Resource Library

Resources

Using this Manual

DSCP Procedures

https://trixcms.trixonline.co.uk/api/content/durhamcs

Child Protection Enquiries (Section 47)

A Section 47 Enquiry is initiated to decide what needs to happen to keep a child safe and well, where the social worker suspects that the child is suffering or likely to suffer significant harm.&nbsp;

Purpose of Section 47 Enquiries

Where information is received (which may be very brief) where the social worker suspects that the child is suffering or likely to suffer significant harm, a Strategy Discussion should be held to decide whether to initiate enquiries under Section 47 of the Children Act 1989.&nbsp;
Strategy Discussions should be held as soon as possible, bearing in mind the needs of the child and must take place within 2 working days of child protection concerns being identified. When the risk to the child is high, for example, where the child has a physical injury, there are worries around sexual abuse, there are serious concerns about neglect, worries in relation to fabricated illness or when there are other complex issues, then a meeting is held on the same day the social worker becomes aware of the worries.&nbsp;
The Section 47 Enquiry is to be completed within six working days of the Strategy Discussion, the outcome is to be shared with family and professionals verbally and followed up in writing.
&nbsp;An Initial Child Protection Conference is held within 15 working days. Where a follow-up Strategy Discussion is held, the timescale remains as 15 working days from the Strategy Discussion which initiated the Section 47 enquiries.
A Section 47 enquiry is carried out by the social worker alongside and to inform the Child and Family Assessment. For more information regarding Child and Family Assessments see - <a href="/resources/resource-library">How we Practice in Durham Guide</a>. Social workers have a statutory duty to lead Section 47 Enquiries with input from police, health professionals, teachers and other practitioners involved with the family. The Team Manager has responsibility for authorising a Section 47 Enquiry following a Strategy Discussion.
The social worker must speak with the child, their family and key practitioners involved with the family along with the family's most important people. This is to understand the child's lived experience including what the parents are doing well to care for their children, any existing safety alongside worries about the child and family. The social worker is clear in the enquiry about what is happening that is harmful to the child and the harm matrix is used to support this. See <a href="/resources/resource-library">Harm Matrix</a>.
The enquiry may also need to cover children in other households where the worries are linked, for example, where the adult is in contact with another child.&nbsp;

Initiating Section 47 Enquiries, and Timescales

Social workers with their managers should:
<ul>
<li>Lead the Assessment in accordance with this guidance;</li>
<li>The social worker explains what is happening to the family in a way that they can best understand and explores what is working in the child and their family's life that helps to reduce the worries, alongside the key issues of the enquiry;</li>
<li>Follow the guidance set out in Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Guidance on interviewing victims and witnesses, and guidance on using special measures, where a decision has been made to undertake a joint interview of the child as part of any criminal investigation;</li>
<li>The social worker talks to parents to gain their agreement to speak to their child(ren) about the reasons the social worker is involved. There may be times when it is not in the child's best interests for the social worker to get consent to speak to them from parents for example, if there is a high likelihood that the child could be threatened; if it is likely that important evidence would be destroyed or if the child did not want their parent(s) to be involved and they are able to make this decision.</li>
</ul>
In such circumstances, the social worker must take legal advice about how to proceed and whether legal action may be required, for example through an application for an Emergency Protection Order or a Child Assessment Order.
<ul>
<li>The social worker speaks to all the children in the family to understand their views around what has happened, what they think helps to reduce the worries, what else they think could help and who the people are who love and care about them and how it is they help. The social worker see's the child alone wherever possible unless the child asks for someone else to be present;&nbsp;</li>
<li>The social worker speaks with parents (including those that don't live in the family home)/ carers for their perspective including what their worries are for their child and what they think would help;&nbsp;</li>
<li>In conversations with the child, parents, their important people and other practitioners, the social worker builds on information gathered in the harm matrix to help analyse what has happened in the child's and parents past that is still impacting on them today;</li>
<li>Based on the analysis of harm, complicating factors and strengths and safety, the social worker speaks with the child, family and practitioners about the next steps needed to best support the child and family. This could include support from the wider family network to help increase safety for the child &nbsp;alongside specific support from other practitioners; and</li>
<li>The section 47 enquiry involves all practitioners that know the child and family best and may include other practitioners that aren't directly involved in the child and family's life such as police.</li>
</ul>
The police should:
<ul>
<li>Help other agencies understand the reasons for concerns about the child's safety and wellbeing;</li>
<li>Decide whether or not there are grounds for a police investigation;</li>
<li>Make available to other professionals any evidence gathered to inform discussions about the child's wellbeing; and</li>
<li>Follow the guidance set out in <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/achieving-best-evidence-in-criminal-proceedings" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Guidance on interviewing victims and witnesses, and guidance on using special measures</a>, where a decision has been made to undertake a joint interview with the child as part of the criminal investigations.</li>
</ul>
Health practitioners should:
<ul>
<li>Undertake appropriate medical tests, examinations or observations, to determine how the child's health or development may be being impaired;</li>
<li>Provide any of a range of specialist assessments. For example, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists and child psychologists may be involved in specific assessments relating to the child's development. The lead health practitioner (probably a consultant paediatrician, or possibly the child's GP) may need to request and coordinate these assessments; and</li>
<li>Ensure appropriate treatment and follow up health concerns.</li>
</ul>
All involved practitioners should:
<ul>
<li>Contribute to the Assessment as required, providing information about the child and family; and</li>
<li>Consider whether a joint enquiry or investigation is needed in relation to the child without the parent/carers' knowledge.</li>
</ul>

Conducting Section 47 Enquiries

The social worker should record the information gathered and actions during the course of the enquiry and its outcomes on the 'Record of Outcome of Section 47 Enquiries' on Liquidlogic, which should be approved by the Team Manager.

Recording Section 47 Enquiries

Social workers are responsible for deciding what action to take and how to proceed following Section 47 Enquiries. The outcome of a Section 47 Enquiry must be agreed by the Team Manager.
A Section 47 Enquiry may conclude that the original concerns are:
<ul>
<li>Not substantiated; although consideration should be given to whether the child may need services as a Child in Need;</li>
<li>Substantiated and the child is judged to be suffering, or likely to suffer, Significant Harm and an Initial Child Protection Conference should be called.</li>
</ul>

Outcomes of a Section 47 Enquiry

The social worker and their team manager should:
<ul>
<li>Discuss the outcome with the child, parents and other practitioners;</li>
<li>Consider whether to provide support under Child in Need or Early Help where there are no concerns about the child suffering significant harm. This would be with the family's consent. Where the child and family are supported under child in need a meeting is held within 7 working days to agree the plan. Where the family doesn't consent or where the issues haven't been substantiated this could lead to no further action;</li>
<li>Decide whether any support from family members and/or services may be helpful and put plans in place to provide this.</li>
</ul>
All involved practitioners should:
<ul>
<li>Participate in further discussions as necessary;</li>
<li>Contribute to the development of any Plan;</li>
<li>Provide services outlined in the Plan for the child; and</li>
<li>Review the impact of support on the child's safety and wellbeing.</li>
</ul>

