIN Plan specify review points?

5.9 Has the CIN Plan been agreed and signed by all involved parties?

5.10. Is there evidence of Strengthening Practice materials being used in the planning process?

5.11 Is there evidence of manager oversight and sign off of the CIN Plan?

- 23 -

6. CIN Plan Review Y N Auditor Comments 6.1 Has the CIN Plan been reviewed at agreed intervals?

6.2 Is there evidence that the child (where appropriate) and parents/carers are involved in the CIN Planning review process?

6.3 Is the overall impact of the CIN Plan evaluated and the plan updated and/or amended appropriately?

6.4 Has the child’s level of need and risk to the child been reassessed as part of the review of the CIN Plan?

6.5 Is there evidence that the assessed risk to the child has been reviewed and consideration given to the appropriateness of continued work with the child and family under the Child and Family Service framework as opposed to transition to the Child Protection service framework?

6.6 Is there evidence of actual inter-agency working together to progress the care plan(regular network meetings, united approach, good communication and information-sharing, working together as appropriate)? If not, what action has been taken?

6.7 Is the working together multi-disciplinary service provision having an impact on meeting the child’s and family’s needs?

6.8 Is there evidence that an effective working relationship been built up with the child and family by the case worker?

6.9 Is there evidence of direct work with the child?

7. Case Management Y N Auditor Comments 7.1 Are the case records kept for this child complete and up to date?

7.2 Is case recording of sufficient quality to show the child’s journey and experience of the service(s) provided?

7.3 Is the ICS chronology updated regularly by the

- 24 -

social worker/team manager to show significant case events and key decisions? 7.4 Is the Social Worker appropriately supported and directed in safeguarding and promoting the welfare of the child by their line manager (via supervision, presence at key meetings, management decisions, day to day case consultation, resource decisions by senior managers etc.)?

8. Case Work Output Y N Auditor Comments 8.1 Has the work undertaken by the social worker/CFW safeguarded the child?



- 25 -

Appendix 4: Children Looked After Service Standards and Audit Tool.

DUTIES IN REGULATION AND GUIDANCE Our approach to assessment, care planning and interventions with children and their families across children’s social work is based on our Needs Lead/Outcome Focussed four stage approach. Needs - stated in specific terms (not in terms of a universal need, an assessment or a service) Seriousness – “what would happen if we did nothing” involves a judgement about the severity of need based on evidence, knowledge and research Outcomes – negotiated and agreed, these enable a shared recognition of what needs to be achieved, provide measures of success and indicators of what success looks like Services – delivered or commissioned only to meet stated needs, prioritised by level of seriousness and where outcomes or clearly defined Looked After Teams deliver specific responsibilities placed on the local authority within this context. Their primary responsibilities are outlined in guidance and procedure along with necessary standards delivered principally from:

• Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (England) Regulations 2010 • The Children Act 1989 Guidance and Regulation Vol 2: Care Planning, Placement

and Case Review 2010 • The Children Act 1989 Guidance and Regulation Vol 3: Planning Transition to

Adulthood for Care leavers • Children’s Services Policy, Procedures and Practice Guidance • Adoption Scorecard (An Action Plan for Adoption 2012) • Adoption and Children Act 2002: Adoption Guidance (Feb 2011)

Guidance

1. Care Planning and Review – Care Plans and linked plans (Vol 2, 2.1 – 2.45) 2. Care Planning and Reviews – Care planning in relation to Health (Vol 2, 2.46 –

2.64) 3. Care Planning and Review – Care Planning in relation to Education (Vol 2, 2.65 –

2.77) 4. Care Planning and Review – Contact (Vol 2, 2.78 – 2.93) 5. Placement of children – placements (Vol 2, 3.1 – 3.127) 6. Placement of children – plans (Vol 2, 3.128 – 3.154) 7. Placement of children – visits (Vol 2, 3.155 – 3.176) 8. Young people ceasing to be looked after (Vol 2, Chapter 5 and Vol 3)

Adoption Scorecard and Adoption Guidance (Chapter 2) NOTE: Service Standards to be added.

- 26 -

Cumbria Children’s Services Audit – Children in Care

This audit tool is part of the Cumbria Children’s Services Quality Assurance Audit Framework (QAAF). The Designated Auditor should read and understand the QAAF Policy requirements prior to undertaking a case audit. This audit tool has been designed for cases of children in care and care-leavers. Part 1 is for children recently looked after at the point of the four month Review. Part 2 is for all looked after children prior to the six monthly Review. Audit Details.


Name and job title of Designated Auditor



1. Child Basic Details recorded on ICS


Name DoB, Age & Gender Address Identity (Ethnicity & Nationality)

Religion School or Nursery Child’s Legal Status Family Composition Professionals involved Other relevant involvements Date CLA episode commenced

Reason for Care Episode Placement type PART ONE – FOR CASES AT THE 4 MONTH (SECOND) LAC REVIEW

2. Assessment and Decision-Making

Y N Auditor comments

2.1 Is there a current needs led/outcomes focused assessment completed?

2.2 Has the completed assessment provided a good understanding of the child’s needs and level of any risks?

2.3 Has the assessment been informed by the child’s voice - wishes and feelings?

2.4 Does the assessment consider and fully address the child’s identity issue(s)?

2.5 Has the assessment been informed by the views of all relevant family members?

2.6 Does the assessment demonstrate inter-agency working by involving all relevant agencies in the process?

2.7 Does the assessment

- 27 -

demonstrate clear evaluation and analysis of the information collated to indicate that the decision to accommodate the child was timely, appropriate and the shared view of all agencies working with the family? 2.8. Does the assessment adequately inform, particularly the child’s identity needs, an outcome focused plan?

