Guidance

Solihull: inspecting the multi-agency response to identification of initial need and risk

Updated 21 February 2022

Applies to England

1. The Secretaries of State for Education, Health and Social Care, the Home Office and Justice, in accordance with section 20(1)(b) of the Children Act 2004, have requested that His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills (HMCI), together with the Care Quality Commission (CQC), the Chief Inspector of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services and the Chief Inspector of Probation for England and Wales, carry out a joint targeted area inspection (JTAI) in Solihull. The JTAI will look at how all local agencies are working together to protect children and improve their well-being. You can read the letter requesting that the inspectorates carry out this JTAI.

2. The JTAI will include evaluating:

• how agencies work effectively, individually and together, to improve the well-being of children, including ensuring that children get the right help and protection at the right time

• the application of appropriate thresholds, effective information-sharing and timely intervention

• how children are protected through effective multi-agency arrangements at the ‘front door’

• how leaders and managers have good oversight of practice, work effectively together, create the right conditions for effective practice and act where improvements are needed

• how the multi-agency safeguarding arrangements (MASA) actively monitor, promote, coordinate and evaluate the work of the safeguarding partners (the local authority, the clinical commissioning group and the chief officer of police) and relevant partners, including schools, as specified in section 16E of the Children Act 2004 and the Child Safeguarding Practice Review and Relevant Agency (England) Regulations 2018, and whether this leads to improvements in the initial multi-agency response at the front door

3. Following the death of Arthur Labinjo-Hughes in June 2020, the local agencies carried out a rapid review. The JTAI will provide a view about whether all agencies have implemented improvements as a result of learning from that review. It will give a clear picture of how local agencies are working together now to protect children from harm.

Scope of the inspection

4. The agencies in the scope of this inspection are the police, children’s social care, education, probation services, youth offending team, and relevant health services.

5. The inspection will evaluate the multi-agency response to identification of initial need and risk. This includes looking at the effectiveness of:

• the front doors of individual agencies, including a sample of health services, and their identification and response to need and risk

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

• individual agencies’ contributions to the multi-agency response, including early decision-making across early help, child in need and child protection

6. The scope does not include longer-term interventions with children and families.

7. The scope includes how the local partnership, through the MASA, actively monitors, promotes, coordinates and evaluates the work of the statutory partners. The lead representatives for safeguarding partners are:

• the local authority chief executive

• the accountable officer of a clinical commissioning group

• a chief officer of police

8. We will consider the impact of leaders and managers on practice with children and families in relation to the front door.

9. This includes the timeliness of this work and the impact of the local area’s actions to improve the multi-agency response to children in need of help and protection.

10. The inspection will focus on recent practice. This is practice within the last 6 months. The inspection will evaluate how well current practice takes account of relevant history in children’s cases.

The inspection team

11. The inspection team will consist of:

• 2 social care inspectors from Ofsted, one of whom will be the lead inspector

• 1 education inspector from Ofsted

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

• 2 inspectors from CQC

• 2 inspectors from HMI Probation (covering probation and youth offending services)

12. Not all inspectors will be on site for all the fieldwork days. Some may work remotely. The lead inspector will be clear with the local area about the arrangements.

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

Overview of the inspection

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

Week	Activities
Week 1	Notifications and set-up discussion (off site) Inspectors request information to support the inspection (this is set out in Annex A of this guidance) Local agencies share information to support the inspection Inspectors select some children and ask the local agencies to evaluate their experiences. Inspectors carry out planning and pre-inspection analysis
Weeks 2 to 4	Local area evaluates children’s experiences Local agencies share information to support the inspection Inspectors carry out pre-inspection analysis and review information set out in Annex A Inspectors work with the local agencies to agree a fieldwork timetable Inspectors meet virtually with local leaders to discuss arrangements for the inspection and the local context.
Week 5	Fieldwork

Week 1: notification and case selection

15. On day 1 of the inspection, inspectors will contact the relevant leaders in the local area to notify them of the inspection. Inspectors will ask them to share the information set out in Annex A of this guidance. Inspectors will provide a timeline for this to happen.

16. Inspectors will offer the local leaders an opportunity for a multi-agency set-up discussion. This is an opportunity for inspectors to set out the arrangements for the inspection and for local agencies to ask questions.

