Performance Management Framework

(1)

Performance Management Framework

June 2015

(2)

BSCB Performance Management Framework

Quality How well did we

do it?

Quantity How much did

we do?

Outcomes What is the

impact?

(3)

1. Introduction

Bradford Safeguarding Children Board, through its Business Plan, is committed to improving the safety of all children and young people in the Bradford District. If children are not safe, they cannot be healthy, happy, achieve or reach their future potential. We recognise and promote the concept that keeping children safe is everybody’s responsibility.

This Performance Management Framework outlines the various strands that are key to performance in order to provide a greater understanding of how well protected children and young people are in the Bradford District. The information enables organisations to improve outcomes, through monitoring and improving practice whilst also acknowledging areas for improvement.

The BSCB Performance Management Framework is informed by the two key principles contained in national guidance Working Together 2015:

• safeguarding is everyone’s responsibility: for services to be effective each professional and organisation should play their full part; and

• a child‐centred approach: for services to be effective they should be based on a clear understanding of the needs and views of children.

The first principle encapsulates the importance of multi‐agency working, whilst the latter emphasises that the child needs to be at the focus of this. The BSCB Business Plan reflects these principles.

Working Together 2015 places importance on the provision of early help by local authorities. This requires greater use of inter‐agency assessments in order to deliver a range of effective, evidence‐based services. BSCB has a responsibility to assess the effectiveness of the early help offer. Indeed, early help is one of the 9 standards included in BSCB Section 11 (Children Act 2004) audit.

Similarly, under the Working Together 2015 guidance, BSCB has a responsibility for publishing a threshold document. The document is included in the West Yorkshire Consortium Safeguarding Children Procedures Manual and on the BSCB website.

Working Together 2015 places a responsibility on BSCB to develop a local

framework for learning and improvement. BSCB has a Learning and Improvement Framework (revised April 2015) in place. BSCB has identified 3 main types of learning: Reviews (including serious case reviews, learning lessons reviews and child death reviews); auditing (including section 11, challenge panels and multi‐

agency audits); procedures, policies, guidance and briefings; and various other sources such as young people surveys and learning from national research.

(4)

BSCB’s approach to performance management is on outcomes for children and young people, rather than simply measuring compliance with processes and procedures. For example, action plan points following a challenge panel looking at practice. It is important that effective challenge runs throughout all the work of BSCB. Challenge and change are an intrinsic part

For outcomes to be considered positive in a child‐centred approach, the views of young people and their families need to be sought. BSCB Business Plan

incorporates a focus on the participation of young people in safeguarding processes, for example, ensuring the voice of the child is fed into the work of BSCB sub‐groups.

BSCB Performance Data Set is incorporated into the framework (appended at the end). The performance data enables local improvement to be made as a result of regular reporting, monitoring and actions. The data set includes national

indicators, drawn from the The children’s safeguarding performance information framework (DoE, 2015) and local data.

BSCB is able to respond to changing needs. An example of this is the development of Bradford’s multi‐agency Child Sexual Exploitation Hub. The CSE Hub comprises partners and third sector frontline staff who work together to protect the victims of CSE, develop intelligence, raise awareness and support investigations. A daily information and tasking meeting is held, chaired by a safeguarding supervisor and new intelligence and referrals are discussed and actioned where appropriate. The data set includes information on numbers of referrals to the CSE Hub.

BSCB will monitor the effectiveness of the performance management framework through the Performance Management, Audit and Evaluation Sub‐group.

Individual organisations can also consider their own internal mechanisms for performance management monitoring arrangements.

2. Purpose and Aim

The purpose of the performance management framework is to enable BSCB to:

• Have an overview of how various strategic documents interlink within performance, including BSCB Business Plan; Section 11 Audit; Learning and Improvement Framework; Performance Data Set; and links with national agenda such as Working Together 2015.

• Contextualise and have a planned approach in scrutinising and challenging the effectiveness of services.

• Performance monitor safeguarding outcomes for children.

