Joint Follow-Through inspection of services
to protect children and young people in the
Argyll and Bute Council area
May 2009
Contents
Page
Introduction
1
1.
The inspection
2
2.
Continuous improvement
2
3.
Progress towards meeting the main points for action
3
4.
Conclusion
6
How can you contact us?
8
Introduction
The Joint Inspection of Children’s Services and Inspection of Social Work Services
(Scotland) Act 2006, together with the associated regulations and Code of Practice,
provide the legislative framework for the conduct of joint inspections of the provision
of services to children. Inspections are conducted within a published framework of
quality indicators, ‘How well are children and young people protected and their
needs met?’1.
Inspection teams include Associate Assessors who are members of staff from
services and agencies providing services to children and young people in other
Scottish local authority areas.
1
‘How well are children and young people protected and their needs met?’. Self-evaluation using quality
indicators, HM Inspectorate of Education 2005.
1
1. The inspection
HM Inspectorate of Education (HMIE) published a report on the joint inspection of
services to protect children and young people in the Argyll and Bute Council area in
March 2007. Working together, services within the Argyll and Bute Council area
prepared an action plan indicating how they would address the main points for
action identified in the original HMIE inspection report.
Inspectors revisited the Argyll and Bute Council area in January 2009 to evaluate
progress made in responding to the main points for action in the initial report and to
assess the extent to which services were continuing to improve the quality of their
work to protect children and young people.
2. Continuous improvement
Following publication of the initial inspection report a number of changes had
occurred in Argyll and Bute Council. Elected members of Argyll and Bute Council
responsible for child protection had changed following the election of 2007. The
former Spokesperson for Children was now leader of the Council and there was a
new Spokesperson. A new Chief Executive had taken up post in October 2008.
The new Chief Executive and senior managers in Argyll and Bute Council were
working closely with partners in the police and health service to improve strategic
management information systems, share good practice and develop joint services.
The development of quality assurance subgroups had built the capacity of the Child
Protection Committee (CPC) to audit files and improve quality assurance
processes.
Some services, including the social work practice teams, had been re-organised to
deliver services more locally. Staff across agencies worked well together and
shared information. The role of education staff in child protection had been clarified
and this had led to some improvements in the identification and support of
vulnerable children.
2
3.
Progress towards meeting the main points for action
The initial inspection report published in March 2007 identified six main points for
action.
3.1 Ensure that the long term needs of vulnerable children are met.
Overall, satisfactory progress had been made towards meeting this main point for
action.
Staff from all partner services had completed a multi-agency audit of care plans. As
a result, some care plans for vulnerable children had improved. Whilst effective
improvements in care planning were evident and this was leading to improvements
for children, it was too early to fully gauge the impact at the time of the inspection. In
some local areas, operational planning for the protection of children had improved
following service reviews and training activity. There had been a helpful reduction in
the number of children placed outwith the authority. Some children continued to be
placed outside the authority, to meet their particular long term needs. Access to the
Educational Psychology Services had improved. Significant improvements in
meeting needs had been made by the throughcare and aftercare service. Social
work and housing staff effectively ensured that vulnerable young people had clear
pathways plans in preparing for independence and had access to more appropriate
accommodation and further education.
Staff from social work and the Scottish Children’s Reporters Administration (SCRA)
had worked well together to ensure that children and families now attended
children’s hearings quickly following identification of the need for compulsory
measures of supervision. There had been improvement in identifying the health
needs of some looked after children. A range of health professionals now ensured
that the health needs of these children were met. However, there was further work
to do to extend this approach to all looked after children. Social work staff had
worked effectively to provide practical and financial support to kinship carers of
vulnerable children. As a result, increasing numbers of children remained in their
communities.
There remained some children and young people with identified needs who were
unable to access appropriate support services, for example, Child and Adolescent
Mental Health Services (CAMHS). School nurses had been identified as the lead
health professionals responsible for meeting the needs of school aged children on
the Child Protection Register (CPR). However, this was not always clearly
understood by all staff. Whilst there had been some improvement in the attendance
of a wider range of professionals at planning and decision-making meetings this was
not yet always consistent across the council area.
