Correspondence

Ofsted's response to the children's social care national framework and dashboard consultation

Published 6 July 2023

Applies to England

Response to National framework and dashboard

Question 7. To what extent do you agree that the National Framework is clear and easy to understand?

[Note that the consultation asks for a tick box response ranging from strongly agree to no opinion. Have ignored this.]

We agree that the National Framework is written in a user-friendly way and is easy to read. We understand that a consultation with children and young people is currently being undertaken. Their feedback on both content and presentation should inform the final framework and associated documents.

Question 8. What do you think of the expectations for practice described in the National Framework?

In general, we support the principles set out in the National Framework. We already see much of this good practice through our inspection.

A strengths-based and family focused approach to safeguarding and care can help to ensure that more children benefit from life-long relationships with those most important to them and experience greater consistency of care. However, there will be differing degrees of risk in these situations and so it is positive to note that the welfare paramountcy principle, so clearly articulated in the Children’s Act, is repeated as the first practice principle.

The principles rightly expect children’s social care to build and maintain strong relationships with partner agencies, but the proposals do not include any new statutory responsibilities for these partners. We understand revisions to Working Together are due to be published in the autumn that will help to clarify expectations of partners, but without legal expectations of all partners there is a risk, particularly during a period of fiscal challenge, that these partnerships may not be as effective in improving outcomes. We recognise the concerns previously expressed by Professor Munro and others that any new statutory guidance should not inhibit innovation or professional judgement. The new National Framework, the strategy set out in Stable Homes, Built on Love, and practice guides should not overwhelm or unduly restrict practice leaders or practitioners.

Question 9. How could the National Framework strengthen expectations for multi-agency working?

The vision set out in the National Framework and separately in Stable Homes, Built on Love, requires effective partnership working across a wide range of agencies. As we have said in our response to question 8, we are concerned that without new statutory responsibilities for partners including health, police and education the ability to deliver the proposals may be compromised.

Education provision is more fragmented than other services and so the framework relies on local areas determining how best to integrate education services into local arrangements. Pathfinders will be used to test different approaches. If not now, then as soon as practicable, guidance should be produced on how education providers can best play their role.

Question 10. Are there additional ways that we can ensure the Dashboard supports continuous learning and improvement?

Information and data sharing between agencies can sometimes be problematic and a barrier to achieving change. Without the right information, organisations and individual practitioners will struggle to make the good decisions for children and their families. The indicators used in the national dashboard should not derive wholly or mainly on local authority data. It should include data from other agencies as this will strengthen local intelligence and better inform strategic planning.

It is important to note that data is not always directly comparable between local authorities. Dashboards should therefore be used to prompt questions rather than to draw conclusions about service performance. Over- or mis-interpretations could lead to unnecessary and unhelpful policy and practice change.

Question 11. How often should data be published to support learning and understand practice is making a different to children, young people and families?

Not every indicator lends itself to quarterly publication; some are only meaningful over a longer periods. Decisions about retrieval and publication should be made for each indicator as appropriate; some might be quarterly, others annual.

A meeting between DfE and Ofsted data analysts has been scheduled to review the range of data DfE is currently proposing to gather and publish.

Question 12. Outcome 1: children, young people and families stay together and get the help they need

a. Are there any other ways leaders and practitioners should work towards this outcome which are not specified in the National Framework?

While there is an emphasis on multi-agency co-operation and effective multi-disciplinary practice at the frontline, there is a risk that reference to ‘leaders’ is interpreted too narrowly with a focus largely or solely on local authority leaders. There is an opportunity in each of the framework outcome areas to reinforce that these actions apply to all relevant leaders in the partnership.

This is particularly important when considering how universal services should cooperate. Without effective universal services the risk of avoidable escalation into targeted family help services will remain.

b. Would you recommend any other existing indicators or evidence to support learning around this outcome?

We understand the desire to keep the initial set of dashboard indicators to a minimum while further work is undertaken to identify the most relevant outcome measures. However, the proposal to include only information obtained from the point of referral to social care excludes available data from earlier stages of early support. This gap should be closed quickly, and consideration should be given to making this as a priority in the pathfinder work.

Question 13. Outcome 2: children and young people are supported by their family network

a. Are there any other ways leaders and practitioners should work towards this outcome which are not specified in the National Framework?

A sensible range of priorities for leaders is identified. In line with previous comments, we would stress that this requires commitment from leaders across the whole partnership.