2.9. Is there evidence of Strengthening Practice materials being employed in assessment and case planning?

2.10 Should more have been done prior to the care episode to support and maintain the child within their family?

2.11 Is there evidence of appropriate managerial involvement in decision-making about the child? (at entry to care and subsequently).

2.12 Is there clarity about how decisions are made?

2.13 Is the current placement the most appropriate to meet the child’s assessed needs and address any identified risk in order to safeguard the child?

2.14 Is there evidence of managerial oversight and sign off of the assessment?

2.15 Does the assessment adequately inform an outcome focused plan for the child?

Designated Auditor Part 1 Summary and recommendations. PART TWO – FOR CASES AT SIX MONTHLY REVIEWS

3.Planning and Review


3.1 Has the child’s care plan been reviewed in line with CLA procedures?

3.2 Does the care plan reflect the actions/tasks to meet the child’s needs identified in the assessment?

3.3 Is there explicit evidence of the child’s voice in the plan?

3.4 Is there explicit evidence of the child’s identity in the plan?

3.5 Has the plan been implemented in a timely way,

- 28 -

monitored, evaluated and appropriately amended to show progress against agreed actions/tasks? 3.6 Is there any evidence of drift?

3.7 Has the child been seen regularly in accordance with the plan and statutory requirements?

3.8 Has the Social Worker or supporting practitioner been a consistent figure?

3.9 Are appropriate services and resources in place to meet the child’s needs in placement and is there evidence of impact to improve the outcome for the child?

3.10 Is there evidence on the record of direct work with the child?

3.11 Is there evidence of the IRO fulfilling their duty to have independent oversight and scrutiny of the child’s case?

3.12 Is there effective planning for permanence, including return home (if viable)?

3.13 Have there been changes of placement? Could or should these have been avoided?

4. Health Y N Auditor Comments 4.1 Are health assessments made by an appropriately skilled person, in a timely way, at regular intervals and do they cover all relevant issues – routine health needs, specialist needs, targeted health promotion - sexual health, drugs & alcohol etc. and emotional well-being?

4.2 Is a health Plan in place? If so are the needs incorporated in the care plan?

4.3 Is there an up to date SDQ? If so are the needs from this evidenced in the care plan?

4.4 Are appropriate services/resources called upon, to meet this child’s needs? If so, are they having an impact?

4.5 Does the child receive timely access to health services, when required? (including where the child is placed)?

5.Safeguarding Y N Auditor Comments

- 29 -

5.1 Are risks to the child in the placement continuously assessed and evaluated (especially when in a purchased placement)

5.2 Are risks to the child from their family continuously assessed and evaluated?

5.3 Are the lifestyle risks (drugs and alcohol, offending, sexual exploitation, etc.) to the child continuously assessed and evaluated?

5.4 Are the risks to the child from going missing continuously assessed and evaluated?

6.Educational Outcomes Y N Auditor Comments 6.1 Is an effective and up-to-date personal education plan (PEP) in place, which has fully involved the child, and which identifies the support the child needs?

6.2 Is the child attending school and supported to attend regularly?

6.3 Has the PEP assisted the child to make progress in education?

6.4 Is the child able to participate in leisure activities of their choice?

6.5 Is the plan regularly monitored and reviewed and is the child making good progress?

7.Transition (if appropriate) Y N Auditor Comments 7.1 Has the young person received good support to enable them to continue in education or training post 16?

7.2 Where applicable, is an effective and timely pathway plan or transition plan in place to support their transition to adulthood? Has the young person been fully involved in developing this plan?

7.3 Have they been well prepared for adult life?

7.4 If preparation for adult life has occurred did it cover guidance and support on independent living?

7.5 Did the preparation cover advice/support to maintain a safe lifestyle?

7.6 Did it cover assessment of financial competency including support to access state benefits?

7.7 Did it cover advice on

- 30 -

future employment and careers? 7.8 Did include advice and support on appropriate housing and tenancy issues?

7.9 Did it include support to access other services – drugs, alcohol, contraception, New Beginnings?

8.Management Oversight/ Supervision


8.1 Is the social worker appropriately supported and directed within professional supervision as prescribed by policy and procedure?

8.2 Does supervision include a clear review of agreed actions/tasks from previous sessions with discussions and decisions recorded?

8.3 Is the care plan reviewed in supervision?

8.4 Is there evidence of effective and continuous analysis of risk within supervision?

8.5 Is the supervisor/manager present at key meetings etc?

9.Case Management Y N Auditor Comments 9.1 Are the records kept for this child complete, up to date, reflect key salient issues (i.e. clear on fact and opinion, provide an accurate picture, has good analysis linked to progress of the care plan actions/tasks) and show the child’s journey and experience?

9.2 Does the case recording and chronology provide a record of statutory visiting and details of visits?

9.3 Is the case chronology regularly updated on ICS to show key events and decisions?

9.4 Are consultations with senior managers and other experts and advice/ decisions recorded on the child’s record?

9.5 Is there evidence that the child/YP has been informed about NYAS and the complaints policy/procedures? Where appropriate has access occurred?

