Children s Social Work (CSW), Children in Care (CIC), Adolescent Support and UASC

(1)

1

Children’s Social Work (CSW), Children in Care

(CIC), Adolescent Support and UASC

What Good Looks Like

Children’s Social Work, Adolescent Support and

UASC – CYPE audit tool Guidance

• _{Introduction & Audit Headings with Ofsted Grade Descriptors}

• _{Service User Feedback}

• _{Response to Referral}

• _Assessment

• _{Plans, planning process and risk management}

• _{Management oversight}

• _{Child focused interventions and outcomes}

• _{Practitioner Feedback, Overall Analysis & Audit Actions}

Introduction

For each section of the audit, you will be asked to answer some quantitative scaling questions and

two qualitative questions regarding the practice strengths and areas of development identified, referencing the Practice Framework elements used. You will be asked to rate the quality of experience for the child/young person for each section in line with Ofsted gradings. The following guidance is specific to the requirements of your service and should support your thinking and analysis when completing the audit.

Audit Headings with Ofsted grade descriptors

For each question, please provide an evaluative judgement using the four Ofsted categories -

Outstanding, Good, Requires Improvement or Inadequate Ensure your judgement is informed

by a focus on outcomes and the difference made to the child/young person.

Good:

Reason and Referral: Decision making is of a high quality, effective and timely.

Assessment: Children and young people have been appropriately involved in all key processes

(2)

2

Children’s Social Work (CSW), Children in Care

(CIC), Adolescent Support and UASC

Planning, process, and risk management: Parents and wider family networks have been

appropriately involved in all key processes and this has had a clear and substantial impact on decisions, support, and practice. Plans are of a high quality. [For example – plans are up to date, comprehensive, specific with measurable outcomes, dynamic, quality of management oversight, influenced by the views of children and young people and responsive to equality and diversity issues]. Case reviews are effective, regular and demonstrate robust scrutiny and challenge of plans. Partner agencies, young people and families participate effectively where appropriate.

Management oversight: There is strong, effective, and timely management oversight and

direction on cases. Reflective supervision is evidenced. Managers are clear that risks have been clearly identified, responded to and reduced. The practice set out in the case file shows clear consideration of age, disability, ethnicity, faith or belief, gender, gender identity, language, race and sexual orientation.

Child focused intervention and outcomes: Relationships between the worker and the child and

family are stable and strong. Practice and support is underpinned by a high quality assessment – timely, comprehensive, analytical, identifies risk, needs and protective factors, including parental capacity. Direct work by the lead practitioner to help and protect children and young people is consistently strong, creative and child focused. This work is clearly linked to the plan, reducing risk, and improving outcomes. The child or young person’s outcomes and quality of life are improving because of high quality, practice

Outstanding:

In addition to meeting the above requirements of a ‘good’ judgement, there is evidence that

professional practice exceeds the standard of good and results in sustained improvement to the lives of children, young people, and families. Research‐informed practice, some of which will be innovative, continues to develop from a strong and confident base, making an exceptional difference to the lives and experiences of children and young people.

Requires Improvement:

Not meeting all good grades, but there are no widespread or serious failures that create or leave

children being harmed or at risk of harm. Assessments should be timely with risk and protective factors identified and action taken to safeguard children. Risk and protective factors are identified. Conclusions flow from analysis and findings in relation to significant harm are clear. All statutory case file requirements are met. However, the case file is not yet at a Good standard, neither is the practitioner able to present the case well or explain the deficits within the recordings and does not provide sufficient assurance that we are delivering good protection, help and care for children, young people, and families.

Inadequate:

The file does not demonstrate a suitable level of assurance. There are, or appear to be, widespread failures or serious failures that leave children harmed or at risk of harm. Response to referrals is not timely or effective, there are poor quality assessments and plans, insufficient involvement of family and children and poor managerial oversight. Case file is not able to evidence compliance with statutory requirements.

Notes for Auditor: All comments boxes must be completed – there must be sufficient information

(3)

3

Children’s Social Work (CSW), Children in Care

(CIC), Adolescent Support and UASC

Service User Feedback

Contact the service user (over the age of 16) either in person or by phone to obtain their views on the scaling

statements below and then ask the 3 questions following this before completing the rest of the audit with the worker.

Please note that should you wish to gain Service User Feedback from someone under the age of 16 parental consent will be needed, and Service User feedback should not be sought on closed cases.

If you are unable to gain Service User Feedback, please select no and add the reason why this was not possible to

the open text box. E.g. Closed case

If you are able to gain Feedback select yes and the following page will open:

Please tell us the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements: The purpose and role of the service were made clear to me

My views have been listened to

The purpose of any meetings was made clear to me beforehand so that I knew what to expect I received the service when I needed it

I am clear about what happens next in terms of support

The service that I have received (so far) has made a positive difference

I was kept informed of what was happening throughout the duration of the case being open I feel like I have been supported

I feel in a better place since our involvement

What worked well with the service you received? What else could have been done to make things better?

(4)

4

Children’s Social Work (CSW), Children in Care

(CIC), Adolescent Support and UASC

Response to Referral

Please consider the following (this is not an exhaustive list but is designed to support your judgements on both the quantative and qualitative questions):

CSW and Adolescent Support and UASC Teams

• Is decision making high quality, effective and timely?