It is positive to note that a more flexible approach to funding is advocated. Where the framework references the right resource available to support families to continue to care for their children, we assume that this includes financial support to families. It will be important to gather learning from Pathfinders to assess whether this increases the financial burden on local authorities and, if so, for this to be reflected in the next spending review.

b. Would you recommend any other existing indicators or evidence to support learning around this outcome?

As noted previously, we understand the desire to keep the initial set of dashboard indicators is kept to a minimum in the first instance. In the short-term adding measures of types of kinship placement may help to develop a view on longevity and sustainability. Additional measures could include the percentage of kinship arrangements achieved through Child Arrangement Order, Special Guardianship Order or via fostering arrangements.

There is always a risk that indicators will drive practice in an unintended directions. It is particularly important therefore that any guidance is carefully written and communicated. Indicators of children living at home subject to care order could drive an increase in the numbers of children living under these arrangements. Evidence from our inspections would indicate that children placed with parents under these arrangements are sometimes at greater risk and are also disadvantaged through weaker educational support and aspiration from parents, leading to worse outcomes.

Question 14. Outcome 3: children and young people are safe in and outside of their homes

a. Are there any other ways leaders and practitioners should work towards this outcome which are not specified in the National Framework?

The leadership priorities identified to ensure that young people are suitably broad and include helpful detail. Extra-familial harm, in particular, requires practitioners from a wide range of services to work together effectively. In addition, many areas are now working to intervene in places and spaces, such as local parks, shopping centres and schools or colleges. It would be helpful to have this recognised in the Framework. Leaders across the whole partnership must work together to achieve the intended outcomes. It is important that this responsibility does not sit solely or mainly with the local authority.

b. Would you recommend any other existing indicators or evidence to support learning around this outcome?

A meeting between DfE and Ofsted data analysts has been scheduled to review the range of data DfE are currently proposing to gather and publish.

Question 15. Outcome 4: children in care and care leavers have stable, loving homes

a. Are there any other ways leaders and practitioners should work towards this outcome which are not specified in the National Framework?

We support the focus on sufficiency planning and the expectation that local authorities work together to ensure that there are sufficient homes now and in the future for children in care and care experienced young people. We have noted an increase in the use of deprivation of liberty orders, in some cases at least in part because of a lack of access to specialised placements and changes in health policy and practice.

b. Would you recommend any other existing indicators or evidence to support learning around this outcome?

From 1 April 2023 local authorities are being asked to provide data on social worker episodes for children in care, this includes the reason for any change of social worker. As this information is already submitted by local authorities there is no additional burden in adding this immediately to the indictor set. Doing so will provide a valuable insight into consistency of relationship and workforce stability.

Local authorities also routinely report on the number/percentage of care experienced young people that they are ‘in touch’ with. Again, it would not be an additional burden to add this to the dataset and would provide a valuable insight into the effectiveness of corporate parenting in a given area. Consideration could be given to formalising the data collection from local authorities initiated by the previous Children’s Commissioner to inform her Stability Index.

Question 16. Enabler 1: the workforce is equipped and effective

a. Are there any other ways leaders and practitioners should work towards this enabler which are not specified in the National Framework?

The enablers would go some way towards creating an environment in which good social work practice could thrive. The pathfinders will test how the enablers can be delivered and whether there are particular barriers that prevent or hinder development. It would be helpful to add additional detail to the framework, in light of these, to illustrate the practical ways in which leaders and practitioners can work together.

b. Would you recommend any other existing indicators or evidence to support learning around this enabler?

There is currently no consistency in measures to report on social work practitioner experience. Some local authorities use Level 1,2,3 etc but not all. Some have senior practitioners or their equivalent but again not all. To help build a national and local picture local authorities could be asked to report on the percentage of social workers with XX years post qualifying experience and length of service with the authority. Using bands to differentiate would provide a view of experience base and retention. While we accept this would be a simplistic approach, it could provide useful intelligence and help inform planning.

A meeting between DfE and Ofsted data analysts has been scheduled to review the range of data DfE is currently proposing to gather and publish.

Question 17. Enabler 2: leaders drive conditions for effective practice

a. Are there any other ways leaders and practitioners should work towards this enabler which are not specified in the National Framework?

As for question 16.

b. Would you recommend any other existing indicators or evidence to support learning around this enabler?

While we understand the importance of ensuring suitable resourcing arrangements are in place, it is unclear why the percentage of budget spent on children in care services has been highlighted when other areas of spend are not. We note here that in smaller authorities, figures can be easily skewed by a small number of children with very high needs.