Guidance

Joint targeted area inspection of the multi-agency response to children and families who need help

Published 7 October 2022

Applies to England

1. This guidance is for inspectors carrying out a joint targeted area inspection (JTAI) of the multi-agency response to children and their families who need help in a local authority area in England.

2. These JTAIs are carried out by inspectors from:

• Ofsted

• the Care Quality Commission (CQC)

• His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS)

3. We carry out JTAIs under section 20 of the Children Act 2004.

4. For guidance on JTAIs that look at other topics, see the joint inspections of local area services collection.

Background

5. We planned to carry out a thematic JTAI in relation to early help in 2019 and consulted on this before JTAIs were paused because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

6. We commissioned Research in Practice to produce a ‘compendium-style’ report, bringing together what we know about current early help provision in England, what the policy debates are, and the different ways agencies work together to meet children’s needs and prevent more intrusive, longer-term intervention. The report, Early help: concepts, policy directions and multi-agency perspectives, informed the development of this guidance.

7. The focus of this JTAI is on the multi-agency arrangements for children and families who need help. In practice this means that our primary focus is on targeted early help, but we will also look at some aspects of the experiences of children in need (as defined in section 17 of the Children Act 1989), such as the interface and thresholds between early help and children in need. The aim of this is to evaluate how the partners work together to ensure that children and families get the right help at the right time

8. We hope that this scope will help local areas to think about their practice in supporting families early, whether through statutory services or early help. We also expect that it will assist the government as it considers the recommendations in the independent review of children’s social care. The review talks about ‘family help’, which includes targeted early help and help for children in need.

9. Through our thematic JTAIs, we want to establish a shared understanding of how different agencies work together effectively to reduce risks to children and meet their needs early.

Scope of the inspection

10. The scope of this inspection is wide. To make our purpose clear, these JTAIs will focus on answering the following questions:

• Do agencies work effectively together so that children and their families get the right help at the right time?

• Is there a shared strategic vision for helping families early?

• Is this well understood across the local partnership, at all operational levels, and by families and communities?

• How effectively do leaders understand local need and engage with families, their neighbourhoods and communities to deliver an appropriate local offer?

• Do leaders understand how local need changes over time, and do they update their offer of help to respond to these changes effectively?

• Does the local safeguarding partnership monitor and evaluate the work of statutory partners effectively?

• Does the workforce have the appropriate skills, knowledge and capacity to support children and their families effectively?

11. Inspectors’ evaluation of family help (targeted early help and help for children in need) will be based on:

• the inspection of single- and multi-agency front doors that oversee targeted early help

• sampling of early help cases

• discussions with frontline practitioners and managers

• talking to children and families

• observations of multi-agency meetings

• discussions with strategic leaders

• the arrangements, decision-making and interface around ‘step-up’ and ‘step down’ between early help and children in need

• decision-making about how multi-agency help is provided

• how well the local agencies evaluate the effectiveness of help provided to children and families at an individual and service level

• the range and effectiveness of multi-agency help for these children and their families

12. The agencies within the scope of this inspection are the police, children’s social care, education and relevant health services. Inspectors will also consider the effectiveness of services commissioned from the voluntary sector. Given the wide range of health services relevant to this scope, we are targeting our activity. The services we will visit are:

• maternity services

• emergency and urgent care

• public health nursing

• emotional well-being and mental health services

13. We recognise that this list is not exhaustive, and there are other health services that play an important role. We will gather relevant evidence about other health services’ contributions to the multi-agency response through:

• case tracking

• sampling in the multi-agency safeguarding hub (MASH) or equivalent

• sampling of early help cases

14. Inspectors will evaluate how partners work with education providers, and the contribution that they make to ensuring that children get the right help at the right time.

15. Inspectors will also evaluate how effectively the local partnership, through its multi-agency safeguarding arrangements (MASA), monitors, promotes, coordinates and evaluates the work of the statutory partners.

16. The inspection will focus on recent practice (practice within the last 6 months). The inspection will evaluate how well recent practice takes account of relevant history in children’s cases.

Evaluation criteria

17. Inspectors will evaluate evidence of the experiences and progress of children against the criteria set out below. The evaluation criteria (EC) numbers are a referencing system used by inspectors when recording their evidence.

18. Inspectors will apply the evaluation criteria proportionately, taking into account the differing responses to differing levels of need.