9.6 Is there evidence of previous case audit and improvement actions?

- 31 -

10. Case Work Output Y N Auditor Comments 10.1 Has the work undertaken by the social worker safeguarded and promoted the best interests of the child?


Auditor recommendations (identified good practice to inform learning or areas for practice improvement):

- 32 -

Appendix 5: Children With A Disability Service Standards and Audit Tool.

DUTIES IN REGULATION AND GUIDANCE NOTE: Service Standards to be added.

Cumbria Children’s Services Audit – Children With A Disability

This audit tool is part of the Cumbria Children’s Services Quality Assurance Audit Framework (QAAF). The Designated Auditor should read and understand the QAAF Policy requirements prior to undertaking a case audit. Audit Details.



Date Audit conducted ICS Number of case audited

1. Child Basic Details recorded on ICS


Name DoB, Age & Gender Address Identity (Ethnicity & Nationality) Religion School or Nursery Child’s Legal Status Family Composition Professionals involved Other relevant involvements - including the name and contact details of direct carers and emergency contact details.

Nature of disability Details of Care Package

2. Response to Referral Y N Auditor Comments 2.1 Was the referral information accurately processed and appropriately sent to the CWD service?

2.2 Did the response to referral demonstrate prompt and appropriate action?

2.3 Was the referral appropriately allocated?

2.4 As part of the allocation process was a case outline (early risk analysis, immediate required case actions and timescales by the allocated practitioner) provided by the team manager/senior practitioner?

2.6 Where a referral was not or is still not allocated is there a risk review system in place and operating?

- 33 -

3. Assessment Y N Auditor Comments 3.1 Did a supervisor agree and record a timescale for an assessment to be completed within the child’s timescale?

3.2 Was the child seen as part of the assessment?

3.3 Was the assessment of sufficient quality to facilitate an informed decision about future case direction (e.g. service eligibility criteria met)?

3.4 Was the decision making based on the assessment recorded and appropriate?

3.5 Was it completed within timescale?

3.6 Does the assessment address the nature and level of any risks to the child?

3.7 Did the assessment involve all professionals concerned with the child’s welfare?

3.8 Is the assessment needs led and outcome focused?

3.9 Is there evidence of the voice of the child (the child was seen and contributed to the assessment process where appropriate)?

3.10 Does the assessment consider the child’s identity issue(s)?

3.11 Has the assessment specifically addressed the disability or special need in terms of meeting the Level 4 Eligibility Criteria ?

3.12 Does the assessment consider and identify the carer’s needs?

3.13 Is there evidence that appropriateness of the case allocation was considered (ie. Case reallocated to CFW) by the team manager post assessment?

3.14 Was the assessment of sufficient quality (information collated and analysis) to facilitate an informed decision making process around the development of the care plan objectives to meet the needs of the child?

3.15. Is there evidence of Strengthening Practice materials being used in the assessment process?

3.16 Is there evidence of manager oversight and sign off (in particular meeting Eligibility Criteria)?

4. Planning Y N Auditor Comments 4.1 Is there a current CIN Plan in place?

4.2 Does the plan reflect inter-agency working together to meet need?

- 34 -

4.3 Does the plan set clear objectives and timescales based on identified needs as identified by the analysis of the assessment information?

4.4 Do the plan objectives address the assessed risk to the child?

4.5 Does the plan reflect the voice of the child?

4.6 Does the plan reflect the child’s identity needs?

4.7 Are desired outcomes included in the plan?

4.8 Does the plan include a visiting schedule to see the child and family? If so has this occurred?

4.9 Is the carer’s assessment reflected in the plan?

4.10 If appropriate is there a transition plan in place and on the child’s record?

4.11 Does the plan specify review points?

4.12 Has the plan been agreed and signed by all involved parties?

4.13. Is there evidence of Strengthening Practice materials being used in the planning process?

4.14 Is there evidence in case supervision notes of managerial oversight and agreement to the plan?

5. Plan Review Y N Auditor Comments 5.1 Has the CIN or Plan been reviewed at agreed intervals?

5.2 Is there evidence that the child (where appropriate) and parents/carers are involved in the plan review process?

5.3 Is the overall impact of the plan evaluated and the plan updated and/or amended appropriately?

5.4 Has any risk to the child been reassessed as part of the review of the plan?

5.5 Is there evidence that consideration has been given to the child continuing to meet service eligibility criteria?

5.6 If the child no longer meets the service eligibility criteria has any unmet need been acknowledged and addressed (e.g. has the family been signposted/referred to other services)?

5.7 Is there evidence of actual inter-agency working together? (regular network meetings, united approach, good communication and information-sharing, working together as appropriate) If not, what action has been taken?

- 35 -

5.8 Is the working together multi-disciplinary service provision having an impact on meeting the child and/or family needs?

5.9 Is there evidence that an effective working relationship been built up with the child and family by the case worker?

5.10 Is there evidence of direct work with the child?

5.11 Are the details of hours and costs of the care package(s), including Direct Payments (and Home Care) evident in the ICS case summary box and have these costs been reviewed?

5.12 Has the transition plan been reviewed and updated as necessary?

5.13 Is there evidence of regular managerial oversight of the plan in respect of progress against actions/tasks in case supervision notes?

