Medway Safeguarding Children Board. Resolving Professional Differences Escalation Policy

Similar documents
Medway Safeguarding Children Board. Resolving Professional Differences Escalation Policy

Escalation Policy. Resolution of professional disagreements in work relating to the safety of children

Sandwell Safeguarding Children Board. Resolution and Escalation Protocol

Resolving Professional Disagreements about Safeguarding Children (Escalation Policy)

Redbridge Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB) Resolution and Escalation Policy

Disagreement between agencies about threshold judgements. Disagreement within agencies about the appropriate course of safeguarding action

Standard Operating Procedure 5 (SOP 5) Escalation

Wirral Safeguarding Children Board. Multi-Agency Escalation Procedure

CSCB escalation policy Resolving professional differences 2015

SSASPB Escalation Policy (v1) Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent Adult Safeguarding Partnership Board (SSASPB) ESCALATION POLICY

Update to the Resolution and Escalation process used by Children, Education and Families

PLYMOUTH MULTI-AGENCY ADULT SAFEGUARDING PATHWAY PROTOCOL

NHS continuing health care joint dispute resolution procedure

4LSAB Safeguarding Adults Escalation Protocol

Healthwatch England Escalation Guidance

Children s Services Schools and Clusters. Improving Safeguarding Practice. Supervision: Policy and Guidance Revised July 2013

ADULT SUPPORT AND PROTECTION CROSS BOUNDARY CASES

Medway Safeguarding Children Board. Safeguarding children competency framework

Escalation Procedure. Purpose & definition

Page 1 of 18. Summary of Oxfordshire Safeguarding Adults Procedures

Escalation Policy Resolution Pathways (For professional disagreements when determining levels of need when working with Children and Families)

The Cornwall Framework for the Assessment of Children, Young People and their Families

NHS England (South) Surge Management Framework

Failure to Gain Access Policy For Adults and Children (Including failure of children to attend appointments)

Multi-Agency Safeguarding Competency Framework

Policy for Supporting Pupils with Medical Conditions (Incorporating Administration of Medication) Chivenor PRIMARY SCHOOL

Thresholds for initiating Adult Safeguarding Referrals or Care Concerns

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING HEALTHCARE INSPECTORATE WALES THE PUBLIC SERVICES OMBUDSMAN FOR WALES

Family Services. Document control. Document title. CAF Team Operational model. Document description. Document author.

COMPLAINTS ESCALATION POLICY AND PROCEDURES

London Borough of Newham

Early Help MASH Desk. Business Processes and Procedures. Version 7_7. Date 28/08/2015 [IL0: UNCLASSIFIED] 1

ISLE OF WIGHT SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN BOARD WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT POLICY

The Cornwall Framework for the Assessment of Children, Young People and their Families

Joint Health, Housing and Social Care Protocol for the Discharge of Vulnerable Children from Hospital

Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent Adult Safeguarding Partnership Board Safeguarding Adult Reviews (SAR) Protocol

Can I Help You? V3.0 December 2013

Medical Consultant Change Request Procedure

Guidance on Referral Processes between:

Complaints Procedures for Schools

Safeguarding Alerts Policy and Procedure

National Health and Safety Function, Workplace Health and Wellbeing Unit, National HR Division. Guideline Document

Safeguarding Adults Reviews Protocol

Brent Children and Families Social Care Locality Service and Care Planning. Standards in Child Protection Work for social workers and managers

A Case Review Process for NHS Trusts and Foundation Trusts

SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN POLICY 2016

TASIS Coldharbour Lane, Thorpe, Egham, Surrey TW20 8TE

Cheshire East Safeguarding Adults Board

Admission to Hospital under Part II of the Mental Health Act 1983 and Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

Safeguarding Children Policy

Kent and Medway Ambulance Mental Health Referral Pathway Protocol

Stage 4: Investigation process

A Guide for Parents/Carers About Making a Complaint

Safer School Recruitment Policy

LCA Escalation Policy. April 2013

Wiltshire Safeguarding Children Board Multi agency Pre-birth Protocol to Safeguard Unborn Babies. December 2015

Member of staff has concerns for child s welfare

12. Safeguarding Enquiries: Responding to a Concern

Safeguarding Children Policy and Procedure. (Draft V 1.1)

Making Submissions on Regulatory Judgments on a stage 2 inspection report - Standard Operating Procedure

Complaints policy RM07

Step up/step Down Guidance CAF/CIN Support

Replacement. Supersedes: Complaints Procedure ( ) and the Patient Advice and Liaison Service Policy ( )

Model Health and Safety Policy For Maintained Schools

Trust Health and Safety Policy

Inspections of children s homes

Islington CCG Commissioning Statement in relation to the commissioning of health services for children and young people 0-18 years

SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN POLICY

CHILDREN S & YOUNG PEOPLE S CONTINUING CARE POLICY

Inspection dates 19/05/2014 to 20/05/2014

Safeguarding Supervision Policy (Children, Young People & Adults at Risk)