EC number	Criteria
EC1	Agencies work together effectively so that children and their families get the right help at the right time. The help provided meets the needs of children and their families.
EC2	Children and their families can access a sufficient range of effective services. Early help activities are well coordinated. There is a clear, up-to-date mapping of services and the pathways are understood and used well by professionals and families.
EC3	Children who need help experience a child-centred approach from all professionals. Practice is based on: a good understanding of children’s experiences; children’s background and identity, including any barriers to them accessing help and support; and children’s needs and strengths.
EC4	Professionals understand the importance of building trusting relationships with children and families who need help. Professionals work together to ensure that they are appropriately persistent in their efforts to engage with children and their families. Relationships are based on consistency, stability and respectful communication.
EC5	Assessments are coordinated by the most appropriate professional for the child, and include contributions from relevant agencies. The experience of the child is well understood, and their views are clearly recorded and central to an effective multi-agency response. Assessments and plans are dynamic and change in the light of emerging need and risk.
EC6	Children and families are helped through effective multi-agency meetings. Key participants attend multi-agency meetings. These meetings are effective forums for timely information-sharing, planning, decision-making and monitoring. Actions happen within agreed timescales and the help provided meets children and families’ needs.
EC7	Children and their families are listened to. Multi-agency practice focuses on their needs and experiences and is influenced by their wishes and feelings.
EC8	Children and their families benefit from evidence-based approaches that meet their needs.
EC9	Education providers, health providers and the community and voluntary sector identify children and families who need help, and provide appropriate help wherever possible. If these agencies are unable to meet children and families’ needs, or those needs escalate, the agencies make appropriate and timely referrals, and work in partnership with other agencies in the best interests of children.
EC10	The local safeguarding partners support education providers to contribute to multi-agency working. As a result, education providers work with partners to meet needs effectively. They work together to enable children to remain in education.
EC11	The workforce is well supported and has the appropriate skills, knowledge and capacity to: identify and respond to need and risk; engage with children and families, and build relationships; and work effectively in a multi-agency system.
EC12	There is effective communication and involvement of the local community in the development and evaluation of help and support, at a strategic level and a practice level. The local community and voluntary sector, including informal support networks, are involved in the local partnership to develop and deliver the local offer.
EC13	Leaders understand and communicate a shared strategic vision and framework for child and family support. It is well understood across the local partnership, and by families and communities.
EC14	Leaders and managers across agencies share and analyse information effectively, and understand local need. This leads to an effective multi-agency strategy, including the commissioning of services to meet local need. Leaders evaluate the effectiveness of their strategy and commissioning arrangements, and improve these when needed.
EC15	Through the MASA, leaders in the local partnership monitor and evaluate the work of the statutory partners effectively. The local partnership works closely with other strategic partnerships and local organisations to ensure that children and their families get the help and support they need at the right time. Arrangements for independent scrutiny of the MASA provide assurance of its effectiveness.
EC16	Through the MASA, the local partnership promotes multi-agency learning about the identification, assessment and response to children and families who need help. Practice, planning and the design of services are informed and improved by feedback from children and families, research and intelligence on effective multi-agency practice.

The inspection team

19. The inspection team will usually consist of:

• 3 social care inspectors from Ofsted – one will be the lead inspector

• 1 schools inspector from Ofsted

• 2 inspectors from HMICFRS

• 3 inspectors from the CQC (only 2 inspectors will be there for the whole fieldwork week)

20. A Senior His Majesty’s Inspector (HMI) from Ofsted will be the quality assurance manager.

21. The CQC and HMICFRS may appoint additional quality assurance managers to the team if there are specific circumstances that require additional oversight.

Overview of the inspection

22. The JTAI will follow the structure set out below. The lead inspector will provide a detailed timeline when they notify the leaders in the local area of the inspection.

Pre-inspection activity

• Inspectorates share and review their analysis of information about the local area

Activities in week 1 (off site)

• Notification (10 working days before fieldwork begins)

• Set-up discussion

• Information request (details set out in Annex A)

• Selecting children’s cases to audit

• Planning and pre-inspection analysis

Activities in week 2 (off site)

• Local area evaluates experiences of children (case audits)

• Off-site analysis

• Off-site meetings with local agencies

• Creating the fieldwork timetable

Activities in week 3 (fieldwork)

• Inspection team meetings

• Meetings with senior leaders

• Gathering and evaluating evidence (including through case tracking, case sampling, observations of practice and meetings with practitioners)

Pre-inspection activity

23. The inspectorates will share with each other an analysis of relevant information they hold about the local area.

24. An inspector from each of the inspectorates will review the information. They will meet to discuss arrangements for the inspection before they notify the local partners of the JTAI.

Week 1 (off site): notification, set-up and information request

Notification

25. On day 1 (10 working days before the fieldwork), inspectors will contact the relevant leaders in the local area to notify them of the inspection. This will usually be on a Monday, but may happen earlier if there is a bank holiday in week 1 or 2 of the inspection:

• Ofsted will contact the director of children’s services (DCS)

• the CQC will notify the clinical commissioning group (CCG)’s chief executive and executive lead for safeguarding children

• HMICFRS will notify the chief constable and the police force’s liaison officer

26. The Ofsted lead inspector will ask the DCS to notify the person with responsibility for independent scrutiny of the local MASA.

27. Inspectors will ask local leaders to arrange for the information set out in Annex A to be shared with inspectors. Inspectors will provide a timeline for this to happen.

Set-up discussion

28. Inspectors will arrange a multi-agency set-up discussion with local leaders and the person responsible for independent scrutiny of the local safeguarding arrangements. This is an opportunity for inspectors to explain the scope and methodology of the inspection, and the practical arrangements for ensuring that the inspection can be carried out smoothly. Local agencies can use this opportunity to ask questions about the inspection.

29. Inspectors will ask the local area to identify a link person to help arrange the inspection. The link person should have access to the senior leaders in the agencies and the authority to respond to the lead inspector’s requests.

30. Inspectors will ask whether there are any safeguarding incidents that they should be made aware of. This includes significant and current investigations, rapid reviews or child safeguarding practice reviews, or local issues of high media interest.

Information request (Annex A)

31. Annex A sets out the information that inspectors will request and the timeline for the local agencies to share it. The information includes:

• child-level data, which inspectors will use to select the children whose experiences they will evaluate (inspectors will ask the local agencies to audit the experiences of some of these children)

• case records of the children whose experiences the local agencies have audited

• performance and management information that sets out how the members of the local partnership work together

32. Inspectors may ask for additional information not set out in Annex A, and may agree to look at additional information provided by the local partnership. The inspector or local agency must demonstrate that the additional information is:

• necessary for an accurate understanding of children’s experiences and the effectiveness of the local partnership in relation to the scope of the inspection

• not already available through the request in Annex A

Selecting children’s cases to audit

33. By the end of week 1, inspectors will select between 5 and 7 children, and ask the local agencies to audit these children’s experiences. Inspectors will use the child-level data set out in Annex A to select these children.