5.14 Is the case still appropriately allocated – social worker or CFW?

6. Case Management Y N Auditor Comments 6.1 Are the records kept for this child complete, up to date, reflect key salient issues and show the child’s journey and experience?

6.2 Is the ICS chronology updated regularly by the social worker/team manager to show significant case events and key decisions?

6.3 Is there evidence of professional supervision case discussion and clear review of agreed actions/tasks?

7. Case Work Output Y N Auditor Comments 7.1 Has the work undertaken by the social worker safeguarded and promoted the best interests of the child?


8.Auditor recommendations (Areas of good practice to promote learning or on how work on this case can be improved):

- 36 -

Appendix 6: Triage and EDT Service Standards and Audit Tool.

DUTIES IN REGULATION AND GUIDANCE Our approach to assessment, care planning and interventions with children and their families across children’s social work is based on our Needs Lead/Outcome Focussed four stage approach. Needs - stated in specific terms (not in terms of a universal need, an assessment or a service) Seriousness – “what would happen if we did nothing” involves a judgement about the severity of need based on evidence, knowledge and research Outcomes – negotiated and agreed, these enable a shared recognition of what needs to be achieved, provide measures of success and indicators of what success looks like Services – delivered or commissioned only to meet stated needs, prioritised by level of seriousness and where outcomes or clearly defined Triage Teams deliver specific responsibilities placed on the local authority within this context. Their primary responsibilities are outlined in guidance and procedure along with necessary standards delivered principally from:

• Working Together to Safeguard Children (DCSF 2010) (statutory guidance) and linked legislation

• Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their families (DOH 2000) • Cumbria LSCB procedures • Children’s Services Policy, Procedure and Practice Guidelines

Guidance

1. Responses to referrals (WT 5.19 – 5.37) 1a - where there may be an alleged crime (5.19-5.31) 1b - responding to a referral (5.32 – 5.37)

- 37 -

STANDARD 1: CONTACT AND REFERRAL

Standard 1 – There are clear, sensitive, consistent and coherent arrangements to respond to

contact and referral of a child, which determine the level of concern and the subsequent response.

1.1 County Triage staff will be suitably trained and experienced in relation to safeguarding

matters and will have due regard to a child’s welfare as being of paramount consideration.

1.2 All staff also have access to appropriate support and guidance through supervision and appraisal.

1.3 Contacts where the information does not indicate immediate action a duty social worker will determinate the need and risk.

1.4 Any contact in relation to a named child that requires further information will be assigned to the Triage duty tray for a social worker to action and will be recorded in the contact and /or case note within 24 hours of the contact being made

1.5 Urgent child protection contacts on ‘active/open cases will be RAG rated and safely emailed to the responsible District within two hour and the relevant child Protection Team Manager or Duty Officer will be informed by telephone within two hours

1.6 County Triage will work with colleagues and partner agencies to embed a shared understanding of what information is required to support effective decision making and analysis of need through the HUB meetings

1.7 All referrals that progress to an initial assessment are assigned to an appropriate team within 24 hours.

1.8 All referrers will be notified of the outcome of the contact and including any proposed course of action and the reasons for the decision

1.9 All referrals will be recorded appropriately and will include:- • who the referrer is; • the nature of the concern; • how and why they have arisen; • what appear to be the needs of the child and family; • identity, including issues of language, race, ethnicity, culture, gender and

disability; • what involvement the referrer is having with the child and family; and • whether consent has been sought.

1.10 Children and families will be given relevant information at all stages of their contact and involvement with County Triage Service

STANDARD 2: BEHAVIOUR AND CODES OF CONDUCT

Standard 2 – In undertaking all aspects of their work, County Triage staff will treat service users,

professionals and colleagues with dignity and respect

2.1 All staff at County Triage will adhere to the HCPC codes of practice, CCC corporate standards and codes of conduct.

- 38 -

2.2 Through the contact and referral process, workers will demonstrate sensitivity and awareness of all aspects of a person’s identity, including language, race, ethnicity, culture, gender and disability.

2.3 Contact and referral information will be inclusive of information relating to a person’s

identity, including language, race, ethnicity, culture, gender and disability

2.4 Through treating service users with dignity and respect, County Triage Service is committed to achieving a high level of user satisfaction. This will be monitored through appropriate quality assurance mechanisms including service-user questionnaires.

STANDARD 3: CASE RECORDING

Standard 3 - County Triage Service has satisfactory arrangements for maintaining both case file

and electronic records of its involvement with those who use its services and respecting the confidential nature of information held.

3.1 County Triage Service will establish a case/electronic file for each child receiving services,

which is stored securely. This will be established at the point of initial contact in relation to the named child.

3.2 All contacts and referrals will be recorded appropriately using ICS. The quality and

timeliness of recording will be subject to Team Manager oversight and audit.

3.4 All Contacts will be recorded onto ICS within 24 hours of receiving the information

3.5 Management endorsement and oversight of case records will be recorded. This will include management endorsement of decision making in relation to contacts and referrals. Such decision making will be subject to a robust audit process.

3.6 Each record will contain up-to-date and accurate information about the child and family and the professional and/or agencies they are involved with.

