Transcript Children 13.00 John Wheeler, Gateshead Children`s

Signs of Safety
Liverpool
Click to edit Master subtitle style
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
Imagine
•
•
A couple, who have learning difficulties, ask to
see the Duty Social Worker at a Civic Centre.
They say,
–
•
Mother says,
–
•
“I’m expecting a baby and we decided to tell you
before anyone else does.”
The Duty Social Worker asks,
–
•
“We’ve just moved into this area.”
“Why’s that?”
The couple reply,
Question
•
•
If you were the worker, what would you be
thinking?
Discuss in pairs
Actual outcome
•
•
•
Careful assessment by Social Worker revealed
the following.
The first three children had been taken into
care because of neglect and the parents’
inability at the time to meet their needs on a
regular basis.
When Mother became pregnant the fourth
time, the baby was removed at birth, without
a new assessment, because the previous three
had been removed.
cont
•
•
•
•
There had never been any concerns raised
about the parents’ ability to meet the needs
of one child.
The authority agreed to meet the costs of the
parents and the new baby being assessed in a
residential setting
This resulted in a positive outcome
Two years later services reported that the
child was “thriving.”
•
What had worked?
Interview with practitioner and
carers revealed
•
•
•
Practice founded “on a working relationship
in which the parents felt understood and
respected”
Practitioner maintained a “purposive focus”
including a rigorous focus on concerns
balanced by recognition of the parents’
strengths and changes
Honesty from the outset about the
possibilities of the parents either keeping or
losing their baby
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
Interview with Manager revealed
•
•
•
•
Practitioner’s thorough reading of
documentary materials to juxtapose risk and
safety factors
Practitioner’s use of team consultation using
SOS as a shared framework;
Practitioner ensuring her professional
judgment was based on available evidence
The manager’s encouragement of the
practitioner’s confidence and competence
balanced with a readiness to provide a safety
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
cont
•
•
And throughout the work, at various stages,
the engagement with the family, and the
worker’s risk assessment was kept on track by
using
Signs of Safety Risk Assessment and planning
tool
What are we Worried
About?
What’s Working
Well?
Judgme
nt
What Needs to
Happen?
WHERE HAS IT COME FROM?
•
•
•
Devised by Andrew Turnell and Steve Edwards
Grew out of practice in Western Australia
Use is spreading in the UK and in various
countries around the world
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
•
Why do each part of SOS
matter?
Descriptions of past harm
Details of incident (s) bringing the family to the
attention of the agency
Pattern/history
Complicating factors
Condition/behaviours that contribute to greater
difficulty for the family
Presence of research based risk factors
Danger statement regarding the children
Risk to child (children)
Context of risk
What safety currently exists?
Strengths demonstrated as protection
over time
Pattern/history of exceptions
What are the strengths of this family?
Assets, resources capacities within
family, individual/ community
Meaningful in relation to the identified
danger
Safety scale
0 = reoccurrence is certain, 10 = there is
sufficient safety to closed the case
Context scale
0 = this is the worst case of child abuse
your agency has ever seen, 10 = this is not a
situation where any action would be taken
Defining the agency goals for safety –
required outcomes
Defining the family goals for safety – desired
outcomes
Building a safety plan
Key characteristics of SOS
•
•
•
•
•
•
Designed to be used with young people and
their families drawing on their resources and
empowering carers to do more to keep their
children safe
Focuses on the key current issues
Highlights what is already working well
Can trigger immediate progress
Developed from practice
Only one page
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
•
Where is it used?
Around the world
Sweden
UK
Finland
Denmark
France
Netherlands
”tens of thousands of child protection practitioners
have been trained in the approach” Turnell 2008
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
In the UK
At least 12 and
spreading
Newcastle
Gateshead
North Yorkshire
Solihull
Notts County
Coventry
Reading
Oxfordshire
West Berkshire
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
Bracknell
Brighton-Hove
North Somerset
•
What does the research say?
Data sets
•
•
Data set , Olmsted County, Minnesota, US.
Impact since 2000
Data set , Carver County, Minnesota, US.
Impact since 2004
Data set , Olmsted County,
Minnesota, US
•
•
OCCFS have utilised their version of the Signs
of Safety framework to organise all child
protection casework since 2000 and all
casework is focused around specific familyenacted safety plans
Within context of major organizational
reforms
–
–
–
Family Group Conferencing
Radical redesign and use of Case Conferences
Restructuringwww.johnwheeler.co.uk
of SW teams to provide a
results
•
•
1995-2007 number of children worked with
has increase three fold, BUT, number of
children removed has halved and number of
cases taken to court have halved.
In parallel the number of repeat allegations
has reduced to 2% (Federal target is 6.7%)
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
Data set , Carver County,
Minnesota, US
•
•
•
•
Use of SOS since 2004
Termination of parental rights 2004/5 – 21
Termination of parental rights 2006/7 – 4
Number of children involved in new
placement occurrences within 60 days of a
child protection assessment.
–
–
–
2006 – 57
2007 – 35
2008 - 26
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
The studies
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Turnell & Edwards 1999 Australia
Sundman, 2002, Finland
Westbrock 2006 Carver County Minnesota US
Appleton and Weld (2006) New Zealand
Turnell, Elliott and Hogg (2007) Gateshead. UK
Keddell (2009) Australia
Borough of Copenhagen Child and Family
Services. (2009) Denmark
North Yorkshire, (2009) UK
Westbrook results
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
Seven of the nine respondents saw positive
differences between their first and second
assessments.
Workers were described as
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
more caring
taking their time
explaining more
not judging
being more personable
being warmer
listening more
being more patient
offering more options
being less intrusive
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
North Yorkshire preliminary
findings
•
•
•
SOS had encouraged the participation of
children and families in the process of
resolving difficulties in their lives.
Outcomes for families appeared to have
improved as a result of the utilization of SOS.
There was some evidence that SOS helped
agencies to work together, though there was a
need to share the methods, goals and
techniques of the approach more substantially
with partner agencies.
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
What is the research telling us?
•
•
•
SOS provides child protections workers
with a framework that helps them face
the challenges of the work.
When child protection workers are clear
about concerns in a non-judgmental
manner clients are more likely to work to
increase the safety of their children. SOS
contributes to this through the explicit
naming of dangers.
Actively seeking
the views of clients
www.johnwheeler.co.uk
•
SOS Gatherings :sharing and
developing good practice
Discussion
•
•
•
In pairs
What do you like about what you’ve heard?
What are you still wondering about?