34. Inspectors will ask for some of the child-level data lists from Ofsted’s inspections of local authority children’s services (ILACS). Inspectors will ask the local authority to include some additional information in these lists (see Annex A for more information).

Planning and pre-inspection analysis

35. Inspectors carry out planning and pre-inspection analysis. Inspectors will contact the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to request data and information relevant to the scope of the inspection and the local area.

Week 2 (off site): children’s case audits, off-site analysis and creating a fieldwork timetable

Local area evaluates experiences of children (case audits)

36. Starting in week 2, the local agencies should audit the experiences of the children selected at the end of week 1. Inspectors will also ask the agencies to share these children’s case records, electronically if possible, during week 2.

37. The local partnership should use its own methods to evaluate the children’s experiences, while taking the scope of the inspection into account. Inspectors will ask the local partners to submit single- and multi-agency audits for each child. If the local partnership has carried out a single and/or multi-agency audit of any of these children’s experiences in the 3 months before the inspection, it may submit this as its evaluation for the inspection.

38. Inspectors will evaluate these cases and the local agencies’ audits. They will ask to meet with the practitioners involved in these children’s cases during the fieldwork week. At least 3 of these meetings will be multi-agency discussions. This guidance refers to these activities collectively as case tracking.

39. Inspectors will choose 3 cases that have been stepped down from children in need to targeted early help in the last 6 months. They will also choose 3 cases that have been stepped up from targeted early help to children in need in the last 6 months. These cases will have multi-agency involvement and will support an evaluation of the effectiveness of help provided by the local area.

Off-site analysis

40. In week 2, the local agencies should share the performance and management information set out in Annex A. Inspectors will refine their analysis based on this information. Inspectors will also review audits of children’s cases carried out by the local agencies.

Off-site meetings with local agencies

41. In week 2, inspectors may meet remotely with local leaders, staff and stakeholders to discuss arrangements for the inspection and to start gathering evidence. More information on who inspectors may speak to is set out in the ‘Interviews with practitioners, managers and leaders’ and ‘Meeting with representatives of the MASA, the independent scrutineer and sub-groups’ sections.

Creating the fieldwork timetable

42. The Ofsted lead inspector will coordinate the creation of a fieldwork timetable. They will ask the lead inspectors from the CQC and HMICFRS to liaise with their respective agencies to help create the timetable. This will include arrangements for meeting with practitioners, managers and leaders to discuss their work. Inspectors will also make arrangements for keep-in-touch (KIT) and feedback meetings where they will share their findings with local leaders.

43. Inspectors may also ask local agencies to arrange for them to meet with children and their families to discuss their experiences.

44. When creating the timetable, the Ofsted lead inspector will:

• consider which activities should be carried out in person and where, and which should take place by phone or video call

• include enough time for inspectors to travel between appointments

• include time for inspectors to review and analyse their evidence, individually and together

• ensure that the timetable is flexible enough to be changed in response to emerging findings

• agree arrangements for the local area to provide additional support to help communication with children, young people, parents and carers, when this is required (for example, by a social worker, advocate or family member)

• work with the link person in the local area to ensure that local leaders and practitioners are aware of the timetable and any changes to it

45. Inspectors will meet at the end of week 2 to discuss the plan for the inspection and any matters arising from their off-site analysis.

Week 3: fieldwork

Inspection team meetings

46. When inspectors arrive on site, they will meet to review the arrangements for fieldwork.

47. Inspectors will meet regularly during fieldwork to discuss their findings. They may meet as a whole team, or in smaller groups to consider findings from a particular part of the inspection scope. At these meetings, inspectors will:

• compare evidence from different inspectors and different parts of the inspection

• consider the impact of leaders, managers and the MASA on practice with children and families

• agree when the team has gathered enough evidence

• agree how best to gather further evidence in the time remaining

• ensure that the lead inspector has the information they need to coordinate the inspection effectively and keep the local agencies informed

48. Inspectors will meet at the end of fieldwork to review all the evidence they have gathered and agree provisional findings. Inspectors will review the evidence against the evaluation criteria. They will identify any strengths, areas for improvement and areas for priority action.

Meetings with senior leaders

Initial on-site meeting with senior leaders

49. The lead inspector and a representative from each inspectorate will meet with senior leaders from the local agencies on the first day of fieldwork. At this meeting, attendees will review the matters discussed at the set-up discussion and inspectors will answer any questions the senior leaders have.

50. This is also an opportunity for the local agencies to tell inspectors about their local context. This can include any key strengths or challenges faced by the partnership and any known issues of concern or public interest relating to the scope of the JTAI.

Keep-in-touch meetings

51. Inspectors will offer local senior leaders an opportunity to attend KIT meetings. KIT meetings are opportunities for senior leaders to hear about the emerging findings from the inspection. Leaders can use these meetings to ask questions about the findings and to help the lead inspector identify where further evidence is needed.

52. KIT meetings take place on the Wednesday and Thursday of the fieldwork week. They focus on the main findings arising from fieldwork. Inspectors may raise concerns about the help, protection or care of specific children for discussion at the meetings. They may ask the relevant local agencies to respond to these concerns in writing.

53. The lead inspector will chair these meetings. A representative from each inspectorate will usually attend. The lead inspector will ask the relevant local agencies to identify a senior leader from each agency to attend. Any additional attendees should be discussed with the lead inspector in advance.

54. Attendance at KIT meetings can be in person or by phone or video call. A local agency’s attendance at, or absence from, the meetings will not affect the inspection findings.

The feedback meeting

55. At the end of fieldwork, the lead inspector will invite all senior agency leaders and the person responsible for independent scrutiny of the MASA to meet inspectors to hear the provisional findings. The Ofsted lead inspector and at least one inspector from each inspectorate will attend. Inspectors will ask the local agencies to keep attendance to a minimum to help keep the discussions manageable and focused.