(5)

The framework covers several key elements that enable performance to be measured at 3 levels:

Children, families, carers and

practitioners

Individual Organisations

Level 1

Efficiency and effectiveness of the Board

Level 2

Individual Services/Organisations ability to safeguard children

Level 3

Outcome – children are safe and feel safe

(6)

3. Key Strands of the Performance Management Framework

Strand 1: Setting the priorities

Strand 2: How will performance be measured?

Strand 3: An effective local safeguarding children board

Strand 4: Performance activities

Strand 5: Governance and accountability

Strand 6: Learning and continuous improvement

4. Strand 1: Setting the priorities

BSCB priorities are defined and agreed by the Board, and informs BSCB Business Plan. One way of identifying priority areas is through the Board doing a group exercise. Priority areas can also consider any Ofsted inspection related areas.

Learning from serious case reviews, learning lessons reviews, auditing (including section 11), local and national research, data from performance indicators and the views of children. One of the outcomes is the Business Plan, which can serve for individual sub‐group action/work plans.

5. Strand 2: How will performance be measured

Performance can be measured through 3 main types:

• Quantity – How much did we do?

• Quality – How well did we do it?

• Outcome – What is the impact?

(7)

6. Strand 3: An effective local safeguarding children board

When looking at the effectiveness of the Local Safeguarding Children Board, Ofsted inspectors make their judgements on a 4 point scale of either outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate. BSCB is striving to become

outstanding. This Performance Management Framework sets out to guide BSCB in pulling together the strands of performance.

To achieve ‘outstanding’, an LSCB has to meet the requirements for a good judgement, but also to provide evidence of being a highly influential strategic arrangement that directly influences and improves performance in the care and protection of children. That improvement is sustained and extends across multi‐

disciplinary practice with children, young people and families. Analysis and evaluation of performance is exceptional and helps the local authority and

partners to properly understand the impact of services, the quality of practice and Q uantity – how m uch did w e do?

Eg’s S ources of Inform ation:

• N ational P erform ance Indicators (including The children’s safeguarding performance information framework)

• D ata from local

perform ance indicators

• M anagem ent Inform ation R eports from organisations

Q uality – how w ell did w e do?

Eg’s S ources of Inform ation:

• V iew s of children, young people and fam ilies

• Experience of

practitioners (eg training feedback)

• Audits of case files and practice

• S ection 11 audits

• S erious C ase R eview s

• Learning Lessons R eview s

• C hallenge P anels

• External inspections

• N ational and local research

O utcom e – w hat is the im pact?

• Evidencing im proved service delivery

• C hildren and young people feel safe

• O rganisations are confident in understanding, identifying and referring concerns about children

• Agreed B S C B priorities have outcom es that m ake a difference to children

(8)

the areas for improvement. There is a comprehensive range of training for managers and practitioners that is directly related to multi‐agency improvement priorities. The LSCB creates and fosters an effective learning culture locally that extends to front‐line practitioners.

The full Ofsted criteria can be found at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4309 20/Framework_and_evaluation_schedule_children_in_need_of_help_and_protection _CLA_and_care_leavers_LSCBs.pdf

Section 11

BSCB adheres to the statutory requirement on making arrangements to safeguard and promote the welfare of children under Section 11 of the Children Act 2004.

BSCB has a Section 11 toolkit containing 9 standards:

Standard 1: Senior management leadership and accountability Standard 2: Policies and procedures

Standard 3: Safer recruitment and selection Standard 4: Supervision, support and training

Standard 5: Complaints, allegations and whistle‐blowing

Standard 6: Interagency working, information sharing, communication and confidentiality

Standard 7: Culture of listening to children, individual decisions and development of services

Standard 8: Diversity

Standard 9: Early Help offer

BSCB Performance Management, Audit and Evaluation Sub‐group oversees the process of ensuring organisations adhere to the requirements of Section 11 through regular scrutiny, quality feedback, and resultant follow‐up work by the organisation itself.

BSCB Annual Report

BSCB, through its annual report will provide a rigorous and transparent assessment of performance and effectiveness of local services. This includes identifying where there is still work to be done and challenging action where necessary. The report includes lessons from lessons learned reviews, serious case reviews and child deaths.