17. By the end of week 1, the lead inspector will use data provided by the local agencies to select 7 children. They will ask the local agencies to audit these children’s cases. The audits should cover the period within the scope of the inspection up to the end of day 3 of the inspection.

18. Inspectors will also begin analysing data and intelligence about the local area to inform their lines of enquiry. They will start to develop a timetable for the fieldwork.

Weeks 2 to 4: children’s case audits and pre-inspection analysis

19. Starting in week 2, the local agencies should audit the 7 children’s cases selected by the lead inspector. Inspectors will ask to meet with the practitioners involved in some of these children’s cases during the fieldwork week for a multi-agency discussion about their work.

20. During this period, the local agencies should also share the performance and management information set out in Annex A. Inspectors will refine their analysis based on the information that the local agencies shared.

21. In week 4, inspectors may carry out interviews with local leaders and practitioners or observe multi-agency meetings relevant to the scope of the inspections. These activities will happen remotely.

22. Working with the local agencies, inspectors will agree a timetable for week 5: the fieldwork week.

Week 5: inspection team meetings

23. Inspectors will meet when they arrive on site for fieldwork to review any matters remaining from the pre-inspection period.

24. 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 to close lines of enquiry

• identify any new lines of enquiry

• 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

25. 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 and use their professional judgement to determine the weight and significance of their findings. They will identify any strengths, areas for improvement and areas for priority action.

Week 5: meetings with senior leaders

Initial on-site meeting with senior leaders

26. 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 local leaders have.

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

Keep-in-touch meetings

28. Inspectors will offer local senior leaders an opportunity for keep-in-touch (KIT) meetings throughout fieldwork. KIT meetings are opportunities for senior leaders to hear emerging findings from the inspection. Leaders can use these meetings to ask questions about the findings to help the lead inspector identify when further evidence is needed.

29. KIT meetings will be short and will 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.

30. 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 an appropriate senior leader from each agency to attend. Any additional attendees should be discussed with the lead inspector in advance.

31. Attendance at KIT meetings can be in person or by phone/video call. Whether or not a local agency is represented at the meetings will not affect the inspection findings.

Week 5: Gathering and evaluating evidence

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

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

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

• interviewing practitioners, managers, leaders and stakeholders

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

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

• contextual issues specific to the local area in relation to the theme of the inspection

34. Inspectors will gather personal information that is necessary to help them evaluate local services. Our 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.

35. At all times, inspectors will focus on the experiences of children and how well practitioners have understood and taken account of children’s views in assessment, planning and intervention. Inspectors will evaluate how well leaders and managers understand the experiences of children and families that need help and protection.

Case audits

36. For cases that the lead inspector selects for the local area to audit, we will review the evaluations carried out by local agencies and key documents about work with the child.

37. Inspectors will ask to meet with the practitioners involved in some of these children’s cases during the fieldwork week for a multi-agency discussion about their work.

38. Inspectors may discuss children’s experiences individually with the professionals involved with the child. This may include the social worker, health and education professionals, the police, and probation and youth offending professionals.

Case sampling

39. Case sampling is a targeted look at the experiences of children.

40. The lead inspector will select some cases for all inspectorates to sample. Inspectors will carry out additional sampling, including to follow up on specific lines of enquiry. Inspectors may sample children’s cases alongside practitioners or by looking directly at case records.

41. Sampling is not an evaluation of all the help a child has been given. Inspectors will focus on practice linked to the scope and evaluation criteria.

Observations of practice

42. Inspectors may gather evidence by observing meetings, such as:

• an initial child protection conference

• a strategy discussion/meeting

• a multi-agency panel

Interviews with practitioners, managers and leaders

43. Inspectors will talk to practitioners and/or managers about individual cases; training, learning, support and supervision; and the strengths and areas for development in relation to the front door.

Role of the education HMI

44. The education HMI will carry out case sampling, contact a sample of schools that have made referrals to the multi-agency front door and meet with the relevant strategic leaders. They will evaluate whether schools contribute effectively to a well-coordinated multi-agency response to ensure that children get the right help and protection at the right time.

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

45. We will meet with representatives of the MASA in the week before fieldwork to understand how they support and enable local arrangements at the front door to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. This includes how well they understand the strengths and areas for development in multi-agency practice and their impact on improvements in the multi-agency response to identification of initial need and risk.