56. Inspectors will encourage the local agencies to discuss the findings, to help them:

• understand the evidence on which the findings are based

• understand any strengths, areas for improvement and areas for priority action

• build on their strengths and have productive discussions about improvement, after the inspection

57. The lead inspector will set out the main findings and provide a summary of the evidence that demonstrates the local area’s strengths and areas for improvement.

58. If there are findings that may lead an inspectorate to take further action (for example, in its role as a regulator), that inspectorate will offer to have a separate discussion with the relevant local agency.

59. The findings shared at this meeting are provisional, pending quality assurance after the fieldwork has finished.

Gathering and evaluating evidence

60. Inspectors will prioritise gathering evidence about direct practice with children and families. They will gather evidence by:

• evaluating the experiences of children through case tracking, case sampling and observations of practice

• interviewing practitioners, managers, leaders and stakeholders

• evaluating the quality and impact of local multi-agency audits

• meeting with representatives of the MASA and relevant sub-groups

• reviewing documents about the local partnership’s work that are relevant to the scope of the inspection

Each of these methods is set out in more detail below.

61. When inspectors select the children whose experiences they will evaluate, they will take into account:

• the child’s age, sex and ethnicity, and whether the child is disabled

• children at different stages of involvement with the agencies being inspected

• issues specific to the local area that are relevant to the scope of the inspection

62. Inspectors will gather personal information that is necessary to help them evaluate local services. The privacy notices below set out what data the inspection teams collect, what we do with it, how long we keep it for and people’s rights under the Data Protection Act 2018:

• Ofsted’s privacy notices

• CQC’s privacy statement

• HMICFRS’ privacy notice

63. At all times, inspectors will focus on children’s experiences and how well practitioners have understood and taken account of their views in assessment, planning and intervention. Inspectors will evaluate how well leaders, managers and representatives of the MASA understand the experiences of children and families.

Hearing the views of children and their families

64. There are various ways for inspectors to hear the views of children and their families. These include:

• talking to children and their families directly, either in person or by phone or video call

• reading views recorded in case records and meeting minutes

• listening to views expressed by advocates on behalf of children

• listening to views expressed by practitioners based on their work with the child and their family

• analysing the responses to consultations with children, families and carers, particularly those the local partnership uses to evaluate and improve the help and protection it provides

65. The lead inspector may ask the local agencies to arrange for inspectors to talk to the children and their families and/or carers. This will usually be the children whose experiences inspectors have chosen to track. Inspectors will provide information to help children and their families and/or carers understand what their involvement in the inspection means. Children and their families and/or carers do not have to take part in the inspection if they do not want to. If a child, parent or carer does not want to speak to an inspector, the local agencies should inform the lead inspector of this. If there are reasons why the local agencies do not think it is appropriate for inspectors to speak to a particular child or their family, they should inform the lead inspector of the reasons.

66. In all activities involving children and their families, inspectors will ask the appropriate practitioner or practitioners in the local area to speak to the child and their family and explain the inspection to them before the inspector speaks to the child or family or observes any work directly with them. Before proceeding with any discussions or observations, inspectors will always check with the child and family that they have understood what their involvement means. Inspectors should note this in their record of the discussion or observation.

Case tracking

67. Tracking is an in-depth look at a child’s experiences in relation to the scope of the inspection. Case tracking will usually include the following activities:

• reviewing children’s records (including case supervision notes)

• reviewing audits carried out by local agencies

• discussing children’s experiences with them and their parents or carers

• discussing children’s experiences with their early help practitioner, social worker, health and education professionals and other practitioners involved with them

• observing the work of practitioners

• speaking to providers of commissioned services for children (when relevant)

Case sampling

68. Case sampling (also referred to as ‘dip sampling’) involves looking at the experiences of a larger number of children. It is not an evaluation of all the help provided for children and their families. Inspectors use sampling to focus on particular aspects of children’s experiences with local services. Inspectors use sampling to investigate areas of potentially strong and weak practice that they identify from other evidence gathered during the inspection. Inspectors may sample children’s cases alongside practitioners or by looking directly at case records.

69. The lead inspector may select some children’s cases for all inspectorates to sample (multi-agency sampling). Inspectors may also carry out single-agency sampling.

70. The lead inspector will decide when the inspection team has evaluated the experiences of a sufficient sample of children to arrive at clear inspection findings.

71. The inspectors will carry out sampling in relation to assessment and decision-making in the MASH. They will sample early help cases and the interface between early help and children in need, evaluating whether children and their families are receiving the right help at the right time.

72. Inspectors will also carry out single-agency sampling. They will evaluate pathways, assessment and decision-making by the police, including where the decision is not to refer to the MASH, and will evaluate the help that children and families receive. Inspectors will focus their single-agency sampling of health services on:

• maternity services

• emergency and urgent care

• public health nursing

• emotional well-being and mental health services

Observations of practice

73. Inspectors may gather evidence by observing meetings that are relevant to the scope of the inspection. These could include:

• strategy discussions or meetings

• multi-agency panels

• child in need or early help meetings, or other planning or review meetings

• any other meetings that are relevant to the scope of the inspection

74. If meetings relevant to the inspection are taking place in week 2, inspectors may join these by video call to observe local practice.

Interviews with practitioners, managers and leaders

75. Inspectors will speak to practitioners and/or managers about the children that they are responsible for, the learning and development of professionals, and the support and supervision they receive. Inspectors will ask them about their views on any strengths and areas for development that are relevant to the scope of the inspection.