Concerns not substantiated

N.B. Where immediate protective action is required, the advice of Legal Services should be sought.
The social worker with their team manager should:
<ul>
<li>Convene an Initial Child Protection Conference. The timing of this conference should depend on the urgency of the situation and respond to the needs of the child and the nature and severity of the harm they may be facing. It should take place within 15 working days of a Strategy Discussion, or the Strategy Discussion at which Section 47 Enquiries were initiated if more than one has been held. The request to convene the conference must be supported by a team manager;</li>
<li>Consider whether any practitioners with specialist knowledge should be invited to participate;</li>
<li>Ensure that the child and their parents understand the purpose of the conference and who will attend; and who from their network of important people they would like to invite to support them or play a role in the plan;&nbsp;</li>
<li>Help prepare the child for conference if they wish to attend or gather their views so these can be shared if they don't wish to attend. The social worker speaks to the child about if they wish to have an advocate (www.nyas.net). Mind of My Own may be used to gather and share the child's views with regards to the conference.</li>
</ul>
All involved practitioners should:
<ul>
<li>Write a report for conference detailing their involvement in the child and family's life and what support they are able to offer;&nbsp;</li>
<li>Attend the conference and take part in decision-making.</li>
</ul>
For the detailed procedure in relation to Child Protection Conferences, see the <a href="https://durhamscp.trixonline.co.uk/chapter/child-protection-conferences " target="_blank" rel="noopener">Durham Safeguarding Children Partnership Procedures</a>.

Concerns Of Significant Harm Are Substantiated And The Child Is Judged To Be Suffering, Or Likely To Suffer, Significant Harm

If the Local Authority decides not to proceed with a Child Protection Conference then other practitioners involved with the child and family have the right to request that a conference be convened, if they have serious concerns that a child's safety and wellbeing may be at risk. In the event of a continued difference of opinion, the <a href="https://durhamscp.trixonline.co.uk/chapter/managing-professional-differences-policy " target="_blank" rel="noopener">Durham Safeguarding Children Partnership Resolution Policy</a>&nbsp;should be implemented.

Resolution

1.06.05 - Harm Matrix with prompts CIC.pdf

durham harm / worry matrix   behaviour  timespan severity  impact on the child first worst last  headline issues - what has happened to the child/young person? (e.g. sexual abuse/ exploitation)  also consider any behaviour that the child/young person might be showing that that is harmful to themselves or others     how long has this been a worry?  how often has it happened?  remember, this isn’t a chronology so we don’t need to list each incident – this is about giving us an overview of timespan and frequency  what was the first incident that we know of that caused harm and when was this?  add context here and check the detail out from different people’s perspectives   what was the worst incident that we know of and when?  add context here and check the detail out from different people’s perspectives – the worst incident is often subjective and may differ depending on who you speak to.   what would the child/young person say is the worst thing that happened?  what was the last significant incident that we know of and when?  add context here and check the detail out from different people’s perspectives     consider: how do we know? use the child/young person’s own words how is the child/young person coping with what has happened to them?  what is the child/young person showing us in their behaviour?  what does this mean for the child/young person?   be careful not to get into victim blaming, particularly where the child/young person is behaving in ways that are harmful to themselves as a result of what has happened to them in their life                               
durham harm / worry matrix                                       future questions to ask  (what are the gaps in your information? use relationship questions to explore the behaviour and impact from different people’s perspectives, e.g. the child/young person; their family; practitioners)              
durham harm / worry matrix               


1.07.01 - Group Supervision Process Handouts  - Harm-Worry matrix.pdf

 © 2019 elia international ltd group supervision process: harm analysis matrix  group supervision process: harm analysis matrix  this signs of safety group supervision process is designed for groups of 4 to 10 people. it revolves around the caseworker who brings forward the case. (sometimes, of course, there is a number of people bringing forward the case). the facilitator leads the group process, assisted by an advisor. other group members are involved as observers/participants. the roles of each are described in the following diagram:   the entire group, but in particular the facilitator and advisor, must focus on the process and not get caught up or over-organized about the content and detail of the case. this process is all about growing the capacity for the team to create together a fast process for working through, and getting direction in, a case. as with every meeting in child protection, effective meetings are always led skilfully.  group process  introductions (2–3 minutes):  if the group is new to the group supervision method, the facilitator should introduce the process, including a quick description of each person’s role:  • the facilitator is the only person who talks directly to the caseworker.  • the advisor acts to assist the facilitator to lead the process.  • the observers/participants have the opportunity to learn by staying out of the content of cases and focusing on analysis and judgement processes, thereby assisting the worker to gain a better overview of the case and the direction he/she wants to take. the facilitator has the professionals, the caseworker, and anyone directly involved in the case say who they are, what their role in the case is, and how long they have been involved in the case. the facilitator will probably need to prevent the professionals involved in the case from going into case content at this point.  
 © 2019 elia international ltd group supervision process: harm analysis matrix  1. genogram (3 minutes) the facilitator draws the family genogram to include the basic information of age along with the names of the immediate family parents, partners, children, extended family members, and relevant friends. this should include clarifying where children are living, if not with one or both parents. again, to keep the process focused, this is not the time to describe case information. 2. background information (3–5 minutes)  the facilitator gives the worker 3–5 minutes to provide an overview of the case, usually by asking, ‘what makes this an open child protection case now?’ the worker should be allowed to talk without interruption. the facilitator and observers should make notes of the worker’s exact words and begin to analyse the information. while listening, the facilitator can make notes at the side of the whiteboard and should not be trying to ‘map’ the case by locating information into particular columns. the more experienced workers become at using the process, the more succinct they will be at providing the critical information that is needed to move through the process.  3. worker’s focus (3–5 minutes)  this is the most important part of the preparatory steps because it provides clear focus for the facilitator and group. ask: ‘what do you need most from this session to help you use the harm analysis matrix tool?’ the facilitator should dig in a little to get a clear, specific goal. if the worker says ‘i just want to learn how to use it’ — this is too general. the facilitator should ask what specifically they feel they need in order to figure out what to focus on next. 4. starting to use the harm analysis matrix – individual exercise (4–6 minutes) the facilitator reminds everyone that this group supervision is designed to help bring a sharp focused lens to the criteria of harm. the facilitator then asks everyone (including the case worker) to look at the information that has just been gathered within the background information and then, individually and in silence, asks everyone to use the harm analysis matrix template (appendix 1) to decide if/where the information lands and to write this down.  it is helpful for the facilitator to remind the group that they are looking to gather evidence and not hypothesise so they should try to avoid making any assumptions. if the information does not appear to land within the harm analysis matrix they may wish to consider if this information is a complicating factor (something that is making the problem harder to deal with) or an example of what’s working well (safety = time the danger has been present and the child has been kept safe. strength = an example of what has been done to try and get the worry sorted out) 5. talking through the evidence – in pairs (5 mins) the facilitator asks people to share their work in pairs and to discuss why they placed the information where they did. what issues does this start to raise for them?  
 © 2019 elia international ltd group supervision process: harm analysis matrix  quite often this exercise will highlight where assumptions about information have started to be made and where there are gaps in the information. if workers start to ask questions the facilitator should stop this and say this is the next part of the exercise that they will move on to. 6. using the harm analysis matrix to create questions — individually (5 mins) the facilitator now asks people to think about the information they already have and what questions this now raises for them. remind people to be curious and to ask questions that stay focused around the harm analysis matrix. questions should be written out fully in the form they would actually be asked. good questions should be relevant and able to be askedto everyone involved: the parents, children, extended family members, and professionals who are involved in the case. at least half of the questions should be written as relationship questions.  everyone reads one or two of their strongest questions. the facilitator reads all his/her questions. 7. recording additional information into the harm analysis matrix the facilitator asks the worker: ‘are there particular questions or areas you would like to record into the what are you worried about column of their case mapping (harm analysis category) now? which of these questions seem most important to you?’ the facilitator spends 10 to 15 minutes recording the detail of these issues to create clear harm statements. all group members give their questions to the caseworker.  8. review and next steps the facilitator now reviews the process so far by asking the worker: ‘what has been most useful for you about the process so far?’ then the facilitator asks this question: ‘on a scale of 0 to 10 – where 10 means i’ve got what i need from the consult already and 0 means i’m no better off or any clearer than when we started – where are you?’ if the group has stayed on track, the worker should be rating relatively high at this stage. the facilitator then asks the worker if this is enough for now. if yes, end using the harm analysis matrix here.  if no, ask, ‘what else do you need to focus on?’ and spend some time on that, usually by listening to the issue and getting questions created for that issue.  a low rating from the worker probably indicates the group process has gone off track significantly from what the worker wanted, or that the worker actually now wants something else. 
 © 2019 elia international ltd  group supervision process: harm analysis matrix   appendix a – harm matrix template  