3.7 Records must be concise, accurate, clear and separately record content, opinion and third party information. Records must evidence that information is shared with the child and their family, and that their views are recorded.

3.8 Recording reflects an understanding of the client’s right to access files.

3.9 Recording will include information about a person’s identity including language, race, ethnicity, culture, gender and disability.

3.10 Recording must demonstrate clear analysis of need and risk and be inclusive of the purpose of any intervention; the intended outcome and the action to be taken.

- 39 -

Cumbria Children’s Services Audits – Triage

This audit tool is part of the Cumbria Children’s Services Quality Assurance Audit Framework (QAAF). The Designated Auditor should read and understand the QAAF Policy requirements prior to undertaking a case audit.

Involved workers, name

• Customer Advisor • Social Worker • Team Manager


Date Audit conducted ICS Number of case audited

1.Contact Record – new contact /open case

Y N N/A or

open case

Auditor Comments

The child and their family details;

Name DoB & Gender Address Religion/ethnicity School or Nursery Child’s Legal Status Family Composition 1.2 Referrers details recorded in full including contact number and shift pattern if appropriate?

1.3 Is it clear that parental consent to the referral, or the child’s consent where appropriate, has been given?(unless consent-seeking places a child or young person at increased risk of suffering significant harm)

1.4 Is the nature of the concern been clearly recorded?

1.5 Has it been clearly recorded how the concern has come about?

1.6 Is there a clear recording regarding the impact upon the child/young person?

1.7 Has the referrer’s involvement with the child/young person (and family) been recorded?

1.8 Have any difficulties being experienced by family members due to Domestic Abuse; Mental ill health, alcohol/drug misuse and/or learning disability been recorded?

1.9 Has the contact been appropriately RAG rated?

- 40 -

2. No Further Action Y N Auditor Comments 2.1 Was the reason for the no further action outcome clearly recorded?

2.2 Was no further action the appropriate outcome for the contact?

2.3 Has the NFA decision been endorsed by a

• Social Worker and/or

• Team Manager?

2.4 Was the time taken to make the NFA decision appropriate?

2.5 Has the referrer been informed of the NFA outcome?

3. Provision of information and advice PIA


3.1 Was the information/advice provided appropriate based on the information provided?

3.2 Was the advice given by the appropriate professional?

3.3 Has the advice been clearly recorded?

3.4 Was a CAF considered as an outcome of PIA?

3.5 Was the provision of information and advice the correct outcome of the contact?

3.6 Has the PIA decision been endorsed by a

• Social Worker and/or

• Team Manager?

3.7 Was the time taken to provide the advice /information appropriate?


4. Progress to Referral and Assessment


4.1 Is the reason for progressing to referral clear and recorded appropriately?

4.2 Are all the sources of information detailed on the referral record?

4.3 Were sufficient enquiries made and recorded to inform the decision to progress to an

- 41 -

assessment? 4.4 Is there evidence an assessment of risk to the child and what the assessment is based upon?

4.5 Is there recorded evidence that the decision to progress to assessment involved other relevant professionals ?(Hub decision making )

4.6 Was the progression to assessment the correct outcome of the contact?

4.7 Has the decision been endorsed by a Team Manager?

4.8 Was the time taken to progress to assessment appropriate?


4.10 Is there evidence that a CAF was completed or been considered as an alternative outcome?

5. Case Work Output Y N Auditor Comments 5.1 Has the work undertaken safeguarded the child?

5.2 Has the work undertaken has an impact on improving the outcomes for the child? If so, how?


Cumbria Children’s Services Audits – EDT

This audit tool is part of the Cumbria Children’s Services Quality Assurance Audit Framework (QAAF). The Designated Auditor should read and understand the QAAF Policy requirements prior to undertaking a case audit. Context:

1. The EDT is designed to ensure a response to crisis and child protection situations that emerge outside of normal service hours. This work usually requires very short service input to stabilise a situation or take protective action to safeguard a child.

- 42 -

2. This Audit Tool reflects the succinct nature of the EDT task by identifying key tasks to be completed by the EDT worker. The quality of this work is critical to ensuring an appropriate out of hours response.

3. The audit process output will be used in the professional supervision sessions to improve practice and disseminate good practice. In addition the audit data will contribute to the quantitative (number of audits completed) and Qualitative (quality of EDT practice) reporting to the Extended Leadership Performance Group.

Audit Operating Process and Tool. 1 The Designated Auditor’s score is binding. The Worker’s score, if different, is

advisory. 2 RESPONSE TIMES: this task refers to the time it takes the worker to get

back to the caller and/or relevant other persons/organisations key to informing and progressing the evaluation and analysis of the case situation.

3 PRIORITY: refers to the order the worker has chosen to progress each task in relation to the total task load at the point of entry (ie. The ability to prioritise a new task above the task currently being worked if it is required).

4 INFORMATION GATHERING: refers to the content relevance of the information collated in terms of enabling robust situation/risk analysis and informed decision making.

5 CONTINUITY: refers to the worker’s ability to maintain agreed and/or timely contact with callers; this includes actively chasing non returned calls and escalating “up the chain” where necessary.

6 ICS CHECK: this is a mandatory task measured by completed or not completed. The thoroughness of the check is a key factor.

7 ANALYSIS: refers to the quality of the worker’s ability to evaluate the collated information and analytically distil the data to establish a risk level that enables the worker to make an informed decision on an appropriate response to the presenting case situation.