76. Inspectors will usually meet with the service leaders listed below:

• DCS

• head of social care

• head of early help

• person responsible for independent scrutiny of the MASA

• police head of public protection or equivalent

• police lead for learning and development (vulnerability strand)

• head of safeguarding and/or designated nurse for safeguarding children in the integrated care system

If these individuals are not available, inspectors may talk to those who deputise for them. If the local area has an alternative service model, inspectors will talk to the local equivalent of these service leaders.

77. Inspectors may speak to stakeholders that provide local services that are relevant to the scope of the inspection, such as providers of commissioned services or voluntary sector organisations. These discussions are for gathering information about the effectiveness of the local safeguarding partners; they are not an inspection of the stakeholder.

Meeting with representatives of the MASA, the independent scrutineer and sub-groups

78. In the week before fieldwork, inspectors will speak to representatives of the MASA by phone or video call, to find out how they support and enable local arrangements for identifying and responding to children and families who need help. This includes finding out how well the representatives understand the strengths and areas for development in multi-agency practice, and how they contribute to improving the multi-agency response to children and families who need help.

79. During fieldwork, inspectors will meet with the representatives of the MASA again to share their findings. This gives the representatives an opportunity to reflect on the findings and provide further evidence if appropriate.

80. The lead inspector will meet with the person responsible for independent scrutiny of the MASA (the independent scrutineer) during fieldwork. This will inform the inspection team’s understanding of the effectiveness of the MASA in relation to the scope of the inspection.

81. Inspectors may decide to meet with any sub-groups of the MASA that are relevant to the inspection.

Role of the schools HMI

82. The schools HMI will review children’s experiences for the cases that the local partnership is asked to audit. They will contact and meet with relevant education providers that the children attend. They will evaluate whether these education providers work effectively with partners so that children receive a well-coordinated multi-agency response that ensures that they get the right support and help at the right time. The schools HMI will meet with education representatives and strategic leaders to evaluate the partnership’s approach to supporting education providers in identifying and helping children who need support. They will also review how partners work together to enable children to access and remain in education.

Issues of concern

83. Inspectors will notify a senior officer as soon as possible if they identify serious issues of concern during the inspection. Examples of these include a failure to follow child protection procedures or when a child is discovered to be at immediate risk of significant harm.

84. The lead inspector will provide a template for recording issues of concern, and will discuss the arrangements for managing this information at the set-up discussion. Inspectors will record their concerns on this template and ask the relevant senior officers to give a written response. The notifying inspector will inform the lead inspector, who will use the KIT meetings to confirm that senior officers have responded to these concerns. The inspector who raised the concern and the lead inspector will evaluate the response and share their evaluation with the senior officer. The lead inspector and senior officer will sign this written record to confirm that they have seen the final version and that the process of review is complete.

Recording evidence

85. Each inspector will maintain a record of the evidence they gather. They should record the source of the evidence and the date and time they gathered it. This includes the date and time of any meetings, discussions and interviews. Each inspectorate will keep its individual inspectors’ evidence records in accordance with its retention policies.

86. Inspectors will record evaluative summaries of their evidence in the inspection team’s shared evidence record. The summaries will set out the inspector’s views about the quality of practice and the difference it makes for children. Two or more inspectors may combine their findings and agree for one of them to record a joint evaluative summary. The shared record will include the notes of team meetings and KIT meetings with the local agencies. Ofsted will retain the shared record on behalf of the inspectorates.

87. Inspectors should complete all evidence records by the end of the fieldwork week. This is so that an accurate record is available to support report writing and quality assurance.

88. The lead inspector will coordinate completion of the evidence record, and will direct inspectors when further evidence is needed. All inspectors should review the shared evidence record regularly and advise the lead inspector when they identify gaps, and when the team has gathered enough evidence.

89. When recording information about specific people, inspectors should use case reference numbers and people’s initials, dates of birth and job titles or roles. Inspectors should only record people’s names in the evidence record when this is necessary to connect related evidence from across the local agencies. Inspectors should delete any names from the evidence record if they are no longer needed.

The letter of findings

90. The lead inspector will write up the inspection findings, drawing on the inspection team’s expertise as required. They will set out the findings in a letter addressed to the senior leaders in the local partnership and the independent scrutineer for the MASA.

91. The letter will set out any strengths, areas for improvement and areas for priority action. It will state the services, practice or arrangements that the findings relate to, but will not state what action the local partnership should take in response to the findings.

Areas for priority action

92. Inspectors will include an area for priority action if they identify a serious weakness that means children are not being protected adequately, or are at risk of significant harm. Priority actions may result from particular or localised failings to protect children, as well as systemic failures or deficits. The inspectorates may take action individually after the inspection to respond to the areas for priority action they identified during the inspection. For further information, see Annex B.

Quality assurance manager

93. A quality assurance manager will be assigned to the inspection to ensure that the inspection guidance, methodology and criteria are applied consistently and correctly, and that any concerns raised by the local agencies about the inspection are resolved. They will review the findings in the final letter to ensure that they link clearly to the evidence from the inspection.

Arrangements for publishing findings

94. The quality assurance manager will support the lead inspector throughout the writing process. Senior managers in all inspectorates will review and agree the findings presented in the letter.

95. The inspectorates will share the draft letter with the DCS and ask them to coordinate a shared review of the factual accuracy of the letter and produce a response on behalf of the local partnership.

96. Inspectors will share a timeline for writing, reviewing and publishing the letter when they notify the local area of the inspection.

Activity	Timescales
Draft letter sent to local partnership to review factual accuracy	15 working days after fieldwork
DCS has 9 working days to bring together the partnership’s comments	24 working days after fieldwork
Final version of the letter sent to the local partnership (pre-publication, under embargo)	31 working days after fieldwork
Letter published	34 working days after fieldwork

After the inspection

Post-inspection feedback survey

97. When the inspectorates send the final letter of findings to the local partnership, we will ask the DCS to coordinate a response from the partnership to an evaluation questionnaire. The inspectorates will use the feedback to improve future inspections.