SCHOOL COMPLAINTS POLICY AND PROCEDURES

Safeguarding Policy for Icknield High School

Safeguarding Children Policy Sutton CCG

Cambridgeshire Escalation Policy - Resolution of Professional Disagreements in Safeguarding Work

Inspection of residential family centres

Children & Families - Family Contact Point Protocol

Woodbridge House. Aitch Care Homes (London) Limited. Overall rating for this service. Inspection report. Ratings. Good

Performance and Quality Committee

How CQC monitors, inspects and regulates adult social care services

BUSINESS CONTINUITY PLAN

Guidance for decision makers on assessing risk in cases involving health concerns

Memorandum of Understanding. between. Healthcare Inspectorate Wales. and. NHS Wales National Collaborative Commissioning Unit

Submitting a Decision Support Tool for Ratification

North East Hampshire and Farnham Clinical Commissioning Group Safeguarding Framework

Corporate. Visitors & VIP s Standard Operating Procedure. Document Control Summary. Contents

SAFEGUARDING ADULTS POLICY

COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY

Patient Complaints Procedure

We are the regulator: Our job is to check whether hospitals, care homes and care services are meeting essential standards.

VIP Visitors Policy. Purpose of Agreement. Document Type. Policy SOP Guideline. Version Version 1. Operational Date July 2015

Mental Health Act 1983/2007. Section 117 and After Care Policy

QUALITY COMMITTEE. Terms of Reference

Learning from Deaths Policy A Framework for Identifying, Reporting, Investigating and Learning from Deaths in Care.

Section 136: Place of Safety. Hallam Street Hospital Protocol

Complaints Policy. Version: 4.2. Approved: 27/01/2015

NO RESPONSE POLICY. Senior Managers Operational Group

Internal Audit. Healthcare Governance. October 2015

Complaints, Compliments and Concerns (CCC) Policy

Choice on Discharge Policy

Transcription:

Medway Safeguarding Children Board Resolving Professional Differences Escalation Policy VERSION 2 June 2016 1

1. INTRODUCTION Generally there is a good working relationship between agencies, but occasionally situations arise when workers within one agency feel that the actions, inaction or decisions of another agency do not adequately safeguard a child. Disagreements are most likely to arise around: Levels of need/ thresholds Roles and responsibilities Progressing plans Communication Effective working together depends on an open approach and honest relationships between agencies. All professionals have a duty to act assertively and proactively to ensure that a child s welfare is the paramount consideration in all professional activity. Therefore all professionals must challenge the practice of other professionals where they are concerned that this practice is placing children at risk of harm. This policy sets out clear routes to escalate professional concerns where the actions, inactions or decisions of another agency may be getting in the way of keeping a child safe. 2. WHEN TO USE THE ESCALATION POLICY Where a professional disagrees with a decision or response from any agency regarding a safeguarding or welfare concern they must firstly consult with their line manager to clarify thinking and the desired outcome. Initial attempts should be made to resolve the matter professional to professional. If the professionals are unable to resolve differences through discussion and/or meeting within a time scale, which is acceptable to both of them, their disagreement must be addressed by more experienced / more senior staff using the Formal Escalation Process. s that need to be escalated include: Disagreements over handling of concerns reported to Children s Social Care e.g. the referral is not considered to satisfy eligibility criteria for assessment; professional differences of opinion about the level of risk; When an agency does not agree with the decision made by Children s Social Care not to convene a child protection conference or the findings of the child and family assessment are not reflective; Concerns or disagreements over another professional s decisions, actions or lack of actions in the implementation of a child protection plan or child in need plan, including core group meetings; Disagreement over the accuracy of minutes of multi agency meetings or other records that do not accurately reflect professional discussions e.g. Child Protection Conferences minutes, Core Group meeting minutes etc.; Core group meetings not taking place within timescales or where there is persistent non-attendance by core group professionals; 2

