2.5 Escalation, Challenge and Conflict Resolution Procedure – Buckinghamshire SCP Children’s Policies, Procedures and Practice Resource

RELEVANT SECTION

1. Introduction
2. Disagreements
3. The Escalation, Challenge and Conflict Resolution Process
- 3.1 Stages to follow
4. Specific Situations
5. The role of Buckinghamshire Safeguarding Children Partnership (BSCP)
- 5.1 Contact details
Appendices

1. Introduction

When working with multi agency partners to protect children there can be differences of opinion about the best course of action or next steps. In these situations, it is important that all those working with children and families feel able to communicate their views and constructively challenge the actions of others. This includes where the difference of opinion is with professionals who are more senior or experienced. Similarly, agencies/professionals should be open to hearing any professional constructive challenge. Practitioners and managers should always be prepared to review decisions and plans with an open mind and act proportionately to any challenge raised.

Research and the findings of child safeguarding practice reviews have shown that differences in opinion between professionals and agencies can lead to conflict and discord within the network, which may result in insufficient information sharing, risk not being adequately managed and negatively impact outcomes for children.

This procedure provides professionals details of how to raise any concerns they have about decisions made by other professionals or agencies. It will also help ensure that:

The child is kept safe from harm, and this is central to all decisions made
There is appropriate management oversight of the decision-making process
Difficulties within and between agencies are resolved quickly and openly
Any problem areas that may require policies or procedures to be updated are identified
Professional disagreements about one case do not adversely affect inter-agency relationships.

All agencies have a responsibility to ensure that their staff are:

Aware of this procedure and able to access it easily
Supported to manage and refer intra- and inter-agency disagreements in line with this procedure. This also includes recognising that differences in status and/or experience may affect some how confident workers feeling about escalating concerns.

All professionals working together should promote and model a respectful acceptance of different viewpoints being shared; acknowledging the important role that challenge can play in ensuring children are always safeguarded from harm.

2. Disagreements

Disagreement over how safeguarding concerns are managed may occur in a range of situations, including when:

There is internal disagreement within an agency about whether a concern should be brought to the attention of Children’s Social Care, either for consultation or a referral.
A referral is not considered to meet threshold for assessment by Children’s Social Care
Information or advice is being sought; however Children’s Social Care assess that a referral is required
Children’s Social Care assess further information should be sought by the referrer before the referral is progressed
Children’s Social Care believes that a Child and Family Assessment should be pursued and not to progress to Child Protection procedures
There is disagreement on the need for a Section 47 enquiry and/or criminal investigation
There is disagreement about whether there is sufficient evidence to progress to an Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC)
There is disagreement in relation to information sharing
There is disagreement about the conclusion of an investigation/enquiry
There is disagreement whether it is appropriate for a case to close based on risks present and safety in place for the child
The inclusion of a child and/or family’s voice and inclusion within the assessment, planning and review process is not evidenced.

Disagreements within a network are most likely to relate to levels of need, roles and responsibilities, the need for action, lack of information sharing and communication issues.

3. The Escalation, Challenge and Conflict Resolution Process

See also Escalation, Challenge and Conflict Resolution Flow Diagram (opens as PDF) for a summary of the process described in this section.

When a disagreement occurs, it is essential that the professional or agency which disagrees remains involved in any child protection or child in need plan in place. It is also essential that the professional or agency continue to contribute to all relevant future decision making whilst the resolution process takes place.

At all stages of escalation, records of discussions and any decisions reached should be recorded in writing on the child’s file and shared with relevant personnel. Buckinghamshire Safeguarding Children Partnership (BSCP) does not prescribe