Action plan after the inspection

98. The Children Act 2004 (Joint Area Reviews) Regulations 2015 allow HMCI to require a written statement of proposed action that responds to the findings. Ofsted will decide whether to require a statement of action in consultation with the CQC and HMICFRS. We will also decide which agency should lead and which agencies should cooperate in making the statement. We will include this decision in the letter of findings. The local partnership may choose to involve other partners in addition to those identified in the letter.

99. The local partnership must make the statement within 70 working days of receiving the final letter of findings.

100. The inspectorates will review the action plan and write a response to the local partnership. The purpose of the inspectorates’ review is to confirm whether the action plan shows that the local agencies have understood the findings. It is the partnership’s responsibility to agree the actions that it should take in response to the inspection findings.

 

Annex A: local information to support the inspection

101. This annex sets out the information that inspectors request when they notify the local partnership of the JTAI. It also sets out the arrangements for selecting the children’s cases that inspectors will ask the local agencies to audit. The flow chart below sets out the process and timeline for sharing this information. The same process is explained in paragraphs 104 to 119.

102. Inspectors will provide details for accessing an online system that local agencies can use to share information. Ofsted configures and manages this system in line with guidance from the National Cyber Security Centre.

103. Inspectors will gather personal information that is necessary to help them evaluate local services. Ofsted’s privacy notices set out what data we collect, what we do with it, how long we keep it for and people’s rights under the Data Protection Act 2018.

Week 1: selecting children’s cases to audit and evaluate

104. By 5pm on Tuesday in week 1, the local authority, working with partner agencies, should share the lists of child-level data set out in the table below. These lists are similar to the information requested in Ofsted’s framework for the inspection of local authority children’s services. For a JTAI, these lists should include some additional data fields. These are set out in the table below. A template ODS file the local area can use is published with this guidance.

List	ILACS list number	Additional fields
All early help assessments in the 6 months before the date of inspection. Also, current early help interventions that are being coordinated through the local authority.	List 2 (early help)	Outcome of early help (as defined by local area) Stepped up to a child in need in the last 6 months? Yes / No Stepped down to an early help assessment/support from child in need in the last 6 months? Yes / No
All those in receipt of services as a child in need at the point of inspection, or in the 6 months before the inspection	List 6 (children in need)	Stepped up to a child in need in the last 6 months? Yes / No Stepped down to an early help assessment / support from child in need in the last 6 months? Yes / No

105. By 5pm on Tuesday of week 1, the local authority and partner agencies should also share 3 lists with the following information:

• up to 10 children who have been receiving early help and help as a child in need

• up to 10 children who have been stepped up/down in the last 6 months

• up to 10 children for whom the local partners think that there has been positive engagement with the child and their family to improve outcomes for the child

For each child on these lists, the local authority should include the child’s unique ID; the agencies involved with the child and their family; and the dates during which they were a child in need and/or the dates during which they received early help.

106. By 5pm on Wednesday, the lead inspector will select 20 children from the lists provided, and ask the local authority to provide additional information on these 20.

107. By 5pm on Thursday, the local authority should answer the following questions about each of the 20 children:

• Is the child known to the police?

• Are the child’s parents or carers known to the police?

• Which health services has the child received support from (for example, school nurse, child and adolescent mental health services, commissioned emotional health and well-being services, including voluntary services, education providers or primary care and emergency department)?

108. By 11am on Friday in week one, the lead inspector will select 5 to 7 children from the 20. They will ask the local partnership to audit these children’s cases.

109. The lead inspector may phone the local authority to confirm that the cases selected include multi-agency involvement and current or recent work in relation to children and their families receiving help. The lead inspector may ask the agencies to review the cases on the electronic recording system to ensure this.

Week 2: children’s case records

110. The list below sets out the information that inspectors will ask for about the children whose experiences the local agencies have been asked to audit. Whenever possible, the local agencies should share this information electronically by 5pm on Tuesday in week 2. If this is not possible, the local agencies should liaise with the relevant inspectorate to give access to this information during fieldwork.

111. The local authority should share:

• the initial referral, contact or notification (if applicable)

• the child’s most recent assessment, including early help assessment

• the child’s most recent plan and/or the most recent review of the plan, including any healthcare plans and early help plans

• the records of multi-agency discussions or meetings, including strategy discussions when relevant

• any section 47 investigation documentation

• the latest return home interview and any subsequent risk assessments (if appropriate)

• the most recent pre-sentence report about the child or any relevant adult (where applicable)

• a chronology of significant events in the 6 months before the inspection; these may include:

  • episodes of the child going missing from home or education

  • any contact that the child, or any relevant adult, has had with the police – as either a victim or suspect – such as reported incidents, crimes and investigations, and reports of the child being missing or absent

  • information on events earlier than the 6 months before the inspection when this is necessary to understand the context of the child’s experience

112. The police force should share:

• incident logs

• crime and non-crime reports

• referral information

• missing children records

• custody records

113. Health services should share:

• assessments of need or risk and the action taken

• evaluations of the impact of their work

• follow-up of referrals and evidence of feedback

• evidence of information-sharing with and from other health and multi-agency partners

• evidence of health agencies’ contributions to decision-making, including at meetings

• evidence of managers’ supervision/oversight of health practitioners’ work with the child

• evidence of escalation to multi-agency partners, including children’s social care, when there are professional disagreements about decision-making

The specific health agencies that help each child will vary. The CQC will determine which agencies to request information from.