3
3.2
Review resources including staff for children in need of protection.
Satisfactory progress had been made towards meeting this main point for action.
The initial review of existing services was recognised by members of the Chief
Officers Group (COG), as a positive beginning to looking further at assessing the
needs of children in the different localities. This review had resulted in new posts
and new services being developed, for example, the creation of the inter-agency
training post. The COG had held their meetings in various localities across the
Council area to meet frontline staff to gather their views. Elected members had also
met with young people. This had led to very useful new perspectives being gathered
of users’ experiences of services. As a result, services had undertaken a number of
reviews of the way in which resources were allocated. Services, including the police
and health, had altered their priorities for spending to support child protection
activities. New posts had been set up to extend services provided in advocacy and
supporting recovery from abuse. There were improvements in areas such as
throughcare and aftercare, family and parenting support.
Social work staff had taken very positive first steps in engaging with partner services
in the education, voluntary and housing sectors to build and increase capacity and
competences in child protection. There were a number of positive examples of
actions in local areas where review had led to new posts in social work, joint training
activities and improved inter-agency working between social work, education and
housing. As a result, there were improvements in some users’ experience of
services. For example, in Oban, there were improvements in local children and
CAMHS. Families in Kintyre had improved access to specialist support for
substance misuse.
While many of the reviews had resulted in improved resource allocation, there
remained further work to do. The Community Health Partnership (CHP) had
improved access to CAMHS services across all council areas. Increased resources
had been made available to social work services. However, in a few areas staff
illness and vacancies limited access to these services.
3.3 Ensure that no child is disadvantaged in gaining access to specialist
resources by location or disability.
Overall, satisfactory progress had been made in meeting this main point for action.
The development of a social work team for children with disabilities had resulted in
more equitable services across the council area. Children’s nurses were meeting
the needs of some children with complex disabilities and their carers. Re-designed
multi-agency groups were now responsible for prioritising service development in
each locality, based on an assessment of need. The CHP was now developing a
model of service delivery for children’s mental health services with a view to locating
primary mental health workers in each area.
Agencies had taken steps to ensure greater equity of access to respite services for
children with a disability. Staff from education and social work had implemented an
effective programme to assist joint planning to support these children when they
4
were leaving school. However, support services provided by the Council and health
for children with disabilities were still insufficiently integrated.
There remained further work to do to develop services available to meet and fully
support the growing needs of children living in remote areas who were affected by
parental substance misuse.
3.4 Ensure the consistent involvement of health services in initial child
protection investigations.
Satisfactory progress had been made towards meeting this main point for action.
A review and action plan for improvement in initial child protection investigations had
been agreed. Staff from social work, police and health services had agreed and put
in place a process to involve health staff at initial stages of child protection
investigation. This had led to an improved understanding of the process and
involvement of key staff from health services.
The involvement of Child Protection Advisers in the Initial Referral Discussion (IRD)
process was beneficial in assisting the decision-making process. Staff from health
services had made some improvements in the quantity and quality of health
information they supplied to IRDs. Improvements in the health documentation to
record discussions should now ensure the details are available in children’s case
files to inform future care. However, the approach was not yet consistent across the
council area. Feedback to health professionals was not always given in cases
where there was no further action taken in respect of child protection processes.
3.5 Review and improve the provision of specialist paediatricians and
forensic medical examinations for children who present with injuries
which might be attributed to abuse.
Very good progress had been made towards meeting this main point for action.
Appropriately trained paediatricians were now available to undertake specialist and
forensic medical examinations of children. Within normal working hours these are
undertaken locally and out-of-hours examinations for child sexual abuse are
undertaken at appropriate paediatric units within hospitals. However, the process
has yet to be fully linked to the IRD system.
Local medical staff, community paediatricians and general practitioners (GPs) now
have access to specialist advice at all times. The lead paediatrician played a key
role in quality assuring medical reports. There remained further work to be done to
ensure that this quality assurance reporting fed into the appropriate governance
structures of NHS Highland and the CPC.
