Bev Petch Senior Education Improvement Adviser

The Petch Screening Tool:Determining vulnerability to CSE in children under 12 years of age(and responding appropriately) Bev Petch Senior Education Improvement Adviser

Aims of this session • To gain confidence in using the Petch Screening Tool where there are concerns about a child • To respond appropriately to support and safeguard younger children who are vulnerable to CSE • To understand the CSE pathways

Purpose • Provides a framework for making a sound professional judgement about the level of vulnerability of a younger child, aged under-12, to CSE • Supports early help and intervention.

Early identification of low level CSE concerns reduces the chances of high level CSE concerns.

Why?

National: Barnardo’s ‘The biggest child protection issue for over 10s in this country…’

National • The Independent Inquiry into CSE in Rotherham 1997-2013, by Alexis Jay OBE (published August 2014) provided some of the impetus for this work: ‘Girls as young as 11 were raped by large numbers of male perpetrators’.

Regional and local evidence of need • Over time, regional and local data sets have included a small number of children aged under 12. • Evidence of vulnerability to CSE emerging at time of transition from primary to secondary school for some children. • Early identification enables early intervention and support.

Primary schools and prevention Key Stage 1 Key Stage 2 Early Years Foundation Key Stage Happy and safe relationships Parents Vulnerable Pupils: identify and safeguard CSE awareness raising for primary schools

Existing screening tools (now for aged 12 and over) • Not precisely focused enough on indicators for this age group. • The current definitions of levels of CSE risk are less helpful for under 12s and could undermine professional judgements and responses to protect the child. • What may be a low-level indicator for a 15-year old may translate to high levels of concern for a child aged 10 or 11.

How does the Petch Screening Tool work?

Format Organised into 3 sections : 1. Indicators 2. Vulnerability factors 3. Overall professional judgement &follow up actions With a focus on: • Behaviour and presentation • Connections and associations • Health • Family and parenting

Indicators are designated either amber or red, with red indicators presenting higher risk. • Red ‘alert indicators’ present a stronger indication of CSE risk (displayed as !),

Key principles: The Petch Screening Tool • Language of vulnerability to CSE for u-12s Universal vulnerability (typical for age) = nocurrent CSE risk Potentially vulnerable to CSE Vulnerable to CSE • Vulnerability beyond universal is always a concern for a child u-12 by virtue of age. • A MASH referral should always be made.

Caution • The tool has not been designed to screen all children • It should only be used where there are specific concerns about a child that may relate to CSE Used differently, screening may lead to false positives…

Professional judgement about vulnerability to CSE • Evidence against a very small number of amber indicators is likely to lead to a professional judgement that the child is currently not at risk of CSE. • A completed screening tool with evidence against a significant number of solely amber indicators would be likely to lead to a professional judgement of the child being potentially vulnerableto CSE. • A completed screening tool with evidence against a combination of several red and amber indicators could lead to a professional judgement of either potentially vulnerableto CSE or vulnerableto CSE. • Where the completed screening tool provides clear evidence against one or more of the red ‘alert indicators’ that present a stronger indication of CSE risk (displayed as !), the child would always be deemed to be vulnerableto CSE.

Meet Sam, aged 10½

Meet Sam, aged 10½ • Sam loves spending time on the computer and has a social media account • Sam sometimes goes to the local park or McDonald’s after school with older sister (aged15) • Sam’s attendance at school has just slipped below 90% • Sam receives support from Solar for low level anxiety

How concerned are you?How vulnerable to CSE is Sam?What would you do at this stage?

Sam is unusually agitated at school and is finding it difficult to concentrate on learning • Sam’s teacher reports several incidents involving Sam have been recorded in the behaviour log in the last few weeks • Mum reports that Sam is sharing pictures on social media ‘but they all do that don’t they?’ (No parental controls in place) • Attendance at school is becoming erratic. Two absences last week remain unexplained • A recent police input at LSCB CSE training highlighted public areas of concern that included the local park and McDonald’s

Mum concedes that Sam’s behaviour has changed at home. Sam’s older sister has been ‘in trouble’ with the police recently • Mum says that she is not at home to supervise after school until about 9 pm because of her job. • Some children tell you that Sam has lots of grown up male ‘friends’ on social media • The local secondary school inform you that Sam’s older sister has been deemed to be at risk of CSE • Sam has a new smart phone • Sam has tried to abscond from school

Access to screening tools and CSE team contact details • Screening tools and FIB forms available via: http://www.solihulllscb.co.uk/practitioner-volunteers/child-protection-procedures-19/tool-box-96.php • CSE email: cseteam@solihull.gov.uk • Secure email account: cse@solihull.gcsx.gov.uk • Contact number: 0121 709 7000

Intelligence Sharing via FIB forms

CSE pathways determine process • Being adapted to reflect 2 different screening tools • Over 12s - either pathway, dependent on risk level • Under 12s - where vulnerability is beyond universal (ie beyond typical for age), always serious and always Level2/3 pathway

Category 1 (at risk of harm):a child who is at risk of being groomed for sexual exploitation. Category 2 (significant risk of harm):a child who is targeted for abuse through the exchange of sex for affection, drugs, accommodation and goods etc. The likelihood of coercion and control is significant. Category 3 (serious risk of harm):a child who is entrenched in sexual exploitation, but often does not recognise or self-denies the nature of their abuse and where coercion/control is implicit.

In summary • Small numbers so far, but it is working. These children are safer and being supported. • Evaluation group monitors use and impact. • Other areas are beginning to share some impact. • Please share any evaluation information; it will shape future versions. Thank you!

Questions: • What CSE training have DSLs accessed? • What has been the impact on knowledge, confidence and resulting vigilance for all staff? How far are staff considering and identifying potential CSE risk/vulnerability? • Explore numbers of children/young people screened in last 12 months. Explore robustness of decision making where screening considered - but not undertaken? • What evidence do you have to demonstrate that CSE has been considered when supporting your pupils and understanding their behaviour?

Questions • What understanding do Governors have and how is this reflected in safeguarding responses to children (e.g CMfE) and the curriculum? • What specific steps do you take to support those at risk of CSE? (e.g. not excluding, reporting when missing from school, work with families, involving supporting services, managing pupil groups carefully)

Opportunities to teach safeguarding • Governing bodies and proprietors should ensure children are taught about safeguarding, including online, through teaching and learning opportunities, as part of providing a broad and balanced curriculum. This may include covering relevant issues through personal, social, health and economic education (PSHE), tutorials (in FE colleges) and/or, for maintained schools and colleges, through sex and relationship education (SRE). (KCSIE, Sept 16, Part Two, pg18.)

Bev Petch Senior Education Improvement Adviser