8 ACTION: refers to the level of response to the presenting case situation taken by the worker following the analytical process undertaken at stage 7.

Scores

0 Complete failure to meet minimum requirement/s. 1 Partially meets minimum requirement/s. 2 Meets minimum requirement/s. 3 Exceeds minimum requirement/s. 4 Far exceeds minimum requirement/s.

Audit Tool SWkr: Audit Date: ICS No:

AREA TM SW DESIGNATED AUDITOR COMMENT(S) Response Times

Priority

- 43 -

Information Gathering

Continuity ICS Check Analysis Action Total Score Designated Auditor’s Summary: Appendix 7: Independent Review Officer (IRO) Service Standards and Audit Tools.

DUTIES IN REGULATION AND GUIDANCE Child Protection Conference • Working Together to Safeguard Children (DCSF 2010) sections 5.82 to 5.148

(Statutory Guidance) and linked legislation.

• Cumbria LSCB Procedures

• Children’s Services Policy, Procedure and Practice Guidelines.

Guidance (with reference to sections in Working Together) 1) Timing of Initial CPC’s (5.83) 2) Attendance (5.84 & 5.85) 3) Family Involvement (5.86 – 5.88) 4) Chairing (5.89 & 5.90) 5) Information to CPC’s (5.91 – 5.96) 6) Actions and Decisions (5.97 – 5.106) 7) Complaints (5.107 – 5.110) 8) Administration (5.111 & 5.112) 9) Timing of Review Conferences (5.136)

- 44 -

10) Purpose & conduct of Review CPC’s (5.137 – 5.140) 11) Discontinuing the CP Plan (5.141 – 5.143) 12) Looked after Children subject to a CP Plan (5.144 – 5.148)

Looked After Reviews

• IRO Handbook (Statutory Guidance DCSF 2010) with linked Guidance and

Legislation.

• Children’s Services Policy, Procedure and Practice Guidelines.

Guidance (with reference to the IRO Handbook) 1) Management of the Care Planning & Review process - preparation (chapter 3) 2) Management of the Care Planning & Review process - timing (chapter 3) 3) Management of the Care Planning & Review process - adjournments (chapter 3 ) 4) Management of the Care Planning & Review process - conduct of a review (chapter 3) 5) Management of the Care Planning & Review process - placement planning (chapter 3) 6) Management of the Care Planning & Review process - adoption cases (chapter 3) 7) Management of the Care Planning & Review process - records, decisions and recommendations (chapter 3) 8) Management of the Care Planning & Review process - monitoring cases on an ongoing basis (chapter 3) 9) Specific groups – children receiving short breaks (chapter 4) 10) Specific groups – young people in transition (chapter 5) 11) Specific groups – foster carers (Fostering Services Regulations & NMS) 12) Dispute resolution & complaints (chapter 6) 13) Administration of the IRO Service (chapter 7)

- 45 -

14) Caseloads of IRO’s (chapter 7) 15) Ensuring the participation of children and young people in reviews and planning (chapter 2)

Cumbria Children’s Services Audit – Independent Review Officer

Service

Child Protection Conferences

This audit tool is part of the Cumbria Children’s Services Quality Assurance Audit Framework (QAAF). The Designated Auditor should read and understand the QAAF Policy requirements prior to undertaking a case audit. This audit tool has been designed in two parts: Part One to be completed following direct observation of the child protection conference. Part Two to be completed following a review of the processes and actions coming from the conference. Audit Details. Name of practitioner being audited.


Date Audit conducted ICS Number of case audited PART ONE: DIRECT OBSERVATION. OBSERVED PRACTICE:

1. Observed chairing practice


1.1 Were the required checks undertaken by the IRO?

1.2 Did the chair confirm address details/family details for all family members?

1.3 Was child protection

- 46 -

conference convened within procedural timescales? If not did the chair address the issue and record the response? 1.4 Did the chair have access to the written social work report in timescale prior to the child protection conference? If not did the chair address the issue and record the response?

1.5 Did the chair have access to written other relevant agency reports in timescale prior to the CP conference? If not did the chair address the issue and record the response?

1.6 Did the chair check that the social work report been shared before the day of the child protection conference with the family? Where the report was not shared did the chair address the issue and record the response?

1.7 Did the chair check, where appropriate, that the report been shared with the child prior to the day of the conference? Where the report was not shared did the chair address the issue and record the response?

1.8 Had other relevant involved agency reports been shared with parents/carers prior to the day of the CP conference? Where the report was not shared did the chair address the issue and record the response?

1.9 Did the chair meet with the parents/carers prior to the start of the conference to explain the process?

1.10 Did the chair facilitate appropriate involvement of the parents/carers in the conference process?

1.11 Did the chair ensure that child’s voice was evident in the child protection conference process? Please comment on quality of this.

1.12 Where appropriate did the chair facilitate the child’s participation in the

- 47 -

conference process? 1.13 Did the relevant involved agencies representatives attend the CP conference? If not did the chair address and record the issue?

1.14 Did the chair check if parents/carers/child are involved with any other agencies other than those represented at the child protection conference?

1.15 Did the chair check on any A & E admissions or CHOC attendances since last child protection conference?

1.16 Did the Chair ensure full information was available and shared with conference members?

1.17 Was the Chair able to establish and articulate a clear level of risk in respect of the child based on the available information and the views of the conference members?

