An Introduction
to the
Signs of Safety
David O’Brien MSW, RSW
Southern Alberta Child and Family Services
1
What is the Signs of Safety?
The Signs of Safety is a strengths-based
and solution-focused approach to
collaborative child welfare work.
Isn’t that what we have always done?
No. Most child protection assessment and
planning processes are risk-based,
problem focused and worker driven.
2
The Problem with the
Problem Focus
• Traditional assessment processes focus on
•
•
•
problems, or what is wrong in the family.
We asked questions like: what causes the
problem? How often does it happen? Who is
involved in the problem? Why does it happen?
The problem with the problem focus is that when
you only look for the bad that is all you find.
The problem focused approach has been linked
to increased numbers of children in care.
3
Focusing on What We’d Like
to See Instead of the Problem
• Do we really need to know everything about a
problem before we can solve it?
• What might happen if we asked: what would we
like to see happening instead of the problem?
• What if we asked: what’s going well? When do
these parents provide good care? How can we
do more of what’s working well?
4
How is the Signs of Safety
Approach Different?
Problem Focused Model
Signs of Safety
The worker as professional ‘expert’
asks questions of the family to get
information about problems needed
to determine the risk to children.
The worker shares protection concerns
and opens a dialogue to build a shared
understanding of the family situation
that acknowledges harm to children.
Through the assessment process the
worker decides what is wrong in the
family, or what needs to be ‘fixed’.
The worker helps family members and
their natural support system to find
solutions that build safety for children.
Using legal authority the worker tells
the family what tasks they must do
or services they must comply with to
mitigate the problem.
The worker shows respect by making the
family accountable for implementing its
own solutions that keep children safe.
5
Where Did it Come From?
• The Signs of Safety was developed in Western
•
•
•
Australia during the 1990’s by Andrew Turnell
and Steve Edwards.
Turnell was a solution-focused family therapist.
Edwards was a child protection supervisor who
felt that traditional CP methods were a barrier to
forging partnerships with families.
Each year for seven years they worked with
small groups of front line child protection
workers to develop the Signs of Safety by
learning what was working with families.
6
The Signs of Safety Builds
Partnerships with Families
• All families, no matter how chaotic, want their
•
•
•
children to be safe and happy.
All families have strengths, resources and
relationships that can make things better for
children.
By honoring what parents do well in the care of
their children we become allies in the cause of
building child safety.
By getting families to do more of what builds
safety for children, we will help more families to
succeed and have fewer children in care.
7
MAPPING WITH THE
FOUR COLUMN FORM
• The Signs of Safety is a conversation with a
•
•
family about the safety of children.
We build a shared understanding of the situation
causing harm, and agree on what needs to
happen to build child safety.
Our conversation is recorded on a Four Column
Form.
• This process is called “mapping” the case.
8
The Four Column Form
The Four Column Form is an assessment
and intervention plan in one document.
What are we worried
about?
What’s working well?
What does future safety
look like?
Who will do what to build
safety?
0-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
---------------------------------------
---------------------------------------10
9
The Signs of Safety is
Structured Around Five
Questions
Answering the question:
1. What are we worried about? Tells the family
why the authority is involved; these are the
protection concerns.
2. What’s working well? Identifies abilities,
resources and relationships within the family to
be used to build safety.
10
Five Questions Continued
3. What does future safety for these children look
like? Provides a goal or describes an outcome
that says what we want life to be like for these
children when they are safe.
4. Who will do what to build child safety? Tells
everyone what needs to be happening all the
time in the care of the children for family
reunification or file closure.
5. How worried are we? Is a judgment about the
current risk of harm.
11
What is Safety Mapping?
• Mapping is a structured conversation designed
•
to gather and organize information about the
safety of children.
Safety is more than just protection from
physical harm or sexual exploitation. Safety also
means emotional and developmental wellbeing.
• Mapping helps the family, caseworker and other
helpers to build a shared understanding of how
children have been harmed, and what needs to
happen to build enduring safety and wellbeing
for the child.
12
Who is Involved?
• In a Signs of Safety approach family means
anyone with an interest in, or relationship with
the child, it includes anyone who has knowledge
of the family situation and can help.
• Mapping is teambuilding because the
caseworker, nuclear family, extended family,
community supports, and professionals come
together to build a safety network for the child.
13
Capture the Child’s Voice
with the Three Houses
Find out about the child’s experience of harm and
safety and make sure that his/her voice is heard
and placed at the center of safety planning.
14
MAPPING PROCESS
Column One: What are
We Worried About?
What are we worried
about?
What’s working
well?
What does future
safety look like?
Who will do what to
build safety?
Harm Statements
Danger Statements
Complicating Factors
0 ----------------------------------------
----------------------------------------
------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------- 10
15
Column One: What are
We Worried about?
• Worries are caregiver actions that have hurt the
child physically, emotionally or developmentally.