Week 2: local partnership audits

114. The local agencies should provide their joint evaluations – and, if possible, individual agencies’ evaluations – of children’s experiences electronically by the end of Thursday in week 2.

115. Inspectors will ask to meet with the practitioners involved in these children’s cases during the fieldwork week for a discussion about their work. At least 3 of these meetings will be multi-agency discussions.

Week 1: other child-level lists and planned multi-agency meetings

116. By 5pm on Friday in week 1, the local agencies should provide the lead inspector with details of the multi-agency meetings taking place during the fieldwork week, including: strategy discussions and other multi-agency meetings or panels relevant to the scope.

117. The local authority should also share the child-level data lists set out in the table below. These lists are similar to the information requested in Ofsted’s framework for the inspection of local authority children’s services. For a JTAI, these lists should include some additional data fields.

List	ILACS list number	Additional fields
All contacts received in the 6 months before the date of inspection.	List 1 (contacts)	Outcome of contact (as defined by local area)
All statutory assessment in accordance with section 17 or section 47 of the Children Act 1989 in the 6 months before the inspection	List 4 (assessments)	Did the assessment result in an early help assessment? Yes / No If yes, what was the start date of the early help assessment?

Week 2: performance and management information

118. By 5pm on Tuesday in week 2, the local agencies should provide the information set out below. Inspectors will use this information to understand how members of the local partnership work together.

119. The local partnership should not provide everything that it holds on each subject. The inspectors will want only the area’s best and most recent examples that relate to the scope of the inspection. Inspectors will not review information that they deem to fall outside the scope of the inspection.

The local authority

Number	Item	Description
1.1	Local authority organisational structures	Organisational structures showing lines of reporting and accountability
1.2	Management information reports	Reports for those children within the scope of the inspection (children and families receiving help), at a local level and an agency level
1.3	Threshold criteria	Assessment and threshold criteria for helping families (including early help) and protecting children
1.4	Practice audits	Practice audits, including multi-agency audits, over the 12 months before the inspection, relating to the theme of the inspection
1.5	Improvement plans	Improvement or action plans
1.6	Commissioned services	Details of any community or voluntary organisations in the area that have been commissioned to provide help for children and their families
1.7	Local analysis of need	Local analysis of need, strategies and action plans relating to children and families who need help, any success criteria and any analysis impact
1.8	Strategic meetings	Minutes of strategic multi-agency meetings relating to children and families who need help
1.9	MASH	Terms of reference for the MASH or local equivalent
1.10	Engagement with children	How the local authority engages children and families in evaluating and improving the design and delivery of services relevant to the scope of the inspection
1.11	Escalation policy	Any policy relating to escalation following disagreement between agencies

Multi-agency safeguarding arrangements

Number	Item	Description
2.1	MASA structure	Organisational structures showing lines of accountability and reporting
2.2	Management information reports	Management information reports: please inform the lead inspector if these are the same as the reports shared by the individual agencies
2.3	MASA meeting minutes	Minutes of the local safeguarding partners from the 12 months before the inspection (including executive board meetings where applicable)
2.4	Sub-group minutes	Sub-group minutes relevant to the scope of the inspection (requested by the lead inspector)
2.5	MASA audits	Any audits that are relevant to the scope of the inspection
2.6	MASA annual report	The most recent MASA annual report setting out the effectiveness of local arrangements
2.7	Reviews	Rapid reviews and practice reviews carried out in the 18 months before the inspection
2.8	Action plans	All relevant action plans, including those following rapid reviews, practice reviews and multi-agency audits
2.9	Engagement with children	Information about how the local partnership seeks feedback from children and engages them in evaluating and improving services for exploited children
2.10	Escalation policy	Any policy relating to escalation following disagreement between agencies about decisions

The police force

Number	Item	Description
3.1	Police organisational structure	Organisational structure showing lines of reporting and accountability
3.2	Learning and development	Learning and development regarding vulnerability, specifically child protection and early help, including for frontline resources
3.3	Referral document	Child protection referral document
3.4	Missing children	Policy and guidance on missing children
3.5	Strategies	Strategy, policies and guidance relating to information-sharing
3.6	Minutes on strategic governance	Three most recent sets of minutes for any of the force’s strategic governance meetings related to protection of children
3.7	Audits and action plans	Any audits and action plan(s) relating to children in the scope of the inspection
3.8	Performance management	Performance management information and or data for children who are referred to social care services
3.9	Child-centred strategy	Child-centred policing strategy and associated delivery plan

Health partners

Number	Item	Description
4.1	Integrated care board (ICB) provider organisational structure	Organisational structures of the ICB and provider organisations, showing lines of reporting and accountability, including details of local health commissioning and/or provider services, and links between operational and safeguarding teams and the local authority
4.2	Commissioning arrangements	ICB and provider services, with details of who is providing commissioned services, including the emergency departments, maternity, public health nursing, and emotional well-being and mental health services
4.3	Annual reports	Annual reports from ICB or CCG and provider services on safeguarding and child protection, including for children looked after
4.4	Provider policies	Provider policies relating to early help and safeguarding, including local primary care policies
4.5	Audits and action plans	Any commissioner or provider audits of early help and safeguarding
4.6	Referral data	Most recent data on health referrals to the multi-agency safeguarding hub (or equivalent)
4.7	Training	Level 3 safeguarding training data by service, including topics
4.8	Strategy	Local area’s strategy on the emotional well-being and mental health needs of its children

Annex B: what the inspectorates will do if there is an area for priority action

If an area for priority action is relevant to more than one agency within the scope of the inspection or the MASA

120. The inspectorates will discuss how to coordinate their follow-up with individual agencies (as set out below). We will share the final letter of findings with the government departments before it is published. We may offer to discuss the findings with the departments so that they can, if they wish, coordinate their response. The inspectorates will consider whether to carry out a JTAI with the same scope after the local partnership has had sufficient time to respond to the area for priority action.