46. We will meet with the representatives of the MASA again during fieldwork share our findings. This will be an opportunity to reflect on our findings and provide further evidence if appropriate.

47. The lead inspector will meet with the person responsible for independent scrutiny of the MASA (the independent scrutineer) before and during fieldwork to inform our understanding of the effectiveness of the MASA in relation to the front door.

48. We may decide to meet with any sub-groups of the MASA that are relevant to the scope and to follow up lines of enquiry.

The feedback meeting

49. On the last on-site day, the lead inspector will invite all senior agency leaders and the independent scrutineer to meet with the inspection team to hear the provisional findings. The Ofsted lead inspector and at least one inspector from each inspectorate will attend. We will ask the local agencies to keep attendance to a minimum to help keep the discussions manageable and focused.

50. We 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

• disseminate the findings throughout the partnership accurately

• build on their strengths and inform discussions about improvement

51. The lead inspector will outline the overall findings and invite members of the inspection team to share the evidence supporting these. Inspectors will provide a summary of the evidence that demonstrates the strengths and areas for improvement in the local area. Inspectors will be clear about which issues are most significant for the experiences of children.

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

53. The findings are provisional pending quality assurance after fieldwork has finished.

Issues of concern

54. Inspectors will notify a senior officer as soon as possible if they identify serious issues of concern during the inspection. Examples of these are:

• a failure to follow child protection procedures

• a child is discovered to be at immediate risk of significant harm

55. Inspectors will share their concerns in writing and ask the relevant senior officer(s) to provide a written response. The notifying inspector will inform the lead inspector, who will ensure that the response is received through the KIT meetings. 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 they have seen the final version and that the process of review is complete.

Recording evidence

56. 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 retain its individual inspectors’ evidence records in accordance with its retention policies.

57. Inspectors will record evaluative summaries of their evidence in the inspection team’s shared evidence record. The summaries will set out the inspector’s view about the quality of practice and the difference this makes for children. Two or more inspectors may coordinate their findings and agree for one of them to record an evaluative summary on their behalf. 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.

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

59. 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 against a line of enquiry.

60. When recording information about specific people, inspectors should use case reference numbers, people’s initials, dates of birth and job titles/roles. Inspectors should only record people’s names in the evidence record when this is necessary to accurately 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

61. The lead inspector will allocate responsibility for writing up the inspection findings. They will compile and edit these contributions into a letter addressed to the senior leaders in the local partnership.

Areas for priority action

62. Inspectors will include an area for priority action when they identify a serious weakness that is placing children at risk of inadequate protection or 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. For further information, see Annex B.

Arrangements for publishing findings

63. 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.

64. We will share the draft letter with the director of children’s services and ask them to coordinate a shared review of the factual accuracy of the letter and a response on behalf of the local partnership.

65. The inspectors will share a timeline for writing, reviewing and publishing the report when they notify the local area of the inspection.

Action plan after the inspection

66. 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 issue this in consultation with CQC, HMICFRS and HMI Probation. 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.

67. The local partnership must make the statement within 70 working days of receiving the final inspection report.

68. 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 responsibility of the partnership to agree the actions it should take in response to the inspection findings.

Evaluation criteria

Children’s experiences and progress

Number	Criteria
EC1	Agencies work effectively together to ensure that children get the right help at the right time.
EC2	Children and their families feel that their views have been heard. This leads to improvements in the help and support that they receive.
EC3	The quality and timeliness of help and support prevent children’s needs and risks from escalating.
EC4	The impact of abuse, neglect and exploitation on children is reduced because children and their families can access a sufficient range of local services, for example community and voluntary services, including therapeutic help that improves children’s and adult family members’ emotional well-being and safety.

