One Minute Briefing: Positive Challenge and Escalation

This chapter was added to the manual in August 2023.

1. Background

A Child Protection Chair and Independent Reviewing Officer’s primary focus is to quality assure the child protection process, care planning and review process for each child/young person to ensure that their voice is heard and given full consideration within their care planning. It is important for the CP chair and IRO to recognise good practice, as well as areas of improvement, to ensure that the child/young person’s best interest is central to the care planning. Therefore, a thorough quality assurance process is essential to monitor and raise quality assurance matters within a timely manner and to escalate and resolve concerns in relation to children who are subject to Child Protection Planning as well as the care planning of children/young people who are looked after by the Local Authority. This is called Professional Challenge and Escalation Process and is held within forms on liquid logic.

The purpose of this resolution process is to improve practice and outcomes for children, young people and their families who have a plan that is reviewed by the Independent Chair Service. It provides a framework for social work teams to raise evidence-based concerns in respect of the practice or decision making of the Independent Chair Service if this has a negative impact on the outcomes for the child or young person they are working with.

Section 6.4 of the IRO Handbook states: 'the individual IRO is personally responsible for activating the dispute resolution process, even if this step may not be in accordance with the child's wishes and feelings, but may, in the IRO's view, be in accordance with the best interest and welfare of the child, as well as his/her human rights'.

Please click here for the IRO Handbook.

The principles of the Professional Challenge and Escalation Process are as follows and should be uses in every step of the process:

  • The safety and wellbeing of the child or young person is paramount;
  • Keeping the child, young person, and their family at the centre of all professional discussions;
  • Ensuring that the right conversations are had with the right people at the right time, taking place face to face where possible or over teams;
  • Quality conversations about which approach should be undertaken setting out a clear plan of action with timeframes as to how the risk will be managed;
  • The approach should be proportionate and flexible;
  • To resolve disagreement using a restorative approach which includes appropriate challenge and respect;
  • Resolving disagreements in a timely manner;
  • Undertaking a solution focus approach;
  • Concerns actions, responses, and outcomes must be recorded and agreed.

When a CP chair or IRO identify a concern within the partnership, they will complete the same process using the appropriate channels (this is not via the Professional Challenge and Escalation process) and ensure this is recorded on Liquid Logic as an IRO case note, clearly setting out what they have done to resolve this with evidence of the agreed plan moving forward, any documents will be added to the case note.

Issues that could arise

CP chairs

  1. Minimum statutory requirements not met for example visits not completed, Core Groups not in timescales;
  2. Quality of holistic assessment of child’s circumstances for example reports not provided for Conference in timescale which is 3 days before initial conference and 5 days before a Review Conference and shared with family;
  3. Drift and delay in progress of CP plan and in achieving positive outcomes in the child’s timescales;
  4. Escalation of risks;
  5. Resource issues impacting on progress of CP plan;
  6. Child’s lived experience not evident and not informing assessments and planning.

IROs

  1. Minimum statutory requirements not met for example visits to the child,
  2. Placement not meeting child’s needs or is unassessed.
  3. Drift and delay in progress of care plan, achieving permanency and/ or transition to adulthood.
  4. Escalation of risks – missing episodes, contextual risks.
  5. Resource issues impacting on progress of care and permanency planning.
  6. Child’s lived experience not evident and not informing assessments and planning.

The IRO / CP chairs can raise an escalation at any stage if the issues they have identified meet the threshold to consider this.

If the issues are not resolved to an acceptable level the IRO’s with consultation with their line managers who will consider a referral to CAFCASS.

Please click here to see the Positive Challenge and Escalation Flowchart.