implementation continuum practice outline
Practice Reform Project
Continuum of Service Practice Outline March, 2015
1
Implementation Continuum Practice Outline ©2015 Resolutions Consultancy
Continuum of Service The proposal for the Signs of Safety England Innovations Project described the Continuum of Service practice reform project as establishing “continuum of service across early help, family support, child protection and looked after children – using the common framework to allow for seamless transition and service provision”. This project anticipates the Signs of Safety methodology being applied in all cases in Children’s Services. As children and families move between services this supports there to be ‘one case, one plan’. Early help ç è Children in need ç è Child protection ç è Looked after children Youth at risk ç èYoung offenders
The Signs of Safety methodology encompasses: • The principles for practice; • The disciplines for practitioners’ application of the approach; • A range of tools for assessment and planning, decision making and engaging children and families; and • Processes through which the work is undertaken with families and children, and including partner agencies. Applying Signs of Safety across all the continuum of all children’s services requires adjustment and adaptation of the assessment and planning framework particularly. As illustrated below, this ‘three column’ framework encompasses: • The four domains for inquiry: the three column questions -‐ what are we worried about, what is working well, what needs to happen, and the scaling question for the judgment; and • The seven analysis categories: harm, danger statements, complicating factors, existing strengths, existing safety, safety goals and next steps. Signs of Safety Assessment and Planning Framework: Seven Analysis Categories
What are you Worried About?
What s Working Well?
What Needs to Happen?
HARM:&Past%hurt,%injury%or%abuse%to% the%child%(likely)%caused%by%adults.% Also%includes%risk%taking%behavior%by% children/teens%that%indicates%harm% and/or%is%harmful%to%them.!
Existing&Strengths:&People,%plans%and% actions%that%contribute%to%a%child’s% wellbeing%and%plans%about%how%a%child% will%be%made%safe%when%danger%is% present.%!
SAFETY&GOALS:&The%behaviours%and% actions%the%child%protection%agency% needs%to%see%to%be%satisfied%the%child% will%be%safe%enough%to%close%the%case.!
DANGER&STATEMENTS:&The%harm%or% hurt%that%is%believed%likely%to%happen% to%the%child(ren)%if%nothing%in%the% family’s%situation%changes.%!
EXISTING&SAFETY:&Actions%taken%by% parents,%caring%adults%and%children%to% make%sure%the%child%is%safe%when%the% danger%is%present.%!
Next&Steps:&The%immediate%next% actions%that%will%be%taken%to%build% future%safety%
Complicating&Factors:&Actions%and% behaviors%in%and%around%the%family%and% child%and%by%professionals%that%make%it% more%difficult%to%solve%danger%of%future% abuse.%!
0
On%a%scale%of%0%to%10%where%10%means%everyone%knows%the%children%are%safe%enough%for%the%child%protection% authorities%to%close%the%case%and%zero%means%things%are%so%bad%for%the%children%can’t%live%at%home,%where%do%we%rate% this%situation?%(Locate%different%people’s%judgments%spatially%on%the%twoLway%arrow)% © Resolutions Consultancy
2
Implementation Continuum Practice Outline ©2015 Resolutions Consultancy
10
Adaptations to the Assessment and Planning Framework The assessment and planning framework below shows the four domains of enquiry and seven analysis categories and those domains and categories that stay the same across the continuum of service: When we think about the situation facing this family: What are we worried about? What is working well? What needs to happen? Harm Existing strengths Safety goals Danger statement Existing safety Next steps Complicating factors On a scale of 0 to 10 where 10 is everyone knows the children are safe enough for child protection authorities to close the case and zero means things are so bad for the children they can’t live at home, where do we rate this situation? (if different numbers place different people on the continuum) 0 ç−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−è 10
Examples of Adaptations to the Analysis Categories: Harm è Risky behavior Critical worry Concern Risks Main worry Disconnections Impact of …
• • • • • • •
Danger è • • • •
Worry statement Critical risk Worst case scenario Getting worse
Existing safety è • • • • • • •
Positive relationships Positive developments Good things Happy things When it was different When it worked Connections
Safety goals è • Goals • Wellbeing goals • Success goals • Stability goals • Achievement goals • Motivations • Dreams • Changes • Stuff that’s got to change
Examples of Scaling Questions: Mess to success -‐ On a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 means my life is ‘on track’ to where you want to go in life and 0 is my life’s a complete mess, where are you?