Impact of practice on children’s experiences and progress

Number	Criteria
EC5	Professionals identify children in need of help and protection. There is a timely and effective response to referrals, including out of normal office hours. Thresholds to access assessments and services are understood by professionals and are applied consistently. Professionals make appropriate referrals, including to children’s social care. This leads to children and families receiving effective, proportionate and timely interventions that improve their situation.
EC6	Referrals are of high quality and timely. Professionals respond to them appropriately, proportionately and in a timely way.
EC7	Children receive the right help and protection because of the application of appropriate thresholds, effective information-sharing and timely intervention.
EC8	Children are protected through effective multi-agency arrangements. 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 and protection provided meet need and reduce risk.
EC9	Children and families experience child protection enquiries that are thorough, focused on the needs of the child, involve the appropriate agencies and lead to timely action that reduces the risk of harm to children.
EC10	Agencies work together to ensure that assessments are child-focused, comprehensive and timely. They include a thorough analysis of all information leading to identifying any risks, needs and recommendations to meet need and reduce risk.
EC11	The individual needs of children are taken into consideration, including age, ethnicity, culture, any religion, sex, sexual orientation and any disability.
EC12	Children in need of help and protection experience a child-centred approach from all professionals. The risks to children and their needs are assessed effectively and responded to appropriately.
EC13	Children and their families benefit from evidence-based approaches that reduce risks and meet their needs.
EC14	Schools have effective systems to identify children in need of help or protection and make timely referrals to early help or children’s social care when appropriate. Children receive support within the school and/or from external agencies, where required.
EC15	Schools contribute effectively to a well-coordinated multi-agency response to ensure that children get the right help and protection at the right time.
EC16	Systematic and high-quality management oversight of frontline practice supports consistent application of thresholds and child-centred assessment, plans and actions that are within timescales appropriate for the child. This leads to effective multi-agency working.

Impact of leaders on children’s experiences and progress

Number	Criteria
EC17	Leaders and managers understand the experiences of children and families that need help and protection and the prevalence of need and risk in their area. This leads to effective multi-agency action to meet children’s needs and improve the help and support provided to children and their families.
EC18	Leaders and managers provide appropriate support, training and challenge to practitioners so that effective practice can flourish.
EC19	Leaders and managers from all agencies know and understand what is happening at the multi-agency ‘front door’. When they identify issues, they take timely action to make improvements. They use their knowledge to challenge and support practitioners and promote continuous improvement in multi-agency working.
EC20	Agencies understand their individual responsibilities and roles. They also understand their responsibilities as part of the multi-agency partnership in relation to the front door. This leads to effective multi-agency working.
EC21	There are good systems in place for information-sharing. Professionals are confident and knowledgeable about when to share information to help and protect children.
EC22	The local partnership, through the MASA, actively monitors, promotes, coordinates and evaluates the work of the statutory partners. This leads to improvements in the multi-agency response at the front door.
EC23	The local partnership, through the MASA, effectively promotes multi-agency learning about the identification, assessment and response to initial need and risk.

Annex A. Local information to support the inspection

69. This annex sets out the information that inspectors will request from local agencies when carrying out this JTAI.

70. Inspectors will provide details for accessing an online system that local agencies can use to share information. Ofsted has risk-assessed this system against the government’s Cloud Security Principles.

71. Inspectors will gather personal information that is necessary to help them evaluate local services. Our 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.

Selecting children’s cases to audit and evaluate

72. This section sets out the child-level data we use to select the children whose experiences we will ask the local partnership to audit. When the inspectorates notify the local area of the inspection, they will provide a timeline for sharing information and selecting cases.

Lists of children

73. In week 1, the lead inspector will ask the local authority to share child-level data lists 1 to 5 from Ofsted’s framework for the inspection of local authority children’s services. For this JTAI, the local authority should also include one additional column of data headed ‘Contact outcome’ in child-level data list 1.

74. The local partnership should also provide a list of multi-agency audits carried out in the 6 months before the inspection. Inspectors will consider this information when deciding which children’s experiences they will ask the local agencies to audit for the inspection. The lead inspector may ask the local agencies to provide some of the children’s case files and audit documents from this work.

Selecting cases to evaluate

75. In week 1, the lead inspector will select 30 children from all the child-level data lists provided. The lead inspector will consider the following when selecting the 30 children:

• age, sex, ethnicity and any disability

• length of time since the last contact/referral

• range of need – early help, children in need and child protection

• who/which agency referred the child to the MASH (or equivalent)

76. The lead inspector will ask the local partnership to provide additional information about these 30 children. The local partnership should answer the following questions about each of the 30 children:

• Is the child known to the police?

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

• Has the child received support from health services above universal services?

• Is the child known to the youth offending team?

• Are the parents or adults in the household known to probation services?

77. In week 1, the lead inspector will select 7 children from the 30 whose experiences the local partnership should audit.

78. The lead inspector may request a phone call with the local authority to confirm that the cases selected include multi-agency involvement. The lead inspector may ask the local authority to review the cases on the electronic recording system to ensure this.