Some useful additional training was provided for local GPs and community
paediatricians. As a result, these staff had identified areas for further improvement
and were now being supported by the involvement of specialist child protection
health staff in the West of Scotland Managed Clinical Network. This will further
improve consistency in child sexual abuse medical examinations.
5
3.6 Extend approaches to monitoring and evaluation to ensure more
consistent standards of delivery across services.
Overall, good progress had been made towards meeting this main point for action.
Monitoring of child protection activities by the COG had improved. Better
management information had led to improvements in trend and risk analysis and
self-evaluation at strategic levels. However, these were at an early stage of
development. Members of the COG now received quarterly reports on a number of
aspects of child protection, including the rationale for registration on the CPR, staff
attendance and the timescales of reports to initial and review Child Protection Case
Conferences. These reports enabled members of the COG to both improve services
and develop better understanding of issues relating to child protection. For example,
children on the CPR affected by parental substance abuse were now clearly
identified.
The scrutiny of child protection activities by the local authority had improved and
there was now ongoing work to develop a consistent approach across all the
Community Planning partners. A positive start had been made to developing
consistent approaches through inter-agency joint training, but these were at an early
stage. There was room to further improve the scope and breadth of management
information and intelligence to support joint working.
4. Conclusion
Overall, the collective response by services to taking action to meet most of the main
points for action outlined in the inspection report published in March 2007 had been
positive and effective.
Strategic management responsibilities and monitoring arrangements for child
protection had been clarified and strengthened. Joint planning by operational staff to
meet children’s needs in some localities had significantly improved. There were
improved links between health staff, education, social work and police. A very
positive start had been made in the provision of training to develop better
inter-agency working between staff involved in child protection. Many of these
improvements were achieved through the effective cooperation and support of
operational staff in police, health, education, and social work services. These
actions had led to improvements for some users of services.
There remained a number of areas where service improvement work had begun.
However, it was still too early to identify the impact of improvements. There were
some areas where the development of support services was still being planned such
as mental health services. There was further work to do on the allocation of staff
and resources in some localities to address issues of risk and more fully meet the
long term needs of vulnerable children. The authority and their partners should
continue to further integrate services to better meet the needs of children with
disabilities, particularly those in rural and island areas.
6
There was a strong and increasing commitment from senior managers across
services and the CPC to continuous improvement and the potential and capacity to
improve further the effectiveness and efficiency of child protection services. As a
result, HMIE will make no further visits in relation to the report of March 2007.
Philip Denning
HM Inspector
May 2009
7
How can you contact us?
If you would like an additional copy of this report
Copies of this report have been sent to the Chief Executives of the local authority
and Health Board, Chief Constable, Authority and Principal Reporter, Members of
the Scottish Parliament, and other relevant individuals and agencies. Subject to
availability, further copies may be obtained free of charge from HM Inspectorate of
Education, First Floor, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale
Way, Livingston EH54 6GA or by telephoning 01506 600262. Copies are also
available on our website www.hmie.gov.uk.
If you wish to comment about this inspection
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of this inspection you should write in the
first instance to Neil McKechnie, HM Chief Inspector at HM Inspectorate of
Education, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way,
Livingston EH54 6GA.
Our complaints procedure
If you have a concern about this report, you should write in the first instance to our
Complaints Manager, HMIE Business Management Unit, Second Floor, Denholm
House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA. You
can also e-mail HMIEcomplaints@hmie.gsi.gov.uk. A copy of our complaints
procedure is available from this office, by telephoning 01506 600200 or from our
website at www.hmie.gov.uk.
If you are not satisfied with the action we have taken at the end of our complaints
procedure, you can raise your complaint with the Scottish Public Service
Ombudsman. The SPSO is fully independent and has powers to investigate
complaints about Government departments and agencies. You should write to the
SPSO, Freepost EH641, Edinburgh EH3 0BR. You can also telephone 0800 377
7330 (fax 0800 377 7331) or e-mail enquiries to ask@spso.org.uk. More information
about the Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website: www.spso.org.uk.
Crown Copyright 2009
HM Inspectorate of Education
This report may be reproduced in whole or in part, except for commercial purposes
or in connection with a prospectus or advertisement, provided that the source and
date thereof are stated.
8