3
Implementation Continuum Practice Outline ©2015 Resolutions Consultancy
Placement stability – On a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is things have got so bad, there is so much conflict, anxiety and mistrust that …. (the foster child) has to leave the placement now, and 10 is we have all understood what has happened and wht we need to do so we can live and work together into the future happily and are totally up for doing it, where are you? And where is…? Confidence about not getting into trouble with the law -‐ On a scale of 0 to 10 where 10 is everyone is confident that the young person won’t get into any more problems with the law / justice system and 0 means you think the young person will be back in trouble and in court immediately, where are you? And where is…?
An Example for Youth at Risk or Young Offenders •
Harm may become the worrying behavior that is harmful to the young person or others, getting clear descriptions of the behavior and how it is negative (in terms of its consequences).
•
Danger may be actual danger to self or others or may become critical worries, and involve being clear about who is worried about what.
•
Complicating factors remain, recognising in this example for teenagers, the biggest complicating factor may be adults trying to make the teenagers do AND see it their way.
•
Existing strengths remain and may focus on the adults who are connected best and the detail of how and when they connect and help the teenager, as well what the teenager sees as the best things in his or her life, and what support people would say are the best things about the teenager.
•
Existing safety may be existing success looking for times when the worrying behaviour could have happened but the young person or others stopped it from happening.
•
Safety goals may become future success, what the teenager and others would need to see to be satisfied that the critical worry is solved or dealt with.
•
Next steps remains and may involve getting a ‘life on track’ scale going or establishing a similar workable goal, and involve the teenager describing what a life ‘on track’ would look like to him or her.
•
Scaling questions may include the mess to success and the confidence about not getting into trouble with the law scales as above. Or scales may address, e.g. working relationships, ‘ …where 10 is you have a relationship with the young person and people around the young person can work together, speak about the worries, what’s working and what needs to happen (even if you don’t both agree) and 0 is where we can’t even stay in the same room together…’.
4
Implementation Continuum Practice Outline ©2015 Resolutions Consultancy
When we think about this young person: What are we worried about? What is working well? What needs to happen? WORRYING BEHAVIOUR Existing strengths FUTURE SUCCESS CRITICAL WORRIES Next steps Complicating factors EXISITING SUCCESS On a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 means my life is ‘on track’ to where you want to go in life and 0 is my life’s a complete mess, where are you? 0 ç−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−è 10 How Much of the Assessment and Planning Framework to Use? Practitioners and partners will vary as to how many parts of the assessment and planning framework will be used in different cases and circumstances. The three columns alone may guide some discussions with partners and referrals. All four domains of enquiry -‐ the three columns and scaling questions -‐ will be used in all formal assessment and planning across the continuum. As assessment and planning and case management proceed, the analysis categories will come into play. It may be that a ‘worry statement’ and ‘goals’ are enough to plan the case. The more complex the case, the more analysis categories will come into play. Child Protection cases use all the domains of enquiry and categories of analysis.
THE NAME – “SIGNS OF …. ” With the various adaptations, the name Signs of Safety itself, when working with families and young people, can be adapted. Signs of Safety è Signs of Success Signs of Wellbeing Signs of Stability Signs of Achievement Signs of Motivation PRINCIPLES All the Signs of Safety principles apply: Working relationships Stance of critical enquiry Being grounded in everyday practice
5
Implementation Continuum Practice Outline ©2015 Resolutions Consultancy
DISCIPLINES The following Signs of Safety disciplines apply unchanged: Plain language Statements focusing on specific observable behaviors Skillful use of authority Assessment is always a work in progress The disciplines that distinguish between harm and danger and complicating factors, and between strengths and protection, are adapted: Being clear about the critical things that have actually occurred, and what the workers are worried could occur if there is no change in behavior and other circumstances. Being clear about the positive things in general and those actual behaviors that have demonstrated a capacity to overcome the main worries. OTHER SIGNS OF SAFETY TOOLS Three houses, and also the Fairy and Wizard variation, apply across the continuum. Word and pictures explanations and plans can apply across the continuum. OTHER KEY ASPECTS OF SIGNS OF SAFETY The questioning approach is central to effective work with young people and families across the continuum. Networks of family and friends and community supports are cornerstone for effective change for young people and families across the continuum. PRACTICE PROCESS ACROSS THE CONTINUUM The core processes of Signs of Safety practice, to the extent that they can be defined when practice is rarely linear and never formulaic, will similarly have specific focuses or additional requirements navigating a service system at different points on the service continuum. The core processes in Signs of Safety practice set out in a logical order are: • Mapping the assessment and plan, doing so with the family and in time with their network (extended family, friends and professional agencies with whom the family is engaged and who share a concern for the children). • Being as committed to identifying, through the questioning approach, what is working well -‐ and identifying the strengths demonstrated as safety, the ‘signs of safety’ -‐ as being clear about the worries. • Narrowing the key factors and conclusions into succinct and clear statements of past harm and future danger. • Making a judgment about how safe the children are. • Building a safety plan from safety goals and actions that address the danger statements. • The safety plan drawing on a safety network comprising particularly extended family and friends, and also professionals.