• These are the protection concerns that mandate
child welfare involvement.
• Concerns are summarized as Past Harm (what
has happened to cause harm) and Future
Danger (what we are worried will happen again
if things don’t change).
• These focus on the child’s experience of harm.
16
Column One: What are
we Worried About?
• We describe behavior causing harm in factual,
behavioral language.
• We focus on what happened, rather than why.
• We avoid professional jargon or diagnostic labels.
• Parental involvement in writing danger statements
builds a joint understanding of the situation.
• Problems not directly linked to child protection
concerns are listed as complicating factors.
17
Column Two: What’s
Working Well?
What are we worried
about?
What’s working
well?
Harm Statements
Current Safety
Danger Statements
Strengths
What does future
safety look like?
Who will do what to
build safety?
Complicating Factors
0 ----------------------------
------------------------------ ------------------------------
--------------------------- 10
18
Column Two
What’s Working Well
• Problems don’t happen all the time, so we ask:
•
•
•
what’s working well?
Exploring safety and strengths provides a more
complete and balanced picture of the family.
Safety is acts of protection by the caregiver
that mitigate danger demonstrated over time,
like counting to ten instead of hitting.
Strengths are skills of living, nurturing,
relationships or resources and capacities of the
family that makes things better for the children,
but do not, by themselves prevent harm.
19
Column Two
What’s Working Well?
• Spending time talking about strengths shows
•
•
•
respect. Showing respect has been linked to
increased child safety independent of any other
intervention.
Strengths talk is transformative because it raises
parents expectations of themselves.
Strengths talk tells families that we see them as
competent problem solvers.
Strengths talk builds capacity.
20
The Safety Scale
• The Signs of Safety uses scaling questions to
measure current risk.
• Example: on a scale of 0 – 10 where 0 means
things are so dangerous for the children that
they can no longer live at home and 10 means
everyone involved knows that the children are
safe enough for the CFSA to close the case
where do you rate the situation right now?
• All family members participate in scaling so that
perception of risk is shared.
21
Column Three: What Does
Future Safety Look Like?
What are we worried
about?
What’s working
well?
What does future
safety look like?
Harm Statements
Current Safety
Authority Safety Goals
Danger Statements
Strengths
Family Safety Goals
--------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Who will do what to
build safety?
Complicating Factors
0 -------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------- 10
22
Column Three:
What Does Future Safety
Look Like?
• In Column Three we move from a past and
present to a future focus.
• We ask the family to describe what kind of life
they want for their children, or what will be
happening instead of the behavior causing
harm.
• In column three we develop safety goals.
23
Column Three:
What Does Future Safety
Look Like?
• Goals describe desired outcomes.
• Authority safety goals provide transparency
about the authority’s ‘bottom line’; they tell the
family what change is required for family
reunification or file closure.
• The more the family contributes to goal setting
the more likely they are to achieve.
24
Column Four: Who Will
Do What to Build Safety?
What are we worried
about?
What’s working
well?
What does future
safety look like?
Harm Statements
Current Safety
Authority Safety Goals
Danger Statements
Strengths
Family Safety Goals
--------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Who will do what to
build safety?
Safety Actions, Tasks,
Rules and Supports
Complicating Factors
0 -------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------- 10
25
Column Four: Who Will Do
What To Build Safety?
• The Signs of Safety does intervention planning
differently; a list of services in not a safety plan.
• Safety plans focus directly on the care of the
child; they are a how-to of safe parenting.
• Safety planning challenges the family and its
natural support system to prove to themselves
and child welfare that they can provide day to
day care for children that eliminates protection
concerns.
26
Column Four: Who Will Do
What To Build Safety?
• What needs to happen - child safety - is
grounded in legislation and is not negotiable.
Safety actions must mitigate the protection
concerns identified in column one.
• How safety goals are achieved is both an
opportunity and challenge for the family. The
safety plan says who will do what to build child
safety; it gives everyone involved a clearly
defined role and responsibilities.
27
Column Four: Who Will Do
What To Build Safety?
• Safety planning clarifies who owns what:
safety actions come from the family, not the
caseworker.
• The workers role is to ensure that the family
acts to build safety, provide supports and
celebrate success.
• The family is strongly supported by the child’s
safety network and community partners.
28
Safety Planning
and Family Accountability
• Safety planning is the “between a rock and a
hard place” for parents.
• Unless they act to provide safety, the children
will not be returned or the file closed.
• The outcome is based on demonstrated ability to
care for children, not compliance with services.
• SOS process builds an extended family and
community based support network for the child.
29
Benefits of Using the
Signs of Safety
• When workers honor every positive act of
•
•
•
parents in the care of their children, client
engagement is enhanced.
Building relationship with parents has been
positively linked to child safety independent of
any other intervention.
By focusing on the shared goal of building safety
for children alliances are built.
When families participate in decision making and
see their solutions being built into the plan
commitment and accountability are increased.
30