Child Protection: Risk Assessment Frameworks Dr Julia Stroud Dr Chris Warren-Adamson

1. Child Protection: Risk Assessment Frameworks Dr Julia Stroud Dr Chris Warren-Adamson

2. Researchers • Dr Julia Stroud, Principal Lecturer, School of Applied Social Science, University of Brighton • Dr Chris Warren-Adamson, Senior Lecturer, School of Applied Social Science, University of Brighton

3. The Brief • Noting the well regarded risk assessment framework adopted by the police in relation to domestic violence, to devise a risk assessment framework for child protection to be used by frontline police officers as guidance for action in first contact. • So, we aim to deliver manageable guidance to enable first contact officers to make decisions about: A) Risk to children and immediate action B) Risk to children and referral for urgent follow- up

4. Some considerations • The Nature of Risk Assessment Frameworks • The context • The nature of risk – forms of abuse, the critical triangle other factors (Brandon 2010; Stroud 2008, 2011), problems of relationship and ‘tipping points’, the human factor, uncertainty • Munro and the Hackney model • Summary of issues • Proposal

5. 1. The Nature of Risk Assessment Frameworks Two mainkinds of risk assessment framework Broad frameworks- aimed at professional systems to make use of systematic collection of informationover time, to evaluate and take action about risk – examples are The Orange Book (1988,DH): now the Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families (2000,HMSO) with its well known triangular perspectives – child, child and parents, and social wider environment . Actuarial Frameworks– risk indicators constructed from large data bases, subject to rigorous statistical examination, proposed to be capable of robust measures of prediction – an example FRAAN (Michigan Family Risk Assessment for Abuse and Neglect).

6. 2 The Context • Historical challenges from child death reviews – from MariaColwellto Baby P – denial, over-reaction, pendulum swing, protocols, experience, inter-agency working and communication, case leadership • Issues emerging from the Munro Review – ‘the human factor’, systems and inter-relationships, importance of supervision, support and child centred-ness

7. 3 The Nature of Risk • Risk is an occasion when two or more outcomes, beneficial or harmful, are possible (Carson 1990, 1994). So … • Risk assessment is a calculation (assessment) of the possible outcomes of a situation and likelihood that something (positive or negative) will occur. It requires a balancing of the possible benefits of a proposed action against the possible harms it may cause (Carson 1990, 1994) • Working with risk, requires professional knowledge, skills and support AND personal qualities; “measured thought, analysis and judgement” (Cooper 2005); the human factor (Cooper 2005); risk is the complexities and effects of human engagement with, and assessment of, individuals who can behave in misleading, difficult and risky ways (Cooper 2005)

8. Abuse and Neglect – breadth of issues Physical abuse Emotional abuse Sexual abuse Neglect Domestic violence Potential effects mental illness/ learning disability of a parent or carer Parental drug/alcohol use

9. Abuse and Neglect – breadth of issues Issues re (violent) extremism Sexually exploited children Children affected by gang activity Fabricated or induced illness (FII) Female genital mutilation Forced marriage and honour-based violence Child abuse linked to belief in ‘spirit possession’ Child victims of trafficking Key issue – is the child ‘suffering, or likely to suffer significant harm’? s31 Children Act 1989

10. Some Key Factors - • Importance of detail about the child • Past history of family and other members • Men in the family • ‘Toxic mix’ – child death reviews - half of the parents/carers had criminal convictions, poor family support, triangle of past/present domestic violence, past/present parental mental ill health/past/present substance misuse (Brandon 2010; Stroud 2008, 2011) • Youngest most at risk (and most at risk of homicide) (Stroud 2008) • Tipping points

11. Serious Case Reviews - Brandon et al

12. 4 Munro and Hackney • Direct contact • Support • High expectations • Layers of experience • Systems orientation • Confident inter-agency practice • Bravery • Synergy or attractor pattern of success

13. 5 Summary • Need for best knowledge of predictive factors • Acknowledge complexity, inter-relationship and “non-stationery” characteristic of factors • One positive factor may make safe a toxic mix • Health of professional system around the child – its impact on risk and capacity to collaborate • Needs and practical expectations of first contact, front line officers

14. 6 Project Proposal Aim To create evidence based risk assessment framework for frontline police officers to use in early contact in child protection situations Objectives • To appraise and be informed by the existing domestic violence tool and its use by police officers • To examine findings of, and material from, Marian Brandon’s serious case review research • To interrogate and examine police files across the continuum of child protection concerns to:

15. Project Objectives, cont’d - Corroborate Brandon’s findings - Identify any additional, new or unexpected issues/ material • To take note of reviews of risk assessment frameworks • To evaluate use of risk assessment tool by police officers

16. Methodology • Key precepts: • Evidence informed and based • Qualitative research approach – i.e. • Documentary analysis ( interrogation of data in police files) • Process focused (as a tool to challenge thinking and as an interactive tool between front line officers and police sergeant (next line manager)

17. Methods • Review of serious case reviews material • Interrogation and examination of documentary evidence in police case files • Consultative groups to further explore and test content of assessment framework • Consultative groups with police officers on using framework

18. Sample for Police Files • A base-line of 45 case-files from a quarter of police authorities with an option to increase the sample to 60 if new material, additional to the serious case review findings, emerges • Criteria for inclusion of files: a range of geography(rural/ urban/ inner city), culture/ethnicity, referral rate, levels of intervention, leading to child protection plan

19. Timescale • We aim to produce a draft risk assessment by mid March 2012 for consultation with front line and senior police colleagues, and with other colleagues  • Subsequently: Evaluate usefulness by front line officers via focus groups (timescale to be agreed)

20. Comments and Advice Please..... cwa10@brighton.ac.uk J.Stroud@brighton.ac.uk School of Applied Social Science University of Brighton Falmer BRIGHTON BN1 9PH

21. References • Brandon M, Bailey S., Belderson P., Gardner R. (2009) Understanding Serious Case Reviews and their Impact: A Biennial Analysis of Serious Case Reviews 2005-7 • Brandon M, Bailey S., & Belderson P. (2010) Building on the Learning from Serious Case Reviews: a Two Year Analysis of Child Protection Database Notifications 2007-9, Research Brief, GB, Department for Education • Dfe (2010) Working Together to Safeguard Children, a Guide to Interagency Working to Safeguard and Promote the Welfare of Children, London, Dfe • Stroud J (2008) A psychosocial analysis of child homicide. Critical Social Policy 28(4) 482-505 • Stroud J. (2011) The death of a child: the unavoidable truth, In Okitikpi T. (ed) Social Work and Social Control, Lyme Regis, Russell House Publishing.