There has been insufficient progress made in respect of the agreed objectives of the child protection plan and no contingency action has been taken. Concerns or disagreements over another professional s decisions, actions or lack of actions in the implementation of the Common Assessment Framework (CAF) or other multi agency process such as Team Around the Family (TAF) 3. STAGES OF THE ESCALTION PROCESS Stage 1 Escalate to Team Manager If professionals are unable to reach agreement about the way forward in an individual case then their disagreement must be addressed by more senior staff. A team manager must contact the equivalent team manager from the other agency to discuss and seek resolution. This may be a detective sergeant in the police; a senior health visitor/ nurse/ GP; social work team manager. If the young person is subject to a Child Protection Plan, the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) should also be informed. A response is required within 5 working days. If agreement cannot be reached following discussion between the above managers it will go to stage 2. Stage 2 Escalate to Designated Safeguarding Leads/ Service Managers If the problem is not resolved at stage 1, the team manager must escalate to their Service manager or Designated Safeguarding lead to liaise with their equivalent. Those senior managers must attempt to resolve the differences through discussion. This may be a Children s Social Care Operational Manager/ Head of Service; Detective Chief Inspector for safeguarding; designated teacher; named GP or other designated professional. If the young person is subject to a Child Protection Plan, the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) should also be informed. A response is required within 5 working days. If agreement cannot be reached following discussions between the above managers it will go to Stage 3. Stage 3 Escalate to Assistant/ Deputy Directors If the problem is not resolved at stage 2, the Service Manager/ Designated Safeguarding Leads must escalate to the agency Assistant Director/ Deputy Director/ Headteacher or equivalent. A copy of the Stage 3 Escalation Alert Form should be completed and sent to the Assistant Director/ Deputy Director/ Headteacher/ Detective Superintendent Head of Safeguarding or equivalent. A response is required within 5 working days. A copy of the Stage 3 Escalation Form should also be sent to the MSCB at 3

mscb@medway.gov.uk If agreement cannot be reached following discussion between the above Assistant/ Deputy Directors it will go to stage 4. Stage 4 Involving the Medway Safeguarding Children Board Where the Escalation Policy has been instigated to stage 3 but has not been satisfactory resolved, the MSCB Notifications and referrals for case reviews process will be used. In accordance with the Notifications and referrals for case reviews to the MSCB, a notification form must be completed and sent to the MSCB Learning Lessons Subgroup Chair, via the MSCB support team mscb@medway.gov.uk. The notification should usually be completed by the safeguarding lead. The MSCB will request reports via Learning Lessons subgroup members from any agency involved in the first instance as appropriate and ask that they present their response at the next Learning Lessons subgroup. The MSCB Independent Chair will also be informed. 4

APPENDIX ONE ESCALATION FORMS Stage 3 Escalation Form Date of Alert: From: To: Assistant/ Deputy Director Response expected within 5 working days Name of Child: Practitioner: DOB: Service: Line Manager: Summary of concern(s) remaining from Stage 2 Requested Action Response by Assistant/ Deputy Director Date: Resolution of Alert (recorded by Assistant/ Deputy Director) If not resolved to progress to Stage 4 Date: 5

APPENDIX TWO ESCALATION POLICY FLOWCHART Professional disagrees with a decision or response from any agency regarding a safeguarding or welfare concern. Professional discusses with Line Manager and seeks to resolve matter with professional in other agency STAGE ONE ESCALATE TO TEAM MANAGER If issue is not resolved escalate to Team Manager who will discuss with equivalent Team Manager in other agency to seek resolution within 5 working days STAGE TWO ESCALATE TO DESIGNATED SAFEGUARDING LEAD/ SERVICE MANAGER If issue is not resolved escalate to more senior manager e.g. Designated Safeguarding Leads/ Service Managers who will discuss with equivalent in other agency to seek resolution within 5 working days STAGE THREE ESCALATE TO ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY DIRECTORS If issue is not resolved escalate to Assistant/ Deputy Director/ Head teacher who will discuss with equivalent in other agency to seek resolution within 5 working days STAGE FOUR MEDWAY SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN BOARD If agreement cannot be reached the MSCB Notifications and referrals for case reviews form should be completed and sent to Medway Safeguarding Children Board (mscb@medway.gov.uk) MSCB Independent Chair informed and reviewed by Learning Lessons Sub Group 6

APPENDIX THREE Children s Advice and Duty Service (CADS) and Child in Need (CIN)/ Child Protection (CP) Manager Contacts Role Name Email Telephone Head of Service Head of Service CADS, CIN/ CP Roisin Madden roisin.madden@medway.gov.uk Ex 7302 Operational Managers CADS Operational Manager CIN & CP Operational Manager Assessment Team A Assessment Team B Assessment Team C Assessment Team D Advice Team SMART CIN & CP Team Manager Team C CIN & CP Team Manager Team D CIN & CP Team Manager Team E Kelly Cogger kelly.cogger@medway.gov.uk Ex 5618 Collette Visagie collette.visagie@medway.gov.uk Ex 8664 CADS Team Managers Susan Akinyele susan.akinyele@medway.gov.uk Ex 8682 Sarah sarah.featherstone@medway.gov.uk Ex 4173 Featherstone Colin colin.heppenstall@medway.gov.uk Ex 7331 Heppenstall Lesley Page Lesley.page@medway.gov.uk Ex 5731 Sarah Ferguson Sarah.ferguson@medway.gov.uk Ex 8556 Sarah Bullen sarah.bullen@medway.gov.uk Ex 4460 CIN & CP Team Managers Annastacia Annastacia.tsalong@medway.gov.uk Ex 5641 Tsalong Iva Kosoko Iva.kosovo@medway.gov.uk Ex 7307 Diana Millwood Diana.millwood@medway.gov.uk Ex 4002 7