Case file documents

79. In week 4, the local partnership should provide electronic copies of the following documents for each of the children whose experiences it has been asked to audit (where recent examples exist):

• initial referral/contact/notification (where applicable)

• most recent assessment, including an early help assessment

• strategy or other multi-agency discussion or equivalent

• section 47 investigation documentation/initial child protection conference minutes

• latest return-home interview and any subsequent risk assessments (where applicable)

• minutes of any multi-agency meetings in respect of the child

• a chronology of significant events in the 6 months before the inspection

80. CQC may also request documents about some of the children whose experiences the local partnership audited. However, as the specific health agencies involved will vary, CQC will determine which agencies to request information from following inspectors’ review of the evaluations carried out by the local partnership. CQC will make this request before fieldwork starts.

Local partnership audits

81. The local partnership should provide its joint audits – and, if possible, individual agency’s audits – of children’s experiences 2 working days before fieldwork starts.

82. Inspectors will ask to meet with the practitioners involved in some of these children’s cases during the fieldwork week for a multi-agency discussion about their work.

Performance and management information

83. In the week before fieldwork takes place, the local partnership should provide the information outlined below. Inspectors will use this to understand how the local partnership works together.

84. The local partnership should not provide everything it holds on each subject. The inspectors will only want the area’s best and most recent examples that relate to the scope of this inspection. Inspectors will not review information that they deem falls outside the scope of the inspection, so the information provided must be relevant information only.

The local authority

The information provided must be relevant information only.

Number and item	Description
1.1 – Local authority organisational structures	Organisational structures showing lines of reporting and accountability
1.2 – Management information reports	Management information reports at both a local and agency level
1.3 – Threshold criteria	Assessment and threshold criteria for helping families and protecting children. Guidance related to the MASH or equivalent.
1.4 – Practice audits	Practice audits, including multi-agency, over the 6 months before the inspection
1.5 – Improvement plans	Improvement/action plans
1.6 – Commissioned services	Details of any services in the area that have been commissioned from the community or voluntary sector
1.7 – Needs analysis and strategies	Needs analysis, strategies and action plans, and any success criteria and analysis of impact
1.8 – Engagement with children	Information about how the local authority seeks feedback from children and engages them in evaluating and improving services
1.9 – Escalation policy	Any policy relating to escalation following disagreement between agencies about decisions made at the front door

Multi-agency safeguarding arrangements

The information provided must be relevant information only.

Number and item	Description
2.1 – MASA structure	Organisational structures showing lines of reporting and accountability
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 MASA meetings from the 12 months before the inspection (including executive board meetings where applicable)
2.4 – Sub-group minutes	Sub-group minutes relevant to the front door
2.5 – 12-monthly report	MASA annual report
2.6 – MASA audits	Practice audits, including multi-agency audits, relevant to the scope of the inspection
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.
2.10 – Escalation policy	Any policy relating to escalation following disagreement between agencies about decisions made at the front door

The police force

The information provided must be relevant information only.

Number and item	Description
3.1 – Police organisational structure	Organisational structures showing lines of reporting and accountability, including police representation in the MASA
3.2 – Risk assessment process	Process map relating to the front door
3.3 – Learning and development	Details of child protection/safeguarding training that relates to police officers and staff working in the MASH/front door. This should include, where possible, the training materials and the number of officers/staff trained
3.4 – Referral document	Child protection referral document
3.5 – Minutes on strategic governance	The 3 most recent sets of minutes for any strategic or operational governance meetings relating to the MASH/front door
3.6 – Audits and action plans	Copies of any audits (both internal and multi-agency) and action plan(s) relating to the MASH/front door
3.7 – Performance management	Performance management information/data relating to the front door, including any qualitative information
3.8 – Escalation policy	Any policy relating to escalation following disagreement between agencies about decisions made at the front door

Health partners

The information provided must be relevant information only.

Number and item	Description
4.1 – Clinical commissioning group (CCG)/provider organisational structure	Organisational structures of the CCG and provider organisations showing lines of reporting and accountability, including details of local health commissioning and/or provider services
4.2 – Commissioning arrangements	CCG and provider services with details of who is providing commissioned services, including school nursing, young people’s substance misuse services, contraceptive and sexual health services, child and adolescent mental health services, urgent care units and midwifery
4.3 – Annual reports	CCG and provider services’ annual reports on safeguarding and child protection
4.4 – Audits and action plans	Any commissioner or provider safeguarding audits and action plans relating to the scope of the inspection
4.5 – Escalation policy	Any policy relating to escalation following disagreement between agencies about decisions made at the front door

Probation Service

The information provided must be relevant information only.