(9)

7. Strand 4: Performance activities

The main performance activities undertaken by BSCB can be summarised as follows:

• Monitoring of key performance indicators (see data set below)

• Action plans arising from external inspection of organisations/Board eg.

Ofsted, HMIP, HMIC and CQC

• Action plans arising from serious case reviews, learning lessons reviews, Child Death Overview Panel

• Action plans arising from challenge panels

• Action plans arising from auditing activity (single or multi‐agency)

• Section 11 audit scrutiny and follow up actions

• Feedback from children, parents and carers, eg View Point

• Feedback from practitioners from training events

• Compliments and complaints

BSCB Performance Data Set has been approved by all partner organisations. It includes both national and local performance indicators. The data set will be analysed to identify areas of declining effectiveness on a quarterly basis and to improve performance.

The data set is divided into the following sections:

- Early Help

- Prevalence of Harm - Prevalence of Risk Factors

- Protection from Abuse and Neglect - Looked After Children

- Missing Children - Listening to Children - Private Fostering

8. Strand 5: Governance and accountability

BSCB Performance Management, Audit and Evaluation Sub‐group will be responsible for co‐ordination and management of performance and quality assurance. (BSCB Business Plan is governed through BSCB Business Planning Group). The work of the BSCB sub‐groups will feed into the Performance

Management Framework through action plans, lessons learned, challenge panels, voice of the child, contribution to the Business Plan. Several sub‐group members are involved in the Section 11 audit on behalf of their organisations. The Learning and Improvement Framework also embraces the various methods of learning, with a requirement on sub‐group chairs to update respective learning, and report back to BSCB Board meetings.

(10)

9. Strand 6: Learning and continuous improvement

The main purpose of the Performance Management Framework is to demonstrate improved outcomes for children and young people. Working

Together 2015 places a statutory requirement on BSCB to develop and implement a robust framework for learning and improvement. The diagram below shows the learning and improvement cycle taken from BSCB Learning and Improvement Framework. It shows how various activities link to one another, and feed into the Business Plan.

The Learning and Improvement Cycle

Learning activities (reviews, audits, surveys,

feedback etc)

Single Agency R ecommendations Sub-groups,

work programmes, working groups Business Plan

N ational P olicy

&

R esearch

Multi-agency R ecommendations

R eview &

Monitoring BSC B

Learning &

D evelopment Strategy, T raining

& D elivery Plan

(11)

PI No Definition Data Owner Frequency of reporting

2013/14 Out‐

turn

2014/15 Out‐

turn

2014/15 Target

EARLY HELP

EH1

Number of Early Help Episodes (CAFs) in

the year Local Authority Annual ‐ year end

EH2

Percentage take‐up of 3 and 4 year olds

benefiting from Early Education Local Authority Annual ‐ year end

EH3

Rate of referrals to the 'Front Door'

(Integrated Assessment Team) per 10,000 Local Authority Annual ‐ year end

EH4

Rate of re‐referrals to the 'Front Door'

(Integrated Assessment Team) per 10,000 Local Authority Annual ‐ year end

EH5 Children in Need rate per 10,000 Local Authority Annual ‐ year end

EH6

First Time Entrants into the Youth Justice

System aged 10‐17 (rate) per 100,000 Local Authority Annual ‐ year end

PREVALENCE OF HARM

N4

The rate of violent and sexual offences against children aged 0‐17 per 10,000 CYP

population Police Annual ‐ year end

N5a

The rate of hospital inpatient admissions caused by unintentional and deliberate injuries to children and young people aged

0‐4. Public Health Annual ‐ year end

N5b

(12)

N5c

N6

The rate of Accident and Emergency attendance caused by unintentional and deliberate injuries to children and young

people aged 0‐17. Public Health Annual ‐ year end

KSI 1

Number of children age 0‐15 'Killed' or 'Seriously Injured' in Road Traffic

Accidents Road Safety Partnership Annual ‐ year end

PREVALENCE OF RISK FACTORS

N11

Potential child and parent or carer risk

factors identified at assessment Local Authority Annual ‐ year end

MARAC1

Number of MARAC cases considered

during year MARAC Annual ‐ year end

PROTECTION FROM ABUSE AND NEGLECT

N7

Rate of assessments per 10,000 of the CYP

population. Local Authority Six monthly including year end

N8

Rate of section 47 enquiries per 10,000 of

the CYP population. Local Authority Six monthly including year end

N9

Percentage of referrals leading to the provision of a social care service (as defined by the child becoming a child in

need). Local Authority Six monthly including year end

Percentage of referrals to children’s social

(13)

health visitors, accident and emergency services, probation trusts, police services, schools, etc