18.02.00-03 HSB Referral Risk Matrix (WORD).docx

harmful sexual behaviour referral risk matrixharmful sexual behaviour referral risk matrix                                                                                                                                                                                 referralreviewnamed worker leading on the risk assessment contact details & agencydateauthorising line manager  contact details & agencydatechild’s full name (+ aliases) d.o.b. age  home address ll id  disability gender identity ethnicity first languagechild legal statuschild’s pen picture / what has happened to this child. tell us who the child and who is in their network, include the family genogram/ecomap.harmful sexual behaviour referral risk matrixthe harmful sexual behaviour referral risk matrix is a tool to determine suitability of a child/young person to be discussed at the sexual harm consultation group. it should be developed alongside with and complimenting any other plan for the young person’s welfare. this does not replace the hsb procedures already in place and should not be used as a threshold document in relation to level of involvement, this is a referral tool for the consultation group. please use this tool in line with local safeguarding partnership procedures. professional assessment of safeguarding risk indicators for referral to the sexual harm consultation group the matrix should be completed by the child or young person’s social worker or key worker with the input of the child/young person, family and partner agencies. that does not mean that the questions should be directly asked, these should be formatted into family friendly signs of safety best questions.all risk indicators should be completed with supporting evidence which is mandatory, think about your mapping or evidence from the harm matrix such as first, last and worst. consider the impact on the child/young person. the heading risk indicators are not exhaustive; they are simply those mostly commonly recognised which may indicate a risk of harmful sexual behaviour; there may be other relevant factors present which require consideration and analysis. one tick in a high-risk box, or several in low-risk may indicate a serious risk, alternatively this might be an indication of other concerns that require addressing via the child’s overall plan, or by accessing other appropriate services. a degree of professional judgement is required when making an overall outcome.the risk and vulnerability factors provided against each of the risk indicator headings are also not exhaustive; they are simply prompts for consideration. consequently, the recorded risk for each of the risk indicators does not necessarily need to correspond with the risk and vulnerability factors highlighted. there may also be two risk indicators relevant to that child based on their own unique circumstances. it is important to provide analysis to evidence how the assessment of an individual risk indicator has been achieved, the harmful sexual behaviour toolkit should be referred to as supporting evidence where relevant. when assessing a child or young person’s risk of harm, it is essential to highlight if the concerns and the information being provided is current or historic. if the concern or information is historic but relevant, it necessary to evidence how this relates to the current assessed risk.*please indicate a level of assesses risk against all the following risk indicatorsrisk indicator – behaviourindicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowsome inappropriate sexualised behaviours which are seen within the hsb toolkit as acceptable within the child/young person’s peer group sexual behaviours are generally consensual and reciprocal with children of a similar age and development outside of the familyevidence that the behaviours appear experimental rather than harmfulmedium  problematic sexualised behaviours within the hsb toolkit which are concerning, developmentally unusual and socially unexpectedno overt elements of victimizationconsent issues unclear, lack of reciprocity some levels of compulsivitypre-occupation with adult sexual behaviour, talking about sex, nakednesschild/young person has committed a criminal offence which is under investigation by policehighabusive or violent behaviours within the hsb toolkit where there is clear intent to cause harm to another misuse of power, coercion or force used significant lack of understanding around consentlack of remorse shown towards victimphysically violent sexual abuseviolence that is physiologically and/or sexually arousing to the child/young person – sadismchild/young person has committed a criminal offence which is under investigation by policechild/young person has a history of allegations/offences madechild/young person has a history of cruelty to animalsrisk indicator – child/young person characteristicsindicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowyoung person is a teenager at an experimental age of developmentchild/young person has no additional learning needschild/young person displays good social skills and has a positive peer network child/young person does not live with any other children or young people evidence that the child/young person accepts responsibility for low level behaviours and shows remorse/regretchild/young person has a willingness to change behaviourschild/young person has some difficulties with identity and confusion around sexuality which identify a support needmedium  child is pre-adolescent child/young person is themselves a victim of sexual harm although has support and shown positive understanding around thischild/young person is a victim of some low level physical abuse or neglectchild/young person has some additional learning needschild/young person displays some difficulties with social skills and has a limited peer network child/young person has some difficulties with identity and confusion around sexuality which appears problematic and unsupportedchild/young person lives with older children or young peoplehighchild is pre-adolescent child/young person is themselves a victim of sexual harm which has gone unsupported child/young person has suffered significant trauma and has been a victim of physical abuse or neglect resulting in them suffering significant harmchild/young person has significant learning needs making their understanding low child/young person displays significant difficulties with social skills and has no positive peer network child/young person has distorted views of sexuality and significant identity difficultieschild/young person lives with younger or vulnerable children or young peoplechild/young person shares a bedroom with another child risk indicator – victim characteristics/nature of offenceindicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowthis is the child/young person’s first known offence or the acts reported are infrequent and at the low end of the behaviour scalemedium  victim is a known person outside of the family to the child/young person the child/young person is known to have several acts of inappropriate behaviours that are in the problematic areahighvictim is not known to the child/young person victim is a family member victim has a learning or physical disabilityevidence of intent and planning in relation to the alleged offencephysical sexual abuse against more that one victimthe child/young person is known to have several acts of inappropriate behaviours that are in the problematic arearisk indicator – family and relationshipsindicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowparents/carers show warmth, support the child/young person and have positive communication with the child/young person.parents/carers show appropriate understanding of safeguarding based on risk, or show a strong desire to put appropriate safeguards in place and follow guidance but may require some support in this area from professionals involved to build on confidence and understandingparents/carers have a positive family network who demonstrate positive attitudes and behavioursthe young person has positive relationships with family membersprimarily positive friendship groups medium  parents/carers have a limited support network or family relationships are strainedparents/carers demonstrate their own difficulties in life which may impact on their ability to provide adequate support or safeguardsparents/carers lack understanding, tolerance and at times warmth towards the young person.parents/carers struggle to implement rules, boundaries and consequences and require support in this area suspected abuse in family (emotional, neglect, physical).highparents/carers demonstrate their own significant difficulties in life which it is evidenced impacts on their ability to provide adequate support or safeguardsparents/carers express anger or blame towards the victims, they deny, minimise or excuse the issues and show little or no insight into the child/young person’s behaviourparents/carers do not acknowledge the behaviour due to religious or cultural beliefsparents/carers struggle to implement rules, boundaries and consequences and despite support provided there is no positive change parents/carers do not engage with professionals or follow adviceparents/carers do not report worriessuspected sexual abuse within the household/family, family, friends or peers are suspected or known offendersrisk indicator – professional support  indicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowall areas of support are in place for the child/young personstrategy meeting has been held for information sharing and ensure safetyyjs attended strategy meeting or a separate hsb meeting has been held to seek advice/supportaim assessment has been agreed or discussed with yjs referrals made to sarc, the meadows, forensic camhs, nspcc, barnardo’s, or alternative support for therapeutic support and interventionsfull circle consultation has been arranged or discussedchild/young person, other children in the home, parents and family network have been involved in support sessions such as “pants work” “safe touch” “online safety”resources accessed from sexual harm toolkitcase discussed at education sexual harm panel effective safety planning in place at home which includes the child/young person, other children in the home, parents, family network effective safety planning in place in school and the community medium  some support has been identified as above but not fully  advice has been sought from some agencies as listed above but unable to provide support/interventions due to ongoing police investigation or lack of resource available highthere has been no strategy meeting or hsb meeting held for information sharing, safeguarding or adviceno support/interventions have been identifiedno effective safety planning is in place at home or schoolrisk indicator – emotional wellbeing indicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowchild/young person is generally in good mental health low level concerns regarding some low mood, low self-esteem, child/young person and is accessing support for any impact on their own wellbeingmedium  low self-esteem or self-confidence, at times expression of despair.internal self-harm:  cutting, overdosing, eating disorder.trauma-related symptoms.bullying or threatening behaviour, aggression, violent outbursts, offending behaviour. highchronic low self-esteem or self- confidence.mental health problems or expression of despair.suicidal thoughts or suicide attempts.external (intensive acting out): bullying or threatening behaviour, violent outbursts, offending behaviour. dependency on substances or alcohol.trauma-related symptoms.local community are hostile towards the child/young person creating further isolation withdrawn, secretive behavioursdegrading and derogatory towards others, showing lack of remorse for behavioursrisk indicator – sexual health indicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowchild/young person is aware of where to get support and advice when needed, they feel able to speak to parents/carers, a teacher or peers.child or young person demonstrates a basic knowledge of sex educationchild or young person has good sexual health medium  child or young person has limited knowledge of sex education child or young person has poor sexual healthyoung person is sexually active, is not practising safe sex and is not accessing or willing to access support from any sexual health services.suspected sti’s or pregnancyhighrecurring, untreated or multiple stis. miscarriage(s), termination(s), pregnancy.child or young person has very poor knowledge of sex education, distorted views of normal sexual relationshipschild or young person has very poor sexual healthrisk indicator – online activity indicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowa high volume of friends or followers on social media platforms of a similar agechild/young person is an adolescent, they have accessed online pornography showing an interest or curiosity medium  child/young person accessing online pornography that includes violence or degradation concerns about proactive inappropriate or risky use of the internet and social media, sharing of images, sexting, making contact with adults or peers via social media.unknown adults initiating contact with young person via social media.highinadequate privacy settings.child/young person is pre-adolescent and searching pornography online child/young person has pre-occupation with pornography in particular accessing pornography that includes violence, degradation or child pornography concerns about proactive inappropriate or risky use of the internet and social media, dating sites, sharing of images, sexting, making contact with adults or peers via social media despite support in placechild/young person is increasingly exposed to sexual content within the home has posted inappropriate language, information or sexual pictures, when asked to by an adult or older peer or unknown person. evidence of perpetrating sexualised bullying via the internet/social media additional information / scaling questions (include scaling from last taf/core group ect)voice/views of the child or young personviews of the parent / carer / other agenciesdetail current support, family and professional, agencies in place or already exploredany additional relevant informationwhat nexton completion of this risk identification tool, please make an initial judgement about the level of risk of harmful sexual behaviour for the child / young person. please tick against your assessed level of risk and discuss this with your team manager. the matrix should be emailed to sexualharmconsultation group@durham.gov.uk for consideration to be discussed at the sexual harm consultation group. you should take appropriate action to manage the risks, in accordance with the local authority / safeguarding partnership procedures.overall assessed level of harmful sexual behaviourriskrisk indicatorsindicatorevidencelow riskthe indicators and assessment raise some concerns that the child/young person is at risk of harmful sexual behaviour but these are at a low level and support can be implemented to reduce this riskmedium riskthe indicators and assessment raise concerns that the child/young person is at risk of harmful sexual behaviour. high riskthe indicators and assessment raise significant concerns that the child/young person is at risk of harmful sexual behaviour. team  manager – name/signaturerisk level agreed date agreedto be completed during sexual harm consultation group pre-screening sexual harm pre-screening membersrisk level agreed date agreedadditional comments pre-screening outcome to be completed during sexual harm consultation groupsexual harm consultation group membersrisk level agreed panel datediscussion actions 