Number and item	Description
5.1 – Local context	Document outlining strategic and operational links with the MASH, including reference to relevant referral pathways and service-level agreements
5.2 – Probation Service organisational structure	Organisational structures showing lines of reporting and accountability within the Probation Service and with other relevant organisations
5.3 – Safeguarding policy	Policy/procedures on child protection and safeguarding
5.4 – Risk management policy	Policy/procedures for managing risk of harm to others
5.5 – Training records	Details of safeguarding training undertaken by staff
5.6 – Audits and action plans	Any audits, needs analyses and action plans relating to the scope of the inspection
5.7 – Performance information	Any performance information relating to the scope of the inspection
5.8 – Escalation policy	Any policy relating to escalation following disagreement between agencies about decisions made at the front door

Youth offending team

The information provided must be relevant information only.

Number and item	Description
6.1 – Local context	Document outlining strategic and operational links with the MASH, including reference to relevant referral pathways and service-level agreements
6.2 – Youth offending team organisational structure	Organisational structures showing lines of reporting and accountability within the youth offending team and with other relevant organisations
6.3 – Safeguarding policy	Policy/procedures on child protection and safeguarding
6.4 – Risk management policy	Policy/procedures for managing risk of harm to others
6.5 – Training records	Details of safeguarding training undertaken by staff
6.6 – Audits and action plans	Any audits, needs analyses and action plans relating to the scope of the inspection
6.7 Performance information	Any performance information relating to the scope of the inspection
6.8 Management board minutes	Any management board minutes from the last 12 months relating to the scope of the inspection
6.9 Escalation policy	Any policy relating to escalation following disagreement between agencies about decisions made at the front door

Annex B. What the inspectorates will do if there is an area for priority action

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

85. 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

86. The CQC inspection team will immediately notify their manager, and a management review meeting will be called. This meeting will be attended by representatives from regulation and other key individuals as deemed necessary.

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

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

88. It will be reported as a cause of concern. A cause of concern will always be accompanied by one or more recommendations. HMICFRS will recommend that the force(s) (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.

89. There are two phases to the monitoring process: Scan and Engage. A force’s progress against 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.

90. At this stage, the HMI will meet with the chief constable and police and crime commissioner (or equivalent) to set out the causes of concern and identify actions that need to be taken. Based on these discussions, the chief constable will undertake a root cause analysis and use it to formulate 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.

91. HMICFRS may decide to revisit/re-inspect on a particular area of activity. This would focus on the cause(s) of concern identified in the initial inspection.

If an area for priority action is relevant to either the youth offending team or Probation Service

92. HMI Probation would trigger the HMI Probation organisational alert procedure. In applying the procedure, HMI Probation lead inspectors on JTAIs consider:

• What might happen if no action is taken?

• Is the issue(s) inherent in the overall system, rather than due to a specific, individual, isolated factor(s)?

• How serious is the risk?

• When might it happen?

93. On inspection, the HMI Probation lead inspector will inform the head of the inspection programme that they think an organisational alert is required and discuss this. The final decision rests with the head of inspection programme.

94. The HMI Probation lead inspector will inform the head of the inspected organisation that an organisational alert will be raised. The lead inspector should explain what the concerns are and outline any immediate actions that should be taken.

95. The HMI Probation lead inspector will complete the organisation alert form, detailing the risk(s) and suggested action if appropriate. A copy will be provided to the inspected body.

Annex C. How the inspectorates will handle challenges and complaints about JTAIs

96. The inspection team will make sure the local partnership are aware of how to raise a challenge or complaint about the inspection. Any queries on this guidance should be sent to Ofsted’s Complaints Team at complaints@ofsted.gov.uk.

97. Each inspectorate will have different policies and processes for responding to challenges or complaints about its own work. However, we have agreed this approach for complaints arising from these joint inspections.

