Features

A Unique Child: Safeguarding - Guiding lights

A Unique Child Legislation Practice Inclusion Safeguarding & Child Protection
The introduction of multi-agency safeguarding hubs staffed by a
pool of professionals is creating a joined-up, more responsive approach
to child protection, as Gabriella Jozwiak reports.

The revised Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) coming into force on 1 September states providers must have and implement policies and procedures to safeguard children in line with the guidance and procedures of their Local Safeguarding Children Board. In some local authority areas, this will mean playing a role in the local Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH) - a joined-up approach to child protection and designed to prioritise the most important cases.

A MASH brings together staff from a range of agencies, such as local authority children's social care, education, probation, police and health. The multi-agency team of people are still employed by their individual agencies, but are co-located in one office. The aim of this arrangement is to improve the quality of information sharing and decision-making at the earliest opportunity to reduce potential risks to children and young people.

The need to improve safeguarding responses arose after a number of high-profile child protection cases. A serious case review into the death of 17-month-old Peter Connelly, known as Baby P, in the London borough of Haringey, found the various agencies surrounding the child when he was alive had failed to communicate and take a joined-up response. A subsequent review of child protection by Lord Laming in 2009 recommended assessment processes should 'be a joint or parallel assessment, with all professionals concerned for the child's safety and welfare'.

The first MASH was created by Devon County Council in 2010. The local authority set up the hub in response to the national climate and research into its own safeguarding cases that showed key information was not being shared between agencies. As a result, the council pooled operations officers, social workers, police officers, education and health representatives to tackle child protection together.

MAKING A JUDGEMENT

The agencies involved in a MASH can vary depending on the area, but they all work in the same way by partnering with other agencies and institutions. When a MASH receives information about a potential case, a social work manager makes a judgement about the level of risk to the child. This category determines the timescale for a decision to be made, which can range from a few hours (four in urgent cases) to a few days.

Information is shared securely between agencies within the hub and is gathered from teachers, GPs, health visitors, school nurses, police officers and others, who are contacted by their professional lead who sits within the hub. Once this information is gathered, a social work manager decides what further action is required. This approach means a serious case can be recognised more swiftly. Equally, it helps services recognise when a situation is not serious and, therefore, avoids them wasting valuable resources.

Nursery workers, childminders and other early years professionals have key roles to play in a MASH. They may engage with them in three ways:

1. By seeking information, advice or guidance about a safeguarding concern if they have identified a child who might be at risk, before deciding whether or not to make a referral to the local authority

2. By responding to a request for information about a child who has been referred to the MASH.

3. By taking action as a result of an outcome from the MASH. This could include, for example, improving safeguarding procedures.

TARGETS AND EVALUATION

There are currently about 40 MASHs operating in England, according to the most recent Home Office data in March 2014. Their locations include Staffordshire, East Sussex, Nottingham, Reading and Norfolk. The majority of MASHs are in London.

In 2011, the London Safeguarding Children Board set a target to establish a MASH in each of the capital's 32 boroughs. By May this year, there were 30 MASHs operating in London. The remaining two boroughs are expected to have a MASH in the near future.

A Home Office evaluation of multi-agency working across the country published in July 2013 found the MASH approach led to positive outcomes. These include more robust decision-making among professionals because decisions are made based on sufficient, accurate and timely intelligence. MASH officers said the working arrangement helped avoid duplication of process across agencies. They also said the MASH reduced 'the risk of "borderline cases" slipping through the net without any action being taken'.

An evaluation of the London MASHs published in December last year suggested the turnaround time for child protection cases judged as high or complex needs had almost halved in some areas as a result of the set-ups.

Researchers at the University of Greenwich reviewed results in five boroughs. They found the mean turnaround time for cases initially assessed as high or complex needs (level 3) reduced from two-and-a-half days to just more than one-and-a-quarter days. Low to vulnerable cases (level 2) were also dealt with more swiftly - from four-and-a-half days to less than two-and-a-half days.

PRAISE AND CHALLENGES

The MASH model has also been praised by Ofsted. In September 2011, it described the Devon MASH as an 'example of effective joint working' in its report, Good Practice by Local Safeguarding Children Boards. A government-commissioned review of child protection conducted by Professor Eileen Munro in 2011 included a case study of the Devon MASH as an example of good practice.

These evaluations also note challenges in creating MASHs. In Devon, data sharing because of data protection and confidentiality between agencies was a problem when setting up the model. To overcome this, the MASH managers worked with the Information Commissioner to agree a 'sterile environment' policy that ensured team members could share information safely.

The Home Office identified one of the challenges of setting up MASHs as funding constraints, particularly in the future. It suggested that despite streamlining processes, the approach could lead to increased demand for services.

Another important factor in ensuring a MASH meets its objectives is for all professionals working with children to know their role.

A London Safeguarding Children Board spokeswoman told Nursery World that it is important early years practitioners are 'aware of their statutory responsibilities, familiar with local child protection procedures, confident about raising issues with families and making referrals, and able to understand and make judgements on information sharing'.

MORE INFORMATION


CASE STUDY 1: ZEEBA DAYCARE, LONDON

Manager of Zeeba Daycare, Wanstead, East London

'The London Borough of Redbridge launched its MASH in March 2013. Since that time, we made it part of our Zeeba Daycare policies and procedures.

'The MASH service for us acts as a centre we can contact when we have any concerns about the safety of a child at the nursery. The MASH staff will assess the risks involved with each particular case and keep us informed of what information they need from us and actions that will be taken.

'The positives of working with MASH are that if we have any concerns at any time, we know exactly who we can contact to raise these and that they will be followed up. We can share the MASH contact details with all nursery staff and parents too, so that way they know exactly who to contact. This helps avoid any confusion about not knowing what to do and leaving it unchecked.

'The MASH has access to professionals in all areas and, as a complete team around the child, we can work together to keep children safe. We have used the MASH service before and it is reassuring to know that it's easy to access, and that each child's safety is of paramount importance.'


CASE STUDY 2: HAVERING, LONDON

An example of a case dealt with by the London Borough of Havering MASH in 2013, provided by the London Safeguarding Children Board

'MASH received a notification of concern about a woman who was seen in the community occasionally under the influence of alcohol. She was offering her services to look after children of other families in her local area on a casual basis. She was not thought to be a registered childminder. The notification was prioritised as "amber" for multi-agency research.

'Research within the MASH revealed the woman had previously been convicted and had served a term of imprisonment for being responsible for the death her own child, some years earlier.

'The MASH outcome was an immediate allocation to a social worker for assessment, including a home visit. This included disclosure and warning to specific vulnerable families that their children should not be left in the care of the woman.

'The intervention also revealed that the woman was pregnant and action was taken to support her and the unborn child.'