18.01.00-01 IFCSA Referral Risk Matrix (WORD) .docx

                                                                                                                                                                                 intra-familial child sexual abuse referral risk matrixintra-familial child sexual abuse referral risk matrixreferralreviewnamed worker leading on the risk assessment contact details & agencydateauthorising line manager  contact details & agencydatechild’s full name (+ aliases) d.o.b. age  home address ll id  disability gender identity ethnicity first languagechild legal statuschild’s pen picture / what has happened to this child /be clear about whether the child made allegations or is there suspected abuse and if so why. tell us who the child and who is in their network, include the family genogram/ecomap.intra-familial child sex abuse referral risk matrixthe intra-familial child sex abuse referral risk matrix is a tool to determine suitability of a child/young person to be discussed at the sexual harm consultation group. it should be developed alongside with and complimenting any other plan for the young person’s welfare. this does not replace the ifcsa procedures already in place and should not be used as a threshold document in relation to level of involvement, this is a referral tool for the consultation group. please use this tool in line with local safeguarding partnership procedures professional assessment of safeguarding risk indicators for referral to the sexual harm consultation groupthe matrix should be completed by the child or young person’s social worker or key worker with the input of the child/young person, family and partner agencies. that does not mean that the questions should be directly asked, these should be formatted into family friendly signs of safety best questions.all risk indicators should be completed with supporting evidence which is mandatory, think about your mapping or evidence from the harm matrix such as first, last and worst. consider the impact on the child/young person. the heading risk indicators are not exhaustive; they are simply those mostly commonly recognised which may indicate a risk of intra-familial child sex abuse; there may be other relevant factors present which require consideration and analysis. one tick in a high-risk box, or several in low-risk may indicate a serious risk, alternatively this might be an indication of other concerns that require addressing via the child’s overall plan, or by accessing other appropriate services. a degree of professional judgement is required when making an overall outcome.the risk and vulnerability factors provided against each of the risk indicator headings are also not exhaustive; they are simply prompts for consideration. consequently, the recorded risk for each of the risk indicators does not necessarily need to correspond with the risk and vulnerability factors highlighted. there may also be two risk indicators relevant to that child based on their own unique circumstances. it is important to provide analysis to evidence how the assessment of an individual risk indicator has been achieved, the intra-familial child sex abuse toolkit should be referred to as supporting evidence where relevant. when assessing a child or young person’s risk of harm, it is essential to highlight if the concerns and the information being provided is current or historic. if the concern or information is historic but relevant, it necessary to evidence how this relates to the current assessed risk.*please indicate a level of assesses risk against all the following risk indicatorsrisk indicator – where a member of the family/household is suspected of a sexual offenceindicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowalleged offence is an isolated allegation by an adult known to the personalleged abuser is no longer in the family home or having any contact with the child, the safety plan is fully supported by all family medium  alleged offence is historical by another child/young person and the person was a child themselves at the time of the allegation with no further allegations or red flagsalleged offence is by an adult with some additional worries such as a multiple allegations/history of sexual violence alleged abuser is no longer in the family home but has regular contact with the children where there is a firm safety plan and supervision by a person fully assessed as having capacity to protecthighalleged offence is by a child/young person within the family alleged offence is by a child/young person outside the family alleged offence is historical by another child/young person the person was a child themselves at the time of the allegation but there has been further behaviours/allegations during adulthood which are red flagsalleged offence is against an adult with significant additional worries such as a multiple allegations/history of sexual violence and deviancealleged abuser shows behaviours that are red flags such as; keeping secrets, favouring a child and buying them gifts, playfighting, using sexual languagealleged abuser remains in the family home or has regular contact with the children where there remains worriesrisk indicator – indicators of child sexual abuse/red flagsindicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowno red flags identifiedmedium  physical health needs such as; discharge or bleeding from genitals, genital soreness, utis, bedwetting, soiling, constipationchild/young person has night terrors and problems sleepingchild/young person changes the way they dress, this could be dressing provocatively or covering up changes in personal hygiene, this could be poor or excessivechild/young person talks about a new/secret friend or relationshipchild/young person suddenly has money or gifts without explanationhighphysical health needs such as; recurrent abdomen pain, recurrent uti’s, genital warts, tears to genitals, unusual bruising around the genitals or which suggest being held downsexually transmitted infections or pregnancy self-harming of the child/young person’s genitalschild/young person is showing signs of inappropriate sexual behaviourchild/young person removes clothes at inappropriate times and mimics sexualised behaviours with toyschild/young person shows fear of closeness/being touchedrisk indicator – child/young person vulnerabilities/characteristicsindicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowchild/young person has no additional learning needschild/young person displays good social skills and has a positive peer network child/young person has some difficulties with identity and confusion around sexuality which identify a support needmedium  child is baby or toddler who cannot verbalise any worrieschild/young person is going through or recently gone through puberty which is a time teenagers often communicate less with parents, experiment with alcohol/drugs and become more sexually curious child/young person is a victim of some low level physical abuse or neglectchild/young person has some additional learning needschild/young person displays some difficulties with social skills and has a limited peer network child/young person has some difficulties with identity and confusion around sexuality which appears problematic and unsupportedchild/young person may be over-compliant or quietchild/young person is home schooled child/young person has been a victim of neglect or other form of abusehighchild/young person has suffered significant trauma and has been a victim of physical abuse or neglect resulting in them suffering significant harmchild/young person has significant learning needs making their understanding low child/young person has a disability, especially if they are non-verbal or have personal care needschild/young person has distorted views of sexuality and what a healthy relationship may look likechild/young person is home schooled, there is evidence of no education and child is isolated child/young person has missing episodes, not wanting to be at home or avoiding the alleged abuserrisk indicator – relationships indicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowparents/carers