If an area for priority action is relevant to the local authority

121. Ofsted will inform the Department for Education (DfE). The DfE may contact the local authority to discuss the findings. Ofsted will also follow the process set out in the inspection of local authority children’s services framework, including asking for an action plan.

If an area for priority action is relevant to a health service

122. The CQC inspectors will immediately notify their manager. A management review meeting will be called. This meeting may be attended by representatives from the regulation team and other key individuals, as necessary.

123. At the management review meeting, the inspection team will present the issues, and a decision will be made as to whether regulatory action is required. The regulatory response may include arranging a meeting with providers, organising a further follow-up visit, and/or beginning enforcement activity according to the CQC’s enforcement policy.

If an area for priority action is relevant to a police force

124. HMICFRS will report the area for priority action as a cause of concern. A cause of concern will always be accompanied by one or more recommendations. HMICFRS will recommend that the police force (and sometimes other bodies) make changes to alleviate or eradicate the concern. New and existing causes of concern are tracked through the force monitoring process.

125. There are 2 phases to the monitoring process: scan and engage. A force’s progress in resolving a cause of concern is reviewed through the scan stage of the monitoring process. If a force is not responding to a cause of concern, or if it is not succeeding in managing, mitigating or eradicating the cause of concern, it will probably be moved to the engage phase.

126. At this stage, the HMI will meet with the chief constable and police and crime commissioner (or equivalent) to set out the cause of concern and identify actions that need to be taken. Based on these discussions, the chief constable will carry out a root-cause analysis and use it to form an improvement plan. The level of improvement required to be ‘disengaged’ will be set out by the HMI. The HMI may also approach other organisations to organise support for the force.

127. HMICFRS may decide to re-visit/re-inspect a particular area of activity. This would focus on the cause of concern identified in the initial inspection.

 

Annex C: complaints about JTAIs

128. If concerns arise during an inspection, these should be raised with the lead inspector or quality assurance manager as soon as possible during the inspection. This provides an opportunity to resolve the matter before the inspection is completed.

129. If it has not been possible to resolve concerns, the local partnership can make a complaint. There are specific processes for:

• complaints about the inspection process and/or the findings

• complaints about an inspector’s conduct

130. The local partnership can make a complaint from when it receives the final letter of findings (the pre-publication stage) to up to 10 working days after the inspection findings are published.

131. We will not usually withdraw findings that we have already published, unless there are exceptional circumstances. The local partnership can ask us to withdraw the letter of findings when it submits its complaint. The request should set out any exceptional circumstances that may be relevant. Ofsted’s national director for regulation and social care will decide whether to withdraw the published findings in discussion with the relevant Ofsted regional director and the other inspectorates. There may be circumstances when a decision needs to be made urgently and a discussion between the inspectorates is not possible. In these situations, Ofsted’s national director will make the decision and advise the other inspectorates at the earliest opportunity.

Complaints about the inspection process and/or findings

132. Complaints relating to the inspection arrangements or findings should be submitted to Ofsted through our complaints form. Ofsted will appoint a lead investigator to coordinate an investigation with the other inspectorates. We will follow the timeline set out in the table below.

Milestone	Activity
From receiving the pre-publication report to 10 working days after the report is published	Local partnership submits complaint to Ofsted.
Within 5 working days of complaint being made	Ofsted sends an acknowledgement letter to the complainants, setting out the timeline for considering their complaint. The letter will confirm whether any request to withdraw the report has been agreed. Ofsted shares copies of the complaint with the other inspectorates.
Within 30 working days of complaint being made	The response letter will undergo final checks and sign-off in Ofsted. Ofsted will share the final response with all inspectorates before sending it to the complainant.

Complaints about inspectors’ conduct

133. Complaints about an inspector’s conduct should be submitted to the relevant inspectorate. The relevant inspectorate will use its own processes to investigate the complaint.

134. In order to maintain confidentiality, the details of the complaint and the outcome may not be shared across all inspectorates. However, inspectorates must share whether a complaint about an inspector’s conduct has been upheld so that any potential implications for the findings can be considered. The inspectorates have agreed the following milestones for keeping each other informed of the complaint’s progress.

Milestone	Activity
Within 5 working days of complaint being made	An acknowledgement letter will be sent to the complainant. The letter will confirm expected response deadlines, and will explain which inspectorate will carry out the investigation. All inspectorates will be informed that a complaint has been received.
Within 30 working days of complaint being made	All inspectorates will be informed of whether the complaint has been upheld. The relevant inspectorate will respond to the complainant.

Complaints about inspection process or findings and inspectors’ conduct

135. Complaints about the inspection process or findings and inspectors’ conduct will be considered on a case-by-case basis. In some cases, it may be appropriate for queries about inspectors’ conduct to be included in a broader complaint investigation. In other cases, for reasons of confidentiality, complaints about conduct might be considered separately.

136. When this occurs, it is important to consider whether the outcome of a complaint about conduct could affect the robustness of the inspection process itself or the inspection results. The relevant inspectorates will be consulted in all such cases.

Print or save to PDF

To print this content you can:

• use the ‘Print this page’ button under the Contents menu

• right-click or secondary click on the page and choose ‘Print’ in the menu

• press Ctrl + P on a Windows keyboard or Command + P on a Mac

You can also use these options and change the printer destination to save the content as a PDF.

Instructions may vary depending on which internet browser you use, such as Internet Explorer or Google Chrome, and the type of device you use, such as a phone or laptop. You can find your print and save options in your browser’s menu.