N12a

Children becoming the subject of a CPP for physical abuse (rate per 10,000 of the CYP

population). Local Authority Six monthly including year end

N12b

Children becoming the subject of a CPP for sexual abuse (rate per 10,000 of the CYP

N12c

Children becoming the subject of a CPP for emotional abuse (rate per 10,000 of the

CYP population). Local Authority Six monthly including year end

N12d

Children becoming the subject of a CPP for neglect (rate per 10,000 of the CYP

N13

Rate of Initial Child Protection

Conferences (ICPCs) per 10,000 of the CYP

population. Local Authority Six monthly including year end

N14

Distribution of working days taken from

referral to assessment completion. Local Authority Six monthly including year end N15

Distribution of working days from Child

Protection strategy meeting to ICPC. Local Authority Six monthly including year end

N16

Length of time child is considered to be a child in need at 31 March and for episodes

of need which have ended during the year. Local Authority Six monthly including year end

N17

Percentage of Child Protection Plans lasting two years or more at 31 March and for child protection plans which have

ended during the year. Local Authority Six monthly including year end

(14)

N18

Percentage of children becoming the subject of Child Protection Plan for a second or subsequent time (within two

years of the previous plans end date). Local Authority Six monthly including year end

N19

Number of children who are the subject of a Child Protection Plan (rate per 10,000 of

the CYP population). Local Authority Six monthly including year end

N20

Percentage of cases where the lead social worker has seen the child/young person in accordance with the timescales specified in the child protection plan. For all children who were the subject of a child protection

plan during the year. Local Authority Six monthly including year end

N21a

Percentage of CIN cases that close within 6 months of the child protection plan end

date Local Authority Six monthly including year end

N21b

Percentage of CIN cases that close within 6 months of the child ceasing to be

Looked After Local Authority Six monthly including year end

CP1

Timeliness of Reviews for children subject

of child protection plans Local Authority Six monthly including year end

LADO1

Number of referrals to Local Area

Designated Officer (LADO) Local Authority Six monthly including year end

LADO2

Percentage of LADO referrals with

'substantiated' outcome Local Authority Six monthly including year end

CSE1

Number of referrals made to CSE Hub in

year Police / CSE Hub Six monthly including year end

(15)

LOOKED AFTER CHILDREN

LAC1 Number of Looked After Children Local Authority Six monthly including year end

LAC2

Timeliness of Reviews for Looked After

Children Local Authority Six monthly including year end

MISSING CHILDREN

MIS1

Number of missing children episodes in

year (end of year quarter 4 only) Police Six monthly including year end

MIS2

Number of children involved (end of year

quarter 4 only) Police Six monthly including year end

MIS3

Number of children in care (end of year

quarter 4 only) Police Six monthly including year end

MIS4

Children missing multiple times (end of

year quarter 4 only) Police Six monthly including year end

LISTENING TO CHILDREN

LAC3

Percentage of LAC participating in their

LAC Reviews Local Authority Six monthly including year end

VPT1

Percentage of LAC age 4+ completing

Viewpoint surveys Local Authority Six monthly including year end

VPT2

Percentage of children subject of a CP Plan

age 4+ completing Viewpoint surveys Local Authority Six monthly including year end

PRIVATE FOSTERING

PF1

Number of children who are Privately

Fostered at year end Local Authority Six monthly including year end

PF2 Notifications to the Local Authority of a Local Authority Six monthly including year end

(16)

Private Fostering arrangement PF3

Percentage of Private Fostering

assessments completed Local Authority Six monthly including year end

PF4

Timeliness of statutory visits by Social

Worker Local Authority Six monthly including year end