show warmth, support the child/young person and have positive communication with the child/young person.parents/carers have a positive family network who demonstrate positive attitudes and behavioursthe young person has positive relationships with family membersprimarily positive friendship groups medium  child/young person has an inconsistent relationship with the non-abusing parent/s making it more difficult to share worrieschild/young person has limited friendship groups and social networkshighchild/young person has a very difficult relationship with the non-abusing parent/s making it more difficult to share worrieschild/young person displays significant difficulties with social skills and has no positive peer network, they are isolated child/young person spends a significant amount of time talking to unknown people online with no safety settings or oversight risk indicator – parents/carers capacity to protect indicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowparents/carers show appropriate understanding of safeguarding based on risk, or show a strong desire to put appropriate safeguards in place and follow guidance but may require some support in this area from professionals involved to build on confidence and understandingnon-abusing parent has been assessed as having capacity to protect using appropriate tools and evidence based assessmentmedium  parents/carers have a limited support network or family relationships are strainedparents/carers demonstrate their own difficulties in life which may impact on their ability to provide adequate support or safeguards such as learning needs, poor mental ill health, substance misuse or domestic abuseparents/carers lack understanding, tolerance and at times warmth towards the young person.parents/carers struggle to implement rules, boundaries and consequences and require support in this area suspected abuse in family (emotional, neglect, physical).unclear if non-abusing parent has capacity to protect / assessment may be ongoing but some positive indicatorshighparents/carers demonstrate their own significant difficulties in life such as learning needs, poor mental ill health, substance misuse or domestic abuse which it is evidenced impacts on their ability to provide adequate support or safeguards parents/carers have low self-esteem and are emotionally insecureparents/carers do not believe the child/young person, they show no empathy parents/carers express anger or blame towards the victims, they deny, minimise or excuse the issues and show little or no insight into the risksparents/carers view the alleged abuser to be a positive person, someone who provides or looks after the family and there is evidence of reliabilityparents/carers do not acknowledge the behaviour due to religious or cultural beliefsparents/carers do not engage with professionals or follow adviceparents/carers do not report worriesparents/carers have been victims of sexual abusesuspected sexual abuse within the household/family, family, friends or peers are suspected or known offendersparents/carers have a distorted view of relationships and children’s sexualitynon-abusing parent assessed as not having capacity to protect / assessment may be ongoing with little or no positive indicatorsrisk indicator – professional support  indicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowall areas of support are in place for the child/young personstrategy meeting has been held for information sharing and ensure safetyreferrals made to sarc, the meadows, forensic camhs, nspcc, barnardo’s, or alternative support for therapeutic support and interventionsfull circle consultation has been arranged or discussedchild/young person, other children in the home, parents and family network have been involved in support sessions such as “pants work” “safe touch” “online safety”resources accessed from sexual harm toolkiteffective safety planning in place at home which includes the child/young person, other children in the home, parents, family network effective safety planning in place in school and the community medium  some support has been identified as above but not fully  advice has been sought from some agencies as listed above but unable to provide support/interventions due to ongoing police investigation or lack of resource available highthere has been no strategy meeting held for information sharing, safeguarding or adviceno support/interventions have been identifiedno effective safety planning is in place at home or schoolrisk indicator – emotional wellbeing indicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowchild/young person is generally in good mental health low level concerns regarding some low mood, low self-esteem, child/young person and is accessing support for any impact on their own wellbeingmedium  low self-esteem or self-confidence, at times expression of despair.internal self-harm:  cutting, overdosing, eating disorder.trauma-related symptoms.distracted/withdrawnsome external (acting out) bullying or threatening behaviour, aggression, violent outbursts, offending behaviour. highchronic low self-esteem or self- confidence, finds their own body repulsive/bad/dirtymental health problems or expression of despair.suicidal thoughts or suicide attempts.external (intensive acting out): bullying or threatening behaviour, violent outbursts, offending behaviour. dependency on substances or alcohol.trauma-related symptoms.withdrawn, secretive behaviourschild/young person has previously suffered sexual harmrisk indicator – sexual health indicatorevidence/consider information from mapping/harm matrix, first, last, worstlowchild/young person is aware of where to get support and advice when needed, they feel able to speak to parents/carers, a teacher or peers.child or young person demonstrates a basic knowledge of sex educationchild or young person has good sexual health medium  child or young person has limited knowledge of sex education child or young person has poor sexual healthyoung person is sexually active, is not practising safe sex and is not accessing or willing to access support from any sexual health services.suspected sti’s or pregnancyhighrecurring, untreated or multiple stis. miscarriage(s), termination(s), pregnancy.child or young person has very poor knowledge of sex education, distorted views of normal sexual relationshipschild or young person has very poor sexual healthadditional information / scaling questions (include scaling from last taf/core group ect)voice/views of the child or young personviews of the parent / carer / other agenciesdetail current support family and professional, agencies in place or already exploredany additional relevant informationwhat nexton completion of this risk identification tool, please make an initial judgement about the level of risk of harmful sexual behaviour for the child / young person. please tick against your assessed level of risk and discuss this with your team manager. the matrix should be emailed to sexualharmconsultation group@durham.gov.uk for consideration to be discussed at the sexual harm consultation group. you should take appropriate action to manage the risks, in accordance with the local authority / safeguarding partnership procedures.overall assessed level of harmful sexual behaviourriskrisk indicatorsindicatorevidencelow riskthe indicators and assessment raise some concerns that the child/young person is at risk of harmful sexual behaviour but these are at a low level and support can be implemented to reduce this riskmedium riskthe indicators and assessment raise concerns that the child/young person is at risk of harmful sexual behaviour. high riskthe indicators and assessment raise significant concerns that the child/young person is at risk of harmful sexual behaviour. team  manager – name/signaturerisk level agreed date agreedto be completed during sexual harm consultation group pre-screening sexual harm pre-screening membersrisk level agreed date agreedadditional comments pre-screening outcome to be completed during sexual harm consultation groupsexual harm consultation group membersrisk level agreed panel datediscussion actions 

