SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN: MEASURING PROGRESS AND OUTCOMES FOR CHILDRENS SAFETY

1

• SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN MEASURING PROGRESS AND
  OUTCOMES FOR CHILDRENS SAFETY

Jane Cunliffe DfES Safeguarding Group 18 April
2007
2
MEASURING PROGRESS AND OUTCOMES FOR CHILDRENS
SAFETY

• Context Local Government White Paper
• Progress on improving childrens safety?
• NSPCC research on safeguarding measurement
• Current indicators
• Themes for discussion

3
LOCAL GOVERNMENT WHITE PAPER

• Purpose sweep away current clutter
• Commitment to reduce overall number of indicators
  to 200
• Indicators to look at outcomes where possible
• Focus on important national priorities

4
LOCAL AREA AGREEMENTS

• Delivery contract between local authority and
  central Government
• Statutory targets plus others covering priority
  areas up to 53 in total against national
  indicators
• Negotiated between local authorities and regional
  government offices
• Inspected by new Comprehensive Area Assessment,
  separate for vulnerable children

5
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN?

• Reduced number of indicators
• Move to outcomes rather than processes/inputs
• Need to be reassured local authorities are
  protecting children in their area

6
WHAT PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE?

• The number of accidental injuries to children has
  been declining steadily. In 1979 almost 1,100
  children killed (in England and Wales) in 2005,
  213 children were killed
• By 2005, there had been a 49 reduction in the
  number of children killed or seriously injured in
  Great Britain in road traffic accidents compared
  to the average for 1994-1998
• The Back to Sleep campaign launched in 1991 saw
  a reduction in the number of babies dying from
  SIDS from 2 in 1,000 live births to under 0.5 per
  1,000 by 2003

7
WHAT PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE?

• In 2005, nearly 400,000 children required some
  support from childrens social care (children in
  need) with 37 being victims of abuse or neglect
• 68,500 children were subject to child protection
  enquiries in 2004-05
• Real extent of abuse may be higher
• 25 disabled children are in need for reason
  other than disability
• Children from DE socio economic groups are 5
  times more likely to die in any type of accident
  (including being killed in a road crash) than
  those in wealthier households and 15 times more
  likely to be killed in a residential fire

8
NSPCC RESEARCH

• Research commissioned February 2006
• Main measures recommended
• Lead outcome measure child homicides
• Lead primary measure Percentage of agencies and
  organisations not compliant with vetting and
  barring requirements
• Lead secondary measure Percentage of schools
  judged to be satisfactory or better on Ofsted
  Care, Guidance and Support measure
• Lead tertiary measure Childrens hospital and
  AE episodes classified as assault
• Lead quaternary measure Suicide and self-harm
  reports for looked after children and young
  people in the secure estate

9
SOME CURRENT INDICATORS

• Number of children adopted as a percentage of LAC
  
• Percentage of children and young people on the
  CPR not allocated a social worker
• Percentage of child protection conferences within
  15 working days
• Re-registrations on CPR
• Percentage of CPR cases that should have been
  reviewed (and were)
• Percentage of initial assessments within 7 days
  of referral
• Percentage of core assessments within 35 days
• Stability of placement
• Duration on the CPR ( of children de-registered
  from the CPR during year that had been on the CPR
  for 2 or more years)

10
THEMES FOR DISCUSSION

• What effect do the current indicators have on
  local practice?
• Which indicators have a link to effective
  safeguarding services?
• Which of the current indicators could be usefully
  retained?
• What outcomes for childrens safety could be
  measured?

11

• SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN MEASURING PROGRESS AND
  OUTCOMES FOR CHILDRENS SAFETY

Jane Cunliffe DfES Safeguarding Group 18 April
2007