6
Implementation Continuum Practice Outline ©2015 Resolutions Consultancy
•
Engaging the children, both bringing their voice into the assessment and parents explaining to them what is happening.
The key specific focuses or additional requirements navigating a service system at different points on the service continuum might be: Early Help • The Team Around the Child meeting being held as a Signs of safety meeting / mapping. Explaining this to the family, their network and professionals attending and having suitable explanatory information. • More meetings with network to gather information and develop a safety and support plan for the longer-‐term • The Child Assessment Framework (CAF) used by the local authority needs to be aligned to the Signs of Safety framework. The main body of the assessment should be based on factual evidence of what are we worried about (teasing out harm and complicating factors) as well as what’s working well (teasing out evidence of existing safety in relation to the worries and strengths) • The Multi Agency Early Intervention Panel, for cases where there are ongoing concerns about safety or welfare, the plan is not achieving the required goals / outcomes , and/or the case is stuck, to review the case and possible next steps and/or judge the case should be stepped up / refered into Children’s Social Care, should review and work on the map the case. Referral (Step-‐Up) to Social Care • Reason for referral should be focused danger statement (which should already have been shared with the family). • Not all cases will come to the Contact Centre with a CAF. If so, the worker should explore with the referrer the factual evidence that is making them concerned for the child. Questions consistent with the Signs of Safety approach may include: o Is the family aware that you are making this referral? If not why not? o What have you seen/heard to make you have a worry about this child? How do you know? o If and how has this impacted upon the child already? How do you know? o How often has this happened? How do you know? o When did you start to have a worry? o What has made you contact us today and not before now? o Are you aware of anything that is being done to try and address this worry? o What has worked the best? o For you not to have a worry what would you need to see differently? o Is there a support network? If so who? – start genogram if one not available from referrer o Are you aware of anybody who is able to offer immediate support to this child/family? • If progressing to an assessment contact worker drafts a danger statement and sends this along with mapped information through to the relevant Children’s Social Care team. • The Statutory Assessment used by the local authority needs to be aligned to the Signs of Safety framework. The assessment should as far as possible reflect the three column questions and seven analysis categories, as well as necessary demographic and service information. • Recording single responses to scaling questions in the Single Statutory Assessment is avoided as these scales are relative and not absolute and should be dynamic and not static.
7
Implementation Continuum Practice Outline ©2015 Resolutions Consultancy
•
The CAF and Statutory Assessment should be as similar as possible and a single assessment format should be considered.
Looked After Children • Looked after children’s LAC plans and reviews can apply the three column questions to each of the wellbeing categories (ie, health, education etc) • Kinship and foster care assessments and reviews can apply the three column questions to each of the caregiving categories (ie, understanding of the child, working with the local authority etc) • Three columns can also be used for assessing potential for placement breakdown • The three column approach can be used for children who go missing, at risk of child sex exploitation or unaccompanied minors assessment and planning.
SIGNS OF SAFETY LEARNING All staff should be trained in the full Signs of Safety to show the thinking, the application to the most difficult cases, and because cases step up and down. Training should introduce the way Signs of Safety is adapted across the continuum and let workers know that it is OK to adapt the framework and be flexible in how it is used. Practice leaders can continue this learning with teams. Appreciative enquiry, with families, young people and practitioners describing good practice and what made it so, is powerful for learning and development, across the continuum.
8
Implementation Continuum Practice Outline ©2015 Resolutions Consultancy