• How has the decision-making surrounding allocation and contact with the family impacted upon them?

•_{How soon were the family and the child/ren seen upon allocation?}

•_{Were the family supported to address any safeguarding/presenting issues?} •_{Were the family motivated to address any risks/ harms/ worries?}

For Children in Care

•_{Does the case summary briefly explain the reasons for the child being in care?} •_{Is their journey to date, including significant placement changes and contact}

arrangements evident?

• Are any delegated authority arrangements clear?

• Are contacts of those professionals and family holding a role with the child evident?

(5)

5

Children’s Social Work (CSW), Children in Care

(CIC), Adolescent Support and UASC

Assessment

• Is consideration is given to aspects of diversity, the wider family and social context?

•_{Are child’s and parents’ voices captured within the assessment to understand their} views regarding the purpose of the assessment?

• Is there assessment of other adults visiting and/or staying at the home who inadvertently represent a significant role within the family?

•_{Are other agencies involved where appropriate and was information shared to} triangulate evidence and inform the assessment?

• Are historical factors incorporated with an up-to-date case chronology?

• Is there personalised analysis of the child’s past and current lived experiences as well as what the child’s lived experience in the future might look like?

• Is there an understanding of the parents’ lived experiences, both as children themselves and as adults, and their perception of parenting?

•_{Is there analysis of the parents’ capacity to change and access services?} • Does sound analysis inform planning and management of risks or challenges? • Does the assessment clearly present to the family the risks of not changing

anything and the impact on the children?

• Does the assessment clearly present how lives may be improved by making the changes and the positive impact on the children of making the changes?

•_{Are recommendations likely to create safety and was the assessment authorised} by a manager?

• Does the assessment engage the children and family to take ownership of finding their own solutions?

For children subject to Child in Need

If a child has been on a CiN plan for at least 6 months, has the C&F been updated to review the plan’s effectiveness and whether alternative case direction or escalation is needed including legal advice, step across or closure?

For children subject to Child Protection (CP)

The CP report may be considered appropriate to be the assessment document. However, for very complex cases an updated C&F or a separate Parenting

Assessment will be needed to understand the family’s capacity to address significant risk within timescales. Therefore, each case will be unique as to whether the C&F is updated or not.

For Children in Care (CiC)

The CIC Review report may be considered appropriate to be the assessment

(6)

6

Children’s Social Work (CSW), Children in Care

(CIC), Adolescent Support and UASC

Plans, planning process and risk management

• Are the children and family’s views regarding the plan recorded appropriately? • Does the needs section of the plan clearly identify the concern?

• Does the plan describe how things will look in the future if the issues persist? • Is the impact on the children of not addressing the needs clear?

• Is it clear who will be responsible for what will be achieved?

• Does the family own the plan and are wider family utilised where possible? •_{Has the whole family been considered within ongoing plans upon case closure?} • Is it clear what services will be provided, what they will achieve and by when? • Do outcomes describe the positive impact on the family of achieving the plan? •_{Is there a clear contingency plan for an emergency or if things do not change?} •_{Are any ongoing risks identified and sufficient plans in place to provide safety?} •_{Are plans regularly reviewed with evidence of amendments that reflect needs}

and reduce risk, or escalate if necessary?

• Is the plan owned by the children and family to develop their capacity to ask for help from other agencies if the time arises again in the future?

(7)

7

Children’s Social Work (CSW), Children in Care

(CIC), Adolescent Support and UASC

Management Oversight

Child focused interventions and outcome

• Is supervision and support for worker frequent and within timescales? •_{Are reviews of previous actions made at supervision and meetings?}

• Is there analysis of the positive impact on children of actions being completed or the negative impact of incomplete actions?

•_{Is there evidence of reflective supervision and team discussions to} consider the children’s lived experiences and interpretation of their world? • Is there sound analysis of the child’s world linking to clear and agreed

outcomes for the family with clear timescales for actions being completed? •_{Does the manager add appropriate case notes to present hypotheses, lines of}

enquiry and timescales for visits as well as when escalation may be necessary? • When cases transfer between teams, do management case notes provide

appropriate case direction and evidence of a transition discussions?

• Do receiving manager provide supervision with the new practitioner, to support the practitioner in working coherently with the case with limited delay?

•_{Overall, does good management oversight lead to assessments, visits and plans} being created and finalised, so families receive the right service at the right time?

• Do families understand how their children feel about their home and this motivates them to make changes that improve their children’s experiences? • Are children empowered to understand their home environment and how to

protect themselves by developing resilience to cope with their experiences? •_{Does visiting reflects need and risk, and statutory and/or agreed timescales for}

the service as a minimum?

(8)

8

Children’s Social Work (CSW), Children in Care

(CIC), Adolescent Support and UASC

Practitioner Feedback

Explore with the practitioner how any training and development over the last 12 months has supported them with their work with the family.

Overall Analysis

Please provide an overall summary of how the intervention has impacted on outcomes for the child/young person. What difference have we made?

Audit Actions

Please add any actions needed to the end of each section and these will be summarised automatically at the end of the audit

Manager Email address

•_{Please add the address of anyone who needs to receive a PDF copy of the Audit.} Additional Manager Email Address

• Add the email address of anyone else that needs to receive a copy of the Audit.