Following the completion of an action plan a review needs to be arranged to monitor and evaluate the consequence of intervention and determine whether the outcomes have been achieved. Each review needs to be recorded electronically on a review proforma which will be stored on the CAF database.
Reviews should happen with consultation and attendance from the child/ young person, parent and relevant professionals.
Practitioners can complete their own invites using the review invite templates for agencies & parents/carers, and forwarding the completed agencies invited to review form to the CAF team. This allows the CAF team to provide access to the stored CAF for anyone invited, without their details on the form, access will not be permitted.
The parent and child evaluate the multi agency plan using a 1- 10 scale of how effective the action plan and process has been to them. The completed review form is stored on the CAF database. If there is no record of evaluation the CAF will be returned to the practitioner for a score, if this is not completed a score of 1 ( not very useful) will be entered by the CAF team and reflected in the overall CAF evaluation reports.
Ideally reviews should be set at intervals appropriate to the needs of the child/young person which will often be around four to six weeks, but not more than 6 monthly.
Following a review it may be appropriate to close the CAF episode, refer to specialist service or agree to hold another review. Any decision / outcome of the review must be recorded on the form stating the reason why. All paperwork should then be submitted to the CAF team including any changes, outcomes and future planned meetings.
Common Assessments are intended to be solution focussed and therefore should undertake solution focussed meetings to identify measurable goals that can be achieved in a realistic timescale. Evidence indicates that Common Assessment episodes tend to last approximately six to nine months. Within this timescale two or three reviews are generally undertaken.
Escalation to Local Intervention Panels
A citywide review of existing Multi Agency Panels has recently been undertaken. This will inform future developments of Integrated Processes that ensure support for cases where multiagency intervention, usually coordinated around a common assessment, has been unable to bring about the necessary improvement of outcomes for a child or young person.
Findings from the review have shown that better outcomes are achieved for families when services are engaged in working together to problem solve and improve flexibility of service delivery at a local level.
The report concludes that Panels working at two distince levels of intervention are to be established. The first Intervention Panel would support cases after a common assessment has been undertaken, if this process is not effecting sufficient improvement in outcomes for the families involved.
The second Children Leeds Panel would be to consider those cases of a more complex and entrenched nature. These would have a remit around multiple additional and/ or specialist needs. A common assessment may have been completed but the needs have escalated to become more complex and agencies are unable to bring about the necessary change despite intervention of specialists. The panel would then consider what else can be done to support the family by being more creative and flexible.
Some of the benefits of establishing the new MAP framework include:
Increases capacity to safeguard vulnerable children, young people and families who are not making progress despite intervention from existing servicesImprove consistency of specialist intervention and understanding of service thresholds citywide. Increase shared ownership, accountability, and governance of cases that are ‘stuck’ within integrated working arrangements.
consistency and commonality across the new panel structure, in terms of delivery, safeguarding, monitoring and performance management.
Failure to agree
At times there may be a difference of opinion regarding the review / plan / CAF. Cases where there are disagreements can often be resolved by practitioners themselves through discussion with colleagues and in some cases involvement of line managers in relevant agencies. Where necessary, cases can be escalated through to each area based Integrating Processes Co-ordinator to support resolution at a local level. If there are practice and resource issues that cannot be resolved locally the Integrating Processes Manager may highlight at a strategic level, implications for planning, commissioning, development and evaluation of services.
There may be times when it is not possible to agree the plan for a child/young person. This may be because of a difference of opinion in respect of the analysis of the additional need, or the allocation of resources from a particular agency is not agreed, or the resource required is not available because of budgetary or other constraints. Under any of these circumstances the child must continue to come first and continue to receive all available support. Unmet needs must be recorded, with clear evidence of the nature of the need and the recommendation of an appropriate service response.
It is important that priorities for resource allocation remain with individual agencies, but that partners can discuss together the issues of wider resource allocation within clusters and wedges. These discussions should ensure that gaps in service provision are escalated through the Children Leeds Partnership structures to the Director of Children’s Services for resolution.