1.0.00 How we Practice in Durham Fifth Edition.pdf

1.06.23 Strategy Script.docx

strategy discussion script “the content of these minutes is highly confidential. it is shared with you on the basis that it will be stored securely and not shared with any other person or agency”the strategy was carried out using sos and risk harm matrix. this script has been designed to ensure that strategy discussions are consistent across the county.introductionsteam manager / swc to open the strategy, introduce themselves and then go to each professional in turn for their introduction. they will then state the following:today we need to examine the information available to us and establish if we believe that there is sufficient information to suggest this/these child/children have suffered, are suffering or likely to suffer significant harm. family composition / networkteam manager / swc to explain who the strategy is in relation to, child’s name, dob and where they live. then parents details, names, dob and where they live. this should include step-parents and partners.  also, which adult is displaying the concerning behaviours. if there is wider family or friends who are involved with the children (the network), their information should also be shared here.name(s) of child(ren) piddobaddressall other household members/parents detailspiddobaddressrelationship to child and do they hold pr?alleged perpetrator’s name piddobaddressrelationship to child and do they hold pr?rationale for the strategy team manager / swc to give details of the reason for the strategy. i.e. ‘this strategy is being held due to a domestic abuse incident which occurred on this date. the incident involved…. the children were/were not witness to this’the rationale needs to be specific and clearly demonstrates that threshold for a strategy has been met. someone who does not know the child should be able to read this document and know what the issues are. reason/purpose for strategy discussion:danger statement the team manager / swc will then pass to the social worker to deliver the danger statement. a good danger statement will include the date of the worries and an example of the worrying behaviour, as well as the impact on the child.danger statementagency information for non-urgent strategies, the team manager / swc explains that the social worker has completed a harm matrix, which will include what children’s services know as well as the child and family’s perspective. the team manager / swc will be asking some specific questions to explore these worries and what is working well in relation to the worries, from each person’s perspective. the harm matrix can be shared on the screen as a starting point for this discussion, and the detail added to this. the team manager / swc may need to remind people to slow down or help them to stay on track so that the detail can be recorded. the team manager / swc will go to each agency in turn for their information and use the prompts in the harm matrix to guide the discussion. this will include asking questions about:behaviour timespan (including how long the behaviour has been a worry and how often it has happened)severity (including the detail of what happened)first incidentworst incidentlast incidentimpact on the childwhen exploring the detail of the incidents and impact on the children, the team manager / swc may need to ask other questions to check out the evidence, e.g. ‘how do you know the children were scared?’, ‘how do you know dad was drunk?’ exploring the impact of the worrying behaviour on the children will help to separate harmful behaviour from any complicating factors.for each worrying behaviour in the harm matrix, the team manager / swc will also ask questions to each agency about times that things have gone well in relation to the worries, or the things that people (parents, the wider network of family, friends and professionals) have done to prevent further incidents or protect the children. if partners are struggling to identify what is working well, we may need to ask them if there have never been any exceptions to the worries that they have.behaviourtimespanseverityimpact on the childfirstworstlastwhat’s working wellsafety what’s working wellsafetywhat’s working wellsafetynamedepartmentinformationchildren’s servicespolicehealthschoolgpchild’s view – should come before safety goal and link in with what we are worried about and what is working well (safety)the team manager / swc asks the social worker what would be in the child’s house of worries,  house of happiness and house of dreams. ideally this will be based on what the child has told us.although in new cases this will be difficult, we can summarise what a child in this situation would want. worrieshappinessdreamssafety goalsthe team manager / swc will invite the social worker to explain the safety goals. the team manager / swc will ask the social worker what the parent and child’s goals would be safety goals summarythe team manager / swc will then summarise what is working well what are we worried aboutwhat are the complicating factors the team manager / swc needs to offer some analysis of this. this can be summarised into a couple of sentences. working wellworried aboutcomplicating factors manager’s analysis scaling question the team manager / swc will then ask the pre-prepared scaling question:on a scale of 0-10, if 10 is that the risk is being well managed so that the children aren’t being harmed and 0 is that professionals are so worried about … (children’s names) that we need to take action straight away, where would you rate it?it can be helpful to have individual scaling questions if there is more than one danger statement and safety goal.the team manager / swc asks each professional in turn for their score and the rationale for this score. the team manager / swc will also ask the professionals what it would take for them to move up a point on the scale. getting the rationale for the score and what would need to happen to move it up one point is the most important part of the scaling. if partners say the child needs to be on a child protection plan as the thing that would move them up, ask partners to think about what behaviour would need to change to move up one on the scale.scaling question namescorereasondecision for threshold for a s47 the team manager / swc then asks each professional in turn for their view on threshold for s47. they should preclude this with the following statement:a s.47 is a standalone assessment of whether sufficient evidence is present to suggest that children have suffered significant harm or at ongoing risk of significant harm. decision for threshold what needs to happen next actions that the team manager / swc has collated during the meeting should now be listed. professionals are asked if there are any other actions that need to be considered. actions need to be specific and include what needs to happen in order for the child(ren) to be safeactionperson responsible 