1.18 Was the CP conference decision about whether to make the child subject to a CP plan or continue the CP plan appropriate and in line with current Working Together guidance?

1.19 Did the chair ensure the CP plan actions/tasks endorsed by conference members address risk reduction and improving outcomes for the child?

1.20 Did the chair ensure that conference members set the statutory CP visiting for the Social Worker (and where appropriate other professionals) based on the risk and circumstances of the child?

1.21 Did the chair review and evaluate the effectiveness of the core group working to progress the CP Plan (ie. Met as scheduled, worked collaboratively on plan actions/tasks, recorded meetings and progress against CP plan, involved parents/carers, demonstrated risk reduction or provided an understanding of why the

- 48 -

CP plan has not had an impact on reducing risk)? 1.22 If a review of progress against the CP plan leads to a CP conference decision that the child no longer needs to be subject a CP plan, did the chair ensure that appropriate follow-on support was addressed and planned for the child and family as a child in need, or ‘stepped-down’ to a multi agency team around the child?

PART TWO: REVIEW OF POST CP CONFERENCE PROCESSES AND ACTIONS.

2. Process & Quality Y N Auditor Comments 2.1 Do the CP conference minutes reflect the decision making and outcome of the conference?

2.2 Are the minutes formulated and recorded in a manner which are SMART, logical and can be understood by parents as well as professionals?

2.3 Did the IRO complete the quality assurance document ?

2.4 Where process/practice gaps in the CP process have been identified by the Chair was a DRP instigated at the appropriate stage?

Auditor summary/recommendations (Areas of good practice to promote learning or on how work on this case can be improved): IRO Audit Tool (Children Looked After)

Cumbria Children’s Services Audit – Independent Review Officer Service

Children Looked After Reviews

This audit tool is part of the Cumbria Children’s Services Quality Assurance Audit Framework (QAAF). The Designated Auditor should read and understand the QAAF Policy requirements prior to undertaking a case audit. This audit tool has been designed in two parts: Part One to be completed following direct observation of the child looked after review. Part Two to be completed following a review of the processes and actions coming from the CLA review

- 49 -

Audit Details. Name of practitioner being audited.


Specify the type of CLA Review (Initial/3 Month/6 Month/6 Month+).

Date Audit conducted ICS Number of case audited PART ONE: DIRECT OBSERVATION. OBSERVED CHAIRING PRACTICE:

1. Chair’s preparation practice - did the chair consider and address any gaps in the following:


1.1 Were the review invites sent out in timescale?

1.2 Were the previous review minutes made available?

1.3 Current legal status of the child is accurate on ICS?

1.4 If the child is placed under Regulation 24, has a Family & Friends Temporary Foster Carer assessment been undertaken?

1.5 Details of any legal orders made in respect of the child?

1.6 Are current court proceedings delaying permanency for the child? If so please explain how.

1.7 Statutory visits are being undertaken as per procedural requirement?

1.8 Has a assessment been completed and within timescale? If not specify the reason.

1.9 Is the assessment of sufficient quality to reflect the needs of the child, including any risk(s)?

1.10Has a care plan been drafted to reflect and meet the assessed needs of the child, including any identified risk(s)?

1.11 Has the care plan been signed and shared with all relevant parties, particularly the child?

1.12 Is the voice of the child and the child’s identity evident in the assessment and care

- 50 -

plan? 1.13 Is the child subject to a CP plan? If so is the CP plan still appropriate?

1.14 Was the Key Worker review report and care plan made available to participants, particularly the child, prior to the review?

1.15 Were written reports from other involved agencies made available to participants, particularly the child, prior to the review? (Please specify involved agencies).

1.16 Did the chair see the child prior to the review commencing to explain the process?

1.17 Did the chair explore the child’s views on particular issues (eg. Relationship with case worker, wishes and feelings about the current time and future)?

1.18 Does the assessment and care plan have management sign off?

2. Chairing the CLA Review (practice) - did the chair consider and address any gaps in the following:


2.1 Has the child seen and understood the care plan?

2.2 Does the child agree with the plan?

2.3 Have other agencies seen, understood and signed up to the plan?

2.4 Has the plan been progressed since last the review?

2.5 Has the potential for a return to family members been explored?

2.6 If a return home is an option has a long term placement been identified /provided for the child?

2.7 Is the child having appropriate contact with significant people and is this scheduled in a signed contact agreement?

2.8 Has the young person been given information about the Complaints Procedure?

- 51 -

2.9 Has the young person been given information about NYAS/Advocacy services (Reg 45)?

2.10 Has the young person been given information regarding Cumbria’s Corporate Parenting Promise?

2.11 Is there evidence that inter-agency working has occurred to promote the child’s best interests?

2.12 Did the chair provide an opportunity for the child to voice their views about the above issues?

2.13 Were parents/carers (if in attendance or via report) provided an opportunity to voice their views?

2.14 Where age appropriate did the chair check that the child had a National Insurance Number? If so and a number was not in place did the chair make this an action for the social worker?

2.15 Did the chair check that the child had a passport? If so and a passport was not in place did the chair make this an action for the social worker and carers?