98. All challenges or complaints relating to the joint inspection arrangements should be submitted to Ofsted, which – as the lead inspectorate – will coordinate an investigation and joint response on behalf of all the inspectorates. Where a complaint relates to a specific inspectorate, it should be raised with that inspectorate.

99. Challenges to inspection findings are often interlinked with complaints about the inspection process. Therefore, a single investigation will consider all concerns at the same time.

100. All local agencies should be encouraged to raise any concerns about the inspection process, including challenges to inspection findings or complaints about staff conduct, with the lead inspector during the inspection so that these can be resolved at the earliest opportunity. If a local authority area feels that this is not possible, it should contact Ofsted directly and ask to speak with the Ofsted Senior HMI assigned to the inspection (as the quality assurance manager) at the earliest opportunity so that the issues can be considered while the inspection is ongoing.

101. The local partnership can raise a formal challenge or complaint up to 10 working days after the publication or finalisation of the inspection report. Challenges or complaints should be submitted to Ofsted through our complaints form. Concerns raised later than this will not usually be considered.

102. The publication or finalisation of a report will not usually be withheld or withdrawn unless in exceptional circumstances. An application to withhold or withdraw a report should be made when a formal complaint is made to Ofsted. The application should set out any exceptional circumstances that may be relevant.

Complaints about the inspection process and/or challenges to the inspection outcome

103. Ofsted will appoint a lead investigator to formally consider and respond to the challenges or complaints. We will send a final response to each challenge or complaint about the inspection process or inspection outcome within 30 working days of receipt of the concern.

Milestone	Activity
Within 10 working days of report publication	Local authority area submits formal challenge or complaint to Ofsted
Within 5 working days of complaint being made	Ofsted sends an acknowledgement letter to the complainants and will confirm expected response deadlines; Ofsted shares copies of all challenges or complaints with the lead inspectors from other relevant inspectorates
Within 10 working days of complaint being made	Lead inspectors have 5 working days to provide written comments on relevant aspects of the challenge or complaint; this may include queries about some aspects of inspection practice or inspectors’ conduct
Within 20 working days of complaint being made	The Ofsted lead investigator will consider all inspectorate responses and draft a response to the concerns raised; they will send this to the other inspectorates for comments
Within 22 working days of complaint being made	Inspectorates send their comments on the response to Ofsted
Within 25 working days of complaint being made	The Ofsted lead investigator will consider all comments received and finalise the response letter
Within 30 working days of complaint being made	The response letter will undergo final checks and sign-off in Ofsted; it will be shared with all inspectorates before being sent to the complainant

Complaints about inspectors’ conduct

104. Specific complaints about inspectors’ conduct will be carried out by the relevant inspectorate, as these concerns may link directly to performance management and/or disciplinary action. However, for consistency, all investigations should be completed and final responses sent out within 30 working days.

Milestone	Activity
Within 5 working days of complaint being made	Acknowledgement letters will be sent to complainants and will confirm expected response deadlines; the letter will explain which inspectorate will carry out the investigation
Within 30 working days of complaint being made	Internal deadlines and sign-off arrangements within an inspectorate will be used to consider complaints about inspectors’ conduct

105. In order to maintain appropriate confidentiality, investigation outcomes into specific complaints about inspectors’ conduct will not automatically be shared across all inspectorates. However, the overall outcome must be provided to Ofsted as to whether a complaint about inspectors’ conduct has been upheld.

Complaints that contain challenges to both inspection process/outcomes and concerns about inspectors’ conduct

106. These 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.

107. Where this occurs, it is important to consider whether the outcome of an investigation into a complaint about conduct might impact on the robustness of the inspection process itself or the inspection outcomes. The relevant inspectorates will be consulted in all such cases.

108. Ofsted will record learning outcomes from the complaint investigations and share this with all other inspectorates.

Requests to withhold or withdraw publication of a JTAI report

109. All inspectorates agree that publication of a JTAI report will not be withheld or withdrawn unless in exceptional circumstances. We will consider exceptional circumstances on a case-by-case basis.

110. Such requests are by nature urgent, and often require a response within 48 hours. Wherever possible, Ofsted will seek the views of the lead inspectors from all other inspectorates before deciding whether any exceptional circumstances justify withholding or withdrawing publication. However, in very urgent cases, the other inspectorates agree that it may be necessary for Ofsted to make a decision alone. In this case, we will advise the other inspectorates of the decision at the earliest opportunity so that they can make representations.