8.06.01 Clarity and confidence-permanence.pdf

2.01.01 OPS Operating Procedures 25-26.pdf

1.09.03 - Practice Guidance - Multi-Agency Chronology.pdf

1  chronology of the child’s significant events  a quick reference guide to creating and using a multi-agency   reason for guidance  1. every child who has a social worker or an early help lead practitioner should have a working multi-agency chronology of their significant events. ideally, children, who have a lead practitioner from a different agency should also have a multi-agency chronology of significant events.  for non-statutory cases, these need to be completed with the family’s agreement and in partnership, and of course ideally, this would be the same for statutory cases too. 2. chronologies are an essential analytical and reflective tool that should be used in assessing, planning, working with families, understanding, and responding to cumulative harm (trauma informed, healing and repair) and in evidence-based decision making. the chronology of the child’s significant events should also be a reliable ‘go to place’ for practitioners and managers who need to get a quick and accurate understanding of the child’s experiences, the harm they have or may have suffered, what has worked well in the past and to gain an up-to-date position of the case.    3. this guidance provides a short summary of the thinking and process that should be followed in order to  develop a meaningful multi-agency chronology of the child’s significant events.  other types of chronologies maybe required within your work and you will need to refer to your own agencies policies and guidance for these.  this guidance specifically supports you in creating, using, and updating a multi-agency chronology of the child’s significant events. it is the child’s lead practitioner’s responsibility to hold the ‘master’ multi-agency chronology on their record/file.  what is a chronology  4. chronologies are a record of key events, in sequential order. events that are significant for the child could be positive or negative.  chronologies are fundamental to good practice as they improve understanding and insight into individual cases including the child’s lived experiences and cumulative harm.  they also help to identify existing safety that can be used now 
2  and in the future, to keep the child safe. although not always accurate and other factors have to be considered, past behaviors are the best predictor for future behavior unless change is achieved.  this includes both harmful and protective actions and behavior.  chronologies can be used in many beneficial ways for the practitioner, child, and family. it is the responsibility of the lead practitioner to create the chronology and the responsibility of partner agencies to contribute relevant and succinct information directly and regularly to be included.  5. some reasons why we need to do a chronology of the child’s significant events a. shows the child’s lived experiences and family history b. it shares information that might otherwise not be known by other agencies who are involved with the child and/or family c. it helps identify gaps and prompts the use of best questions with children and the family network to fill these gaps d. helps to prevent known significant information becoming ‘lost’ within records over time e. chronologies are a key element in every kind of assessment, though is not a substitute for an assessment f. helps you to focus on all relevant issues, not just those presenting right now g. makes you the practitioner better prepared, gives you a better understanding and makes you better able to challenge (but not pre-judge) and to be curious h. supports the practitioner and family to identify and make sense of what we are worried about, patterns, themes, cycles, increases or decreases in events or behavior in the life of a child and their family i. helps to identify existing safety that could help protect the child now and, in the future j. makes it easier to identify the build-up of harm/cumulative harm and plan support and services that will help heal and repair harm and are trauma informed k. helps the practitioner and family to understand the frequency, severity, first, worst, and most recent harm, and the potential cumulative harm or difficulties and its impact on the child.  parental and family members responses to 
3  significant events may add or reduce the impact of harm on the child (also helps you to complete the in the harm matrix which supports best practice) l. helps empathy, reflection, and analysis on the part of the practitioner and others during work with the child and family, and sometimes after a serious incident within the family  m. is useful in supervision and can act as a summary of events to facilitate review, reflection  and to work out what might be going on and why   n. informs and supports evidence-based decision making, planning and intervention o. helps emergency duty practitioners and new practitioners to get an understanding of the child’s experiences and harm quickly p. they are the starting point for internal and external auditing q. chronologies are a legal requirement for some cases    6. what makes a good chronology? a. it lists events in the order they happened, not in the order they came to professional attention b. they tell the story of the child and family, not of the agencies working with them c. they show the impact on the child, positive or negative d. identifies existing safety (when someone steps in to prevent or lessen harm to the child) as well as worrying events e. they are up to date, accurate, use straightforward language that is non-blaming and succinct f. they are multi-agency so increase everyone’s knowledge of the child’s live experiences 
4  g. they save time for practitioners by front-loading their exploration of the child and family’s history and any relevant themes and gaps in their knowledge h. when professional  judgement is used: chronologies cannot be automated or treated as an administrative task or something that is done at case closure i. when they are succinct and are fundamentally different from case notes, or an ‘audit’ chronology j. when they can be used as an ‘index’ and allow you to find more details in the agencies case record k. when they are written in plain language with no abbreviations, or these are explained in the first instance they are used in each event entry l. they provide evidence of change (or lack of change) over time  7. top tips a. starting a chronology of the child’s significant events should be one of the first actions for both emergency and non-emergency cases b. talk with children, parents and the family network about what they think is significant and get consent from those who hold parental responsibility for sharing your ‘child’s significant events’ information to create a multi-agency chronology. remember, a chronology of the child’s significant events is a required for statutory cases and needed for non-statutory case  c. start the chronology as soon as the child/family is allocated to you and work backwards by adding in historical events as you learn about them throughout your involvement, and forwards by adding new events as they happen d. a chronology doesn’t give you all the answers for your analysis, but gets you asking some of the right questions e. have ‘updating child’s chronology’ as an agenda item for core groups, team around the family meetings and care team meetings.  ask other professionals, the child and family if they know something significant to add to the chronology. appendix 1 shows an example of a template that could be used by agencies to update the lead practitioner of significant events. 
5  f. enter event as the date they happen on (and put when and how they were first reported/first known about in brackets) g. if the actual date of the significant is unknown, use the 1st of the month and explain in the details, why you can’t identify a specific date h. focus on the person not the agency, this is not a chronology of your agencies work i. don’t clutter the chronology of the child’s significant events with processes, routine information and insignificant events that detract and hide what is important to know      8. what is and what is not a significant event?  9. deciding on what is a significant event will often require professional judgement. some events will be universal and others specific to an individual child/family and their circumstances. remember to include significant events that have a clear  positive impact not just the negative ones as this may help with safety planning and understanding what works for this family which can then be built upon in the safety plan. 10. a chronology of the child’s significant events will include some but not all processes such as strategy meetings, team around the family meetings, public law outline panel (plo) family group conference etc.  remember to include the ‘person centred’ part, which could be the reason the meeting was needed, the decisions made, following actions and the impact on the child. 11. when using your professional judgement and practice wisdom in deciding what events are significant, ask yourself, “does this decision, event, occurrence, or omission hold significance for the child, why and what is the impact or potential impact on them, positive or negative, and how do we know this? 12. suggestions for significant events can be found below, this is not an exhaustive list, it doesn’t and can’t include events that might only be specific for an individual child (remember to be specific and include positive and negative events): 
6      significant events some suggestions of what significant events might be think - does this decision, event, occurrence, or omission hold significance for the child,  why and what is the impact or potential impact on them, and how do we know this? ▪ births, including parents and child ▪ bereavement/deaths ▪ safeguarding referral ▪ physical or mental ill health in the family (including disability) drug/alcohol misuse/ overdose/self-harm/ depression, serious injury including accidental ▪ child becoming a young carer or their responsibilities changing ▪ change of address, gp, school etc ▪ change of marital or other significant relationships ▪ domestic abuse incident  ▪ positive or worrying weight loss or gain ▪ when a child tells you or someone else something that is a safeguarding concern ▪ any type of harm or risk of harm ▪ parent/carer not attending family time/contact ▪ when someone stepped in and protected the child from harm (existing strength) or mitigated the harm in someway ▪ missing from home and return to home 
7  ▪ unexplained school absence  ▪ child protection/child in need referrals ▪ start of public law outline (plo) protocol ▪ key decision such as change in legal status, living arrangements or who and how the child spends family time, level of need, care plan or level of involvement etc ▪ achievements, awards, exam results ▪ child subject to a child protection plan – beginning and end ▪ parent, important adult, or an abuser starts or ends a custodial sentence ▪ missed immunisations and other ‘was not brought’ medical appointments ▪ child protection strategy meetings/child protection conferences/ core groups/team around the family meetings, care team meetings, family group conference etc.  ▪ parental or young person overdose and other forms of self-harm ▪ treatment/programme for  substance problematic substance misuse – start and finish  ▪ change in medication script ▪ pandemic lock downs or similar events/disasters that impact on the child/family ▪ changes in the child’s legal status/ becoming or ceasing to be accommodated/looked after by the local authority.  ▪ urgent care attendance / hospital admissions and discharge ▪ chronic or significant acute parental/carer/child illness ▪ referral to services lado (local authority designated officer) ▪ was not brought to medical/health/therapeutic appointments ▪ all observations which may be related to sign of physical, sexual, or  emotional abuse and neglect including sexual or criminal exploitation ▪ a new adult, child or young person moving in or out of the household ▪ committing of offences by the child or significant adults 
8  ▪ fixed term or permanent exclusions from school ▪ court proceedings, hearings, and their outcome. ▪ significant incident e.g., house fire     13. examples of what is not a significant event for the child unless something significant (positive or negative) occurred within them are shown below:  some examples of events that are not significant events for the child unless something significant (positive or negative) occurred within them  x routine recording/case notes x report written x attendance at appointments x statutory visits x letters  x emails x attended school  x routine visits x telephone calls  x legal advice x pnc checks (but do enter offences in on the date they happened)   
9   14. the table below is an example of how a multi-agency might look and with suggested column headings and an explanation of where different types of information should be entered (taken from durham’s children’s social care  - liquidlogic children’s system)   child’s chronology of significant events – what goes where   date of event category type  event details impact /child’s views decision /actions record the actual date that the significant event took place, not when you first heard about it.  this is the child’s chronology not a chronology of our work though some of our actions will also be significant events for the child.  recording when the event happened helps you to identify what was going on at that time for the child and family and any patterns, triggers etc.     record the ‘primary source’ here. who told you about the significant event, how do we know about it?   for examples  • police  • education  • social care records  • parents  • the child    record the ‘headline’  what is the significant event?   for examples  • referral made by maternal grandmother who is worried about how much alcohol mum drinks and  that the children aren’t being cared for;  • birth of brother or sister;  • mother starts a new relationship; describe the basic and important details of the significant event. what happened, who was there etc.  be specific and succinct.  don’t copy the whole referral/information as more detail can be found in case recording.  what was it about the event that is significant or important? this might be a worry, actual harm or something was that was significantly good for the child?   include parental and any member of the families note the impact on the child or the likely impact if not known.  record the age of the child at the time of the event as this helps to understand the impact better.   for example;  lucy was 6 years old and peter was 4 years old when this happened.  mrs hubbard said that lucy kept asking, “is mammy alright” and needed a lot of reassurance before she could sleep that night. peter showed no obvious distress.  it is likely that what did we do next in response to the event?  record significant decisions made.  think about:  what did we decide or decide against:  who did we speak to, visit, and or inform;  was there a strategy discussion or another type of meeting?  what decisions did we make (taking no action is still a decision);  did we alter any arrangements/decisions already in place?  
10         • domestic abuse incident where mother is punched in the face by father;  • court hearing where father is given permission to spend more supervised family time with lucy network’s behaviours or responses.  for example:   mrs hubbard, maternal grandmother, took lucy and peter to her home as mother was drunk, slurring her words and falling over and was unable to care for them.  mother said “i wasn’t that drunk, i only had a glass of cider”  you will be recording the event on the day it happened.  you should add in here, in brackets, when you first learnt of the event. this directs the reader to where more details can be found.  for example: (first informed of this on 8/07/19 by mrs hubbard, maternal grandmother, who telephoned mary poppins, social worker)  (monday morning)  this would have been frightening and upsetting for both children.    management oversight, was this discussed with a manager, in supervision or a reflective discussion etc.           remember: it is the child’s chronology of significant events  
11  start or build on the child’s chronology of significant events as soon as you are allocated the case  start with today and work backwards, by adding in historical significant events, and forwards, by updating new significant events  *only include significant events*       *be specific and succinct*         * use full names and job titles*                                                                    *use plain language*                                   *order of events *                * use to aid everyone’s understanding*     appendix 1  this template can be downloaded and could be use when passing on information about significant events for the child to the lead practitioner   child’s chronology of significant events –    date of event  (date when event took place rather than the date you learnt about it) category  (primary source – put the name of the agency and practitioner who first knew about this event i.e., gp, police, school name etc ) type   (what is the significant event i.e., birth, was not brought to an appointment, tested positive for substance, moved to a new house etc.  short and succinct)  event details  (describe the basic and important details of the significant event. what happened, who was there etc)  impact /child’s views  (be clear about what you know and how you know it and what you think might be the impact) decision & actions  (what did you or others do next in response to the event?)                current + new historical 
12                     
