Family Court Social Work Model: The key Practice Shifts

Anthony Douglas CBE - Chief Executive, Cafcass

Community Care Live

Thursday 14h November 2013

Risk high with Live threat

Immediate threat taken out

Risk reduced or removed permanently

Child can lead a risk free life

RISK

DEVELOPMENT

A degree of normal

development restored

Signs of safety & growth

Development stabilised

Development thwarted, reversed

Development Normalising

Risk Reduction

A Risk and Wellbeing framework

Domains of a social work analysis under the revised Public Law Outline

• A significant harm threshold analysis • Case management advice • Analysis of parenting capacity to meet the

child’s need • A child Impact analysis (how the child is

affected) • An early permanence analysis including

placement/s and the contact framework

Social workers and guardians as experts

• A welcome affirmation of skills and the contribution of social workers to society • Restoration of trust and confidence needed, which will take time • Inquisitorial social work and inquisitorial judging is needed more, especially with the rise in litigants in person as well as the revised PLO • Sometimes, social work expertise will need supplementing with specific questions being asked of other professionals • Most cases need social work judgment and specific expertise, with the social worker and guardian bringing the aggregated knowledge about a child together for the court

Good pre-proceedings

practice

in public law

All baseline assessments are

commissioned and completed, and

evidence base for proceedings finalised

Documentation screened by a social

work manager before care

proceedings are issued

Children’s guardian supports the process

by aiming to build confidence e.g.,

between parents and the local authority

Final attempts to increase parenting

capacity made

Parallel planning begins e.g., potential

kinship carers identified or ruled out

Early Permanence for the Child

• Permanence is either safe reunification, kinship care, permanent fostering, special

guardianship or adoption.

• The preferred option has to deliver ‘emotional permanence’ for the child

• They key driver for safe reunification is a permanent change in lifestyle, thinking, behaviour and emotion by the parent assessed as having a parenting gap

• Pre-proceedings work may lead to the identification of a single track/proposition for permanence, with a very clear transition plan for the child

• Fostering for adoption is a new variation on permanence options, aiming to secure permanence earlier for the child

• Many care plans for adoption are continuing to become long-term fostering plans by default, because an adopter/adopters cannot be found NB, it is crucial to assess whether interim care is ‘good enough’ if it risks lasting longer than first planned

• The early permanence analysis needs to consider a ‘next best match’ for a child if the ideal placement cannot be found in the child’s timescale

• Like attachments, permanence today has multiple meanings for children, hence the need to find the child’s ‘unique permanence framework’

Application

By Week 2/ 10 working days First Case Management Hearing (FCMH)

Core Sources of information for CG Annex documents •Social Work Chronology •Social Work Statement and genogram •any current assessment relating to the child and/or the family and friends and on which the LA relies •Threshold Statement •Care Plan •Allocation Proposal

Core Tasks for CG •Identify who needs to be seen; identify outstanding information; form case plan •Carry out identified tasks •Conduct ‘gap analysis’ of plans proposed by LA •Form initial hypothesis, based on above •Consider whether full analysis can be provided at FCMH

Analysis for FCMH •Report outlines initial case analysis. Could be oral or written, but with written cross reference to key evidence used to inform analysis, taken from electronic case file (ecf; to be auto-populated by ECMS in 2014) •File analysis (in some cases this could be the Final analysis)

Week 2- 4

Week 10

Week 12

Week 26

Week 3-14

Week 14-15

Week 15-16

By Week 20

Core Tasks for CG •Review case plan in light of case management directions •Discuss case plan with parties and child •Undertake any further meetings if necessary •Inform the court of any new information impacting the timetable for the child •Prepare Final Case analysis, to be submitted at any point where CG necessary work is complete

Guardian Final Case Analysis •Report outlines final analysis. Will be written with cross reference to key evidence used to inform analysis, taken from electronic case file (ecf; to be auto-populated by ECMS in 2014)

Core Tasks for CG •Carry out any ‘later life’ work needs to be carried out

Post proceedings best practice

• Put as much time effort and energy into the after-court and after-care stages of a child’s journey through the care system

• Implement the care plan NB It should have been revised for realism in the care proceedings stage

• Consider a care plan for the parent/s, to avoid the same problems recurring at a future pre-birth conference in respect of a new child who will be at risk if family circumstances and/or parenting capacity remains unchanged

• Locally, consider aggregated eligibility criteria for the child and the parent, so that eligibility for services is based upon a whole family calculation

• Ensure the case closure process is a robust system which ensures sufficient work has been carried out on behalf of the child

• Identify medium-term support needs for children and families in private law cases, and signpost and/or refer at the point of case closure

• Use outcome statements and service user/children’s feedback as personal and team learning and to support continuous improvement