3. Permanence Planning


3.1 Is there a permanency plan in place?

3.2 Is it clear who is exercising Parental Responsibility for the child?

3.3Was the child provided with the necessary profile of their current carers or in the case or residential home the profile of the establishment?

4. Leaving Care Y N Auditor Comments 4.1 Has a leaving care worker been allocated?

4.2 Has the Pathway Plan been started?

5. Health (Health Assessments must be undertaken every 6


- 52 -

months in the case of children under 5 years, and every 12 months for 5 years and over) 5.1 Has a health assessment been undertaken in line with procedure?

5.2 Is there a current health plan in place? If so does the child have a copy?

5.3 Are the child’s routine health needs being addressed (eg. Dentist, optician, GP appointments)?

5.4 Does the child have any enduring or complex health needs? If so, are these being addressed appropriately?

5.5 If health care is not apparent has the child opted out of health monitoring services?


6. Education Y N Auditor Comments 6.1 Does the child have an appropriate school/nursery place?

6.2 Is the child attending school/nursery?

.

6.3 Does the child have any additional educational needs? If so, are these being addressed appropriately?

6.4 Is there an up to date PEP in place?

6.5 Is the PEP reviewed in a timely manner?


7. Chairs Overview Y N Auditor Comments 7.1 Did the chair indicate that sufficient resources were being available to the child in placement?

7.2 Did the chair consider that the child was being safeguarded or not?

7.3 Did the chair summaries the review decisions and recommendations?

7.4 Did the chair complete

- 53 -

the review record on ICS using a SMART (truncated) approach? 7.5 Did the chair highlight any areas that would be subject to DRP?

Appendix 8: Fostering Services Service Standards and Audit Tool

DUTIES IN REGULATION AND GUIDANCE Our QA Framework is underpinned by the National Minimum Standards for our service together with the relevant regulation. Values common to all sets of National Minimum Standards include:

• The centrality of the child’s welfare, safety and needs • Children should have an enjoyable childhood, benefiting from excellent parenting

and education and enjoying a wide range of developmental opportunities. • Every child should have his or her wishes and feelings listened to and taken in to

account Fostering teams deliver specific responsibilities for looked after children within the context of the Fostering Services: National Minimum Standards (2011) There are 29 relevant Standards that may be grouped as follows: Children

1. Listening to Children and taking their views in to account (Standard 1) 2. Promoting the child’s identity (Standards 2&3)

3. Safeguarding children in family placements (Standards 4, 5, 22 & 29)

4. The health and wellbeing of fostered children is promoted (Standards 6 & 7)

5. Promoting education of fostered children is promoted (Standard 8)

- 54 -

6. Contact with parents and important others is promoted (Standard 9)

7. Fostering accommodation ( Standard 10)

8. Planning for placements (Standards 11, 15 and 31)

9. The fostering service promotes transition to adulthood (Standard 12) The Service

10. Recruitment of carers (Standards 13, 14, 16, 19 & 20) 11. Management of the service (Standards 17, 19, 23, 24, 25 & 26)

12. Supervision of carers (Standard 21)

13. Payments to carers (Standard 28)

14. Family and friends as carers (Standards 30 – “Regulation 24”)

Appendix 9: Adoption Services Service Standards and Audit Tool




account • In addition for adoption the recognition that adoption is “an evolving lifelong

process for all those involved” – adoptees, adopters and birth families Adoption teams deliver specific responsibilities for looked after children within the context of the Adoption: National Minimum Standards(2011) There are 26 relevant Standards that may be grouped as follows: 15. Listening to Children and taking their views in to account (Standard 1)

16. Promoting the child’s identity (Standards 2&3)

17. Safeguarding children (Standards 4, 22 & 29)

18. The health and wellbeing of children (Standards 5&6)

19. Promoting educational attainment (Standard 7)

- 55 -

20. Accommodation (Standard 9)

21. Recruitment

• Recruiting prospective adopters (Standards 10 & 11)

22. Involving birth families and support services • Birth families and ongoing support (Standards 8, 12, 15, 16)

23. Matching • matching issues (Standards 13 & 14)

24. Adoption Agency

• Standards for the Agency (Standards 17, 18 & 19)

• Managing the agency (Standards 21, 23, 24, 25 & 27)

Appendix 10: Children’s Homes Service Standards and Audit Tools




account Children’s Homes deliver specific responsibilities for looked after children within the context of Children’s Homes National Minimum Standards (2011) There are 23 relevant Standards that may be grouped as follows: Children

25. Listening to Children and taking their views into account (Standard 1) 26. Promoting the child’s identity (Standards 2&3)

27. Safeguarding children in residential placements (Standard 4, 5, 20 & 24)

28. The health and wellbeing of children in residential care is promoted (Standards 6 &

7)

- 56 -

29. Education of children in residential care is promoted (Standard 8)

30. Contact with parents and important others is promoted (Standard 9)

31. Residential accommodation ( Standard 10)

32. Planning for placements (Standards 11 & 25)

33. Children’s Homes promotes transition to adulthood (Standard 12) The Service

34. Management of the service (Standards 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 22)

35. Monitoring the service (Standard 21 – “Regulation 33 and 34) Appendix 11: ICS Operational Guidance on Electronic Audit Tool Management.

DUTIES IN REGULATION AND GUIDANCE NOTE: To be added.

children’s services quality assurance audit … · to achieve overall benefit to children’s...

Documents