the assessment framework for children in need€¦ · web viewrisk and resilience assessment tool...

HSCB Risk and Resilience Assessment Tool of 23Agreed: September 13

Risk and Resilience Assessment ToolThe Risk and Resilience Assessment Model has been developed by Herefordshire Safeguarding Children Board and Herefordshire Council to support an agreed multi-agency approach to assessment and intervention at levels 3 and 4 of the Herefordshire Levels of Need and Service Response Guidance.

It has been developed with the support of Effective Training and Consultancy.

Further information on thresholds and alternative responses to need are set out in the Herefordshire Levels of Need and Service Response Guidance.

This tool and the following associated and support documents are available through the Policies and Procedures page of the Herefordshire Safeguarding Children Board website:

Herefordshire Levels of Need and Service Response Guidance

West Mercia Child Protection Procedures

Herefordshire Multi-Agency Referral Form

HSCB Case Escalation Form and Case Escalation Procedure

The tool is organised into the following sections to support you making a full risk assessment:

Child Details............................................................................................2

Anchor Principle 1: What is the Assessment for?...................................3

Anchor principle 2: What Is The Story?..................................................4

Anchor Principle 3: What Does The Story Mean?..................................6

Risk And Resilience Matrix...................................................................16

Anchor Principles 3 & 4: What Does The Story Mean? And.................18

What Is The Emerging Picture Of What Needs To Happen?................18

Anchor Principle 4: What Needs To Happen?......................................21

Anchor Principle 5: How Will We Know We Are Making Progress?......22

effective training and consultancybuilding skills to meet professional challenges

http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/hscb/7.htm

http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/hscb/docs/Escalation_flowchart_health-CYPD(2).pdf

http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/hscb/docs/Escalation_template(1).doc

http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/hscb/docs/Multi-Agency_Referral_Form_-_2013-02.doc

http://www.proceduresonline.com/west%20mercia%20consortium/

http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/hscb/docs/Levels_of_Need_v10.pdf


Child Details: Risk and Resilience Assessment Tool Child’s name DOB

Child’s Unique Identifier: Gender

Home address:

Parent/Primary caregiver:

Relationship to child:

Parent/Secondary caregiver:

Relationship to child:

Lead Professional completing this tool:

Name: Designation:

Agency:

Name: Designation:

Agency:

People contributing to the assessment tool:

Name: Designation:

Agency:

Name: Designation:

Agency:

Name: Designation:

Agency:

Name: Designation:

Agency:

Name: Designation:

Agency:

Name: Designation:

Agency:

Date of completion:


Date of visit/s to / meetings with the child and family:

ANCHOR PRINCIPLE 1: WHAT IS THE ASSESSMENT FOR? What is the purpose / reason for undertaking the assessment Tool at this time – i.e. what process / assessment is this going to inform?

What are the concerns, risks and dangers for this child? Who has these concerns / how have the concerns arisen? (Brief summary):


ANCHOR PRINCIPLE 2: WHAT IS THE STORY?SECTION 1

THIS SECTION 1 SHOULD BE COMPLETED INITIALLY TO INFORM A RISK ASSESSMENT AT THE STRATEGY MEETING AND AS PART OF SECTION 47 ENQUIRIES. IT SHOULD THEN BE REVIEWED WHENEVER THE RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT TOOL IS INITIATED.

SECTION 1 RELATES TO CURRENT LIVE CONCERNS

Significance of harm Yes

No

Don’t know

NA

1 Does the suspected harm meet the definition of abuse in the child protection procedures (physical, emotional, sexual, neglect)? Please state which areas of harm is/are the subject of concern:

2 Has the child/young person been injured or physically harmed? Have they suffered neglect, impaired development or emotional harm?

3 Is the pattern of harm continual/ continuing?

4 Is the pattern of harm escalating?

5 Are the injuries/incidents a one off event or cumulative or episodic? Please state which:

6 Has the parent or caregiver made a threat to cause harm to the child? Physical; forced marriage; related to beliefs about spirit possession; cruelty; emotional – bullying; name calling; degrading and demeaning behaviour etc

7 If sexual abuse is alleged, does the alleged perpetrator continue to have access to the child/young person?

8 Did the injuries/incidents result from spontaneous actions, neglect or intent? If yes, explain:

9 Is the parent/s’ explanation inconsistent with the injuries/incidents including any medical assessment of injuries?

10

Do/es the parent/s acknowledge and accept the expressed concerns?

11

Is there a previous history of the parent/s maltreating or neglecting a child?

12

Are the injuries/incidents / harm likely to recur?

Additional notes:


Are there any ‘grey’ areas for example any other known potential risk factors which have not yet impacted the child?

List all areas where further information needs to be gathered and assessed including those areas in Section One where the response was ‘Don’t know’.


ANCHOR PRINCIPLE 3: WHAT DOES THE STORY MEAN?

The emerging analysis of the impact on the child:

Question Response

When and how is the child at risk?

What is the severity and duration of the harm?

What does the child mean to the family? What role does the child play e.g. scapegoat, protector, carer?

What are the effects on the child’s current development?

What may be the long-term effects?

What is the child’s reaction to and perception of the harm?

What are the child’s needs, wishes and feelings regarding intervention and likely outcomes?

What are parental thoughts and perceptions at this point in time?

What are the thoughts and perceptions of professionals at this point in time?

EQUALITIES IMPACT: Are there any needs or issues requiring specific consideration in response to the Equality Act and any of the protected characteristics race; age; gender; gender assignment; disability; sexual orientation; faith or belief?


Response

On a scale of 0 to 10 where 10 means everyone knows the child is safe enough for the children’s social care to close the case and zero means things are so bad for the child they can’t live at home, where do we rate this situation? (If different judgments place different people’s number on the continuum).

0………1………2…………3……………4…………5…………6…..……7………8………9……..…..10

Is the impact of the harm / likelihood of harm significant? Yes / No / Needs further assessment

Is immediate protective action required? If yes, state what action is to be taken and by whom:


ANCHOR PRINCIPLE 2: WHAT IS THE STORY? Continued…SECTION 2

Section two builds the risk and resilience assessment components which are then plotted onto the risk and resilience matrix.

What are the factors relating to and innate to the child/young person that increases his/her vulnerability?

VulnerabilityYes

No

Don’t

know

N/A

1 Is the child under 12 months / pre-mobile? (Young children are more vulnerable. Any physical harm to a child under 12 months must be considered serious)

2 Is the child under aged between 12 months and 5 years? (they are unable to protect themselves. The impact of neglect on children, their development and long term outcomes is known to be very serious and significant)

3 Does the child have a disability, significant or chronic illness? (Children with disabilities, chronic illness or behaviour problems are more vulnerable to abuse or neglect). ? If yes, please specify:

4 Does the child exhibit significant behaviour problems ( Children with behaviour problems are more vulnerable to abuse or neglect)

5 Does the child/young person present as / talk about being fearful of the parent or other household member? (A fearful, withdrawn or distressed child may indicate that the family environment is characterised by “low warmth/high criticism” and they are less likely to be protected by their parent.)

6 Is the child/young person engaging in self harm, substance misuse, and dangerous sexual or other risk taking behaviour? (This maybe an indicator of past or current abuse or harm). If yes, please list each risky behaviour the child is regularly engaging in and *score one point for each:

7 Does the child have asylum seeking status? (They are vulnerable as a result of their life experiences, and absence of support networks)

8 Does family or child identify areas of vulnerability that are not included in the list above? for example their position and role played within the family. If so please list: Care must be taken not to add factors which are covered elsewhere and to ensure they have evidence based adverse impact.

9 Do the professionals who know the child or family identify areas of vulnerability that are not included in the list above? (e.g. child is a young carer) If so please list:


VulnerabilityYes

No

Don’t

know

N/A

Care must be taken not to add factors which are covered elsewhere and to ensure they have evidence based adverse impact.

Additional notes: (this should include a list all areas where further information needs to be gathered and assessed including those areas in Section Two where the response was ‘Don’t know’.)

Each ‘yes’ scores one point. When have completed these questions, add the total number of yes scores and plot the total score on the Risk/Resilience matrix below on the lower section of the vertical axis.


What are the factors relating to the child/young person that increases his/her resilience?

Note: To answer positively you should be confident that the strengths are consistent and of a good enough standard for the child. These evidence based resilience factors are those which are innate to the child and professional understanding of child development and the impact of any disability / impairment, is necessary to judge the relevance of each question having regard for the child’s age and stage of development. For example, a pre-verbal baby cannot be deemed to have good self-esteem. For example, a one year old attending nursery provides a protective environment but cannot be deemed to evidence an innate resilience for the purpose of this assessment.

ResilienceYes

No

Don’t

know

N/A due to

age

1 Does the child/young person have a strong attachment to a main caregiver?

2 Does the child/young person have good self-esteem?

3 Is the child/young person sociable and does he/she interact appropriately for his/her age and development?

4 Does the child/young person have friends and active social contacts?

5 Has the child/young person experienced any period of positive parenting?

6 Is the child/young person comfortable with their physical appearance?

7 Does the child/young person have / pursue talents and/or interests?

8 Does the child/young person take part in play, leisure and/or sport activities?

9 Does the child/young person have a positive experience of nursery or school?

10

Does family or child/young person identify areas of resilience that are not included in the list above? If so please list:

11

Do the professionals who know the child or family identify areas of resilience that are not included in the list above? If so please list:

Additional notes: (this should include a list all areas where further information needs to be gathered and assessed including those areas in Section Three where the response was ‘Don’t know’.)


Each ‘yes’ scores one point. When have completed these questions, add the total number of yes scores and plot the total score on the Risk/Resilience matrix below on the upper section of vertical axis.

What are the factors relating to the parent or caregiver, and their environment that increase the risk to the child/young person?

NOTE: In this section, where there are two parents / care givers involved and subject to the assessment, where any factors of adversity apply to both parents, two ticks should be given to give weight to the impact of this. Where the adversity / complicating factor applies to one parent only, just one tick should be given. Where the assessment involves a single carer household, one tick only will be given. The narrative of the analysis and professional judgement should explain the context.

Adversity / Complicating factorsYes

No

Don’t

know

1 Has either parent/care-giver caused significant harm to any child or young person in the past (once a person has harmed a child there is an increase likelihood that this behaviour will re-occur). If yes, please specify: (evidence in court could be fact find or conviction)

2 Has the child been the subject of s47 enquiries and a child protection plan as a consequence of harm / risk of harm from the parent / care giver?

3 Is either parent/ care-giver’s explanation of the harm inconsistent or minimised? (Where a parent fails to accept responsibility for their actions, there is a higher likelihood of future significant harm).

4 Is either parent/ care-giver unwilling to engage meaningfully? Such might include resistance; passive aggression; disguised compliance etc. If yes, please specify:

5 Is either parent/care-giver’s behaviour violent or out of control? If yes, please specify:

6 Is either parent/care-giver’s ability to protect the child impaired due to mental illness, physical or learning disability? If yes, please specify:



No

Don’t

know

7 Is either parent/care-giver experiencing domestic abuse within the current relationship? If yes, please specify which parent and who is the perpetrator:

8 Is either parent/care-giver experiencing a high level of stress? Stress factors may include poverty, financial issues, health, racial abuse, isolation; poor housing; bereavement or separation etc. Please list:*

*Note, score one point for each cause of adversity and stress listed.

*

9 Does either parent/care-giver have unrealistic expectations of the child, or act in a negative way toward them?

10

Does either parent/caregiver have a poor caring relationship / attachment with the child or young person? If yes, specify who:

11

Does either parent/care-giver have a substance misuse problem (including alcohol or drug addiction. Substance misuse may lead to poor supervision, neglect, harmful responses through altered consciousness and a risk of harm from others through inability to protect?) If yes, please specify:

12

Does either parent/care-giver refuse access by professionals to the child or young person? If yes, please detail:

13

Is either parent/caregiver under 21 years? If yes, please specify which and age:

14

Is this a single parent / carer household with no effective support network?

15

Has either parent/caregiver experienced childhood neglect or abuse? (parenting skills are frequently learned or modelled on the experience of being parented, although later positive experiences can counteract early childhood experiences).

16

Are there other extended family members / significant adults who compound the risks / adversities? If so, please specify:



No

Don’t

know

17

Is the physical environment chaotic, hazardous or unsafe?

18

Is the environment overly sanitised, where child’s needs are not recognised?

19

Is there a history of resistance / unsuccessful or un-sustained interventions with this family, by statutory children’s services in response to safeguarding concerns?

20

Does family or child identify areas of adversity or complicating factors that are not included in the list above? If so please list:

21

Do the professionals who know the child or family identify areas of adversity or complicating factors that are not included in the list above? If so please list: for example history of unsubstantiated allegations against a parent / care giver/ significant other.

Additional notes: (this should include a list all areas where further information needs to be gathered and assessed including those areas in Section Four where the response was ‘Don’t know’.):

Each ‘yes’ scores one point. When have completed these questions, add the total number of yes scores and plot the total score on the Risk/Resilience matrix below on the left hand section of horizontal axis.

What are the factors relating to the parent/s or main caregiver/s, and their environment that protect the child/young person, and decrease the risk including their capacity for change?


Note: To answer positively you should be confident that the protective and supporting factors are consistent and of a good enough standard for the child.

Protective Environment / Supporting factors Yes

No

Don’t know

N/A

1 Is the parent/main caregiver supportive of the child/young person?

2 Does the parent/main caregiver respond appropriately to the child’s physical needs?

3 Does the parent/main caregiver respond appropriately to the child’s emotional needs?

4 If child has disclosed abuse, does the parent/main caregiver believe the child?

5 Is the parent/main caregiver willing to engage meaningfully? NB Use professional judgement to assess indications of disguised compliance.

6 Does the parent/main caregiver understand the need for change?

7 Is the parent confident that the family can make any necessary changes?

8 Are professionals confident that the family can make any necessary changes?

9 Is there a history of successful interventions by social care and other agencies?

10

Does the child / family have good networks and relationships in their extended family and/or community who will help to protect the child/young person?

11

Does the child have good attendance at school / day care with good oversight which will help to keep them safe?

12

Does the child (age appropriate) and family identify areas of strength which they can evidence and that are not included in the list above? If so please list:

13

Do the professionals who know the child or family identify areas of strength that are not included in the list above? If so please list:


Additional notes: (this should include a list all areas where further information needs to be gathered and assessed including those areas in Section Five where the response was ‘Don’t know’.)


EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT: Are there any needs or issues requiring specific consideration in response to the Equality Act and any of the protected characteristics race; age; gender; gender assignment; disability; sexual orientation; faith or belief?

Response:


RISK AND RESILIENCE MATRIXEach ‘yes’ scores one point. When have completed these questions, add the total number of yes scores and plot the total score on the Risk/Resilience matrix below on the right hand section of horizontal axis.

COMPLETING THE MATRIX

Now join the marks on each of the four axes of the diagram. The pattern for a resilient and protected child will sit predominantly in the upper right quadrant; a vulnerable and unprotected child will sit predominantly in the lower left quadrant.

EXPLANATION:A resilient child living in a protective environment will be represented by a shape located predominantly in the top right hand quadrant of the matrix.

A vulnerable child living in an adverse environment will be represented by a shape located predominantly in the bottom left hand quadrant of the matrix.

A vulnerable child in a protective environment will be represented by a shape located predominantly in the bottom right hand quadrant of the matrix.

A resilient child living in an adverse environment will be represented by a shape located predominantly in the top left hand quadrant of the matrix.

Most children will demonstrate aspects of both vulnerability and resilience and live in environments which include both protective and adverse factors, but the diagram will show which the dominant factors are for this child. However, the scoring and matrix does not replace professional judgement and no correlation should be made between the numerical scores and the level of risk to the child. The matrix is not a risk scale tool to benchmark child protection thresholds. It is a tool to inform professional judgement.

THE VALUE / PURPOSE OF THE MATRIX:The purpose of the matrix is to give a visual profile of the child’s vulnerability within the risky environment, and in re-visiting the assessment and matrix mapping, it will provide a visual map of changes over time.

Where there is more than one child in the family, comparing the profile of each child can usefully highlight the different needs and therefore responses required for each child within a sibling group.

ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THE COMPLETED MATRIX:

2 3 4 5 6 7818 16 6 4 21

1012 14 2024 222614321

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

11

8 9 102830

2

1

10

11

12+

12

13

14

15+

11+


RISK AND RESILIENCE MATRIX

Name of child: Date of completion:

RESILIENCE

ADVERSITY PROTECTIVEENVIRONMENTAND CAPACITYFOR CHANGE

VULNERABILITY


ANCHOR PRINCIPLES 3 & 4: WHAT DOES THE STORY MEAN? ANDWHAT IS THE EMERGING PICTURE OF WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN?

SECTION 3 – ANALYSIS AND MANAGING THE RISK - WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE IN ORDER TO MAKE THE SITUATION SAFER AND HEALTHIER FOR THE CHILD, TO NARROW THE GAPS AND IMPROVE THEIR OUTCOMES?

Your aim, in managing the risk, is to strengthen and build on the strengths, resilience and protective factors, and diminish the identified risk factors where this is achievable.

For each question, there is a prompt as to the key primary sources of evidence which should inform your analysis. These prompts are intended to support robust evidence informed analysis of the information gathered using this Tool, and to support subsequent planning and service delivery.

The prompts are categorised as follows:

First hand evidence from the child from discussions and observations. (Ch);

First hand evidence from the parents/ care givers and other significant persons (PR/ SO);

Evidence from other professionals (P);

Practice wisdom / Judgement(J);

Research evidence (RE).

Question Evidence source

Response

Is the child safe without any intervention?

Ch; RE: P; J;

What is your understanding of the balance and relative strengths of the risks and protective factors? Are the protective factors outweighed by the risk factors?

P; J

Describe the factor(s) which are the most significant for the child in terms of

a) reducing or

b) increasing

the probability of future harm?

Ch; SO; P; J; RE

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT: Are there any needs or issues requiring specific consideration in response

Ch; SO; P; RE; J


to the Equality Act and any of the protected characteristics race; age; gender; gender assignment; disability; sexual orientation; faith or belief?

What is your assessment of the likely impact of the risk(s) on the child’s health, safety and development?(If more than one risk, address each separately)

RE; P; J

Specify what needs to change in order to

make the situation safe for the child,

reduce the risk and adversity faced by the child,

strengthen their resilience and their protective environment,

redress any current development delay, emotional harm and

generally improve their well-being and outcomes?

P; Ch; PR; RE; J

What does the child / young person and family want to happen?

Ch; PR;

What is the capacity of the family to achieve this change?

PR; P; RE; J

What are the contributions required of other agencies and professionals to support the family and achieve the changes?

RE; P; J

What is the capacity of other professionals / agencies to do this?

P

What are the advantages of intervention?

RE; P; J


How likely is it that the intervention will achieve and maintain necessary changes?

What are the risks (if any) associated with intervention in the short or long term? And how will these be managed/ mitigated?

P; J; RE

What would evidence that progress is being made?

Ch; PR; P; J

Is there any other information you need to complete this tool? Please note below:

On a scale of 0 to 10 where 10 means everyone knows the child is safe enough for the children’s social care to close the case and zero means things are so bad for the child they can’t live at home, where do we rate this situation? (If different judgments place different people’s number on the continuum).

0………1………2…………3……………4…………5…………6…..……7………8………9……..…..10

Summary of analysis:


ANCHOR PRINCIPLE 4: WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN?

On completion of this risk and resilience assessment model, the information, decisions and recommendations should be used to contribute to the on-going decision making, existing plans and planning process, and arrangements for monitoring and reviewing progress made and outcomes achieved, including child protection planning as appropriate. Any resulting plan for intervention should include clear statements of:

1. The child focussed needs;

2. The outcomes to be achieved;

3. What needs to happen to achieve the desired outcomes;

4. What would evidence that progress is being made;

5. Who is responsible for what actions and within what time-scales;

6. What might be the contingency plan if no / insufficient progress is made;

7. How will the recommendations be monitored and reviewed.


ANCHOR PRINCIPLE 5: HOW WILL WE KNOW WE ARE MAKING PROGRESS?

It is important that the assessment is reviewed and updated periodically. This will evidence what has changed in the child’s life; what has been the impact of decisions, interventions and services provided and therefore evidence of outcomes achieved. Refreshing the assessment also helps to re-focus decisions, interventions and services in response to changing strengths and needs. When do you recommend that the assessment is reviewed / refreshed in this case?

DATE FOR REVIEW / RE-ASSESS:

Discuss your analysis and decisions / recommendations with your supervisor.

Date of discussion with supervisor: Name of supervisor:

Views of child / young person and parents/ primary care givers:

Date findings and conclusions shared with child/ young person:

Record of child / young person’s views:

Date findings and conclusions shared with parents / primary care giver:

Record of parents / primary care giver’s views and thoughts:

Date of management authorisation:

Name and position of manager authorising the assessment, decisions and recommendations:

ANCHOR PRINCIPLE 5: HOW DO WE KNOW WE ARE MAKING PROGRESS? REPEAT USE OF THE RISK AND RESILIENCE TOOL –

SUMMARY OF PROGRESS / IMPACT

Please provide a concise summary of the changes made and the impact of the assessment and intervention expressed as outcomes for the child:

For example – did the agencies provide the interventions and services agreed? How well did the child and family engage with these interventions? Did the interventions have the intended impact and what difference have they made? How has life changed for the child? Etc…

the assessment framework for children in need€¦ · web viewrisk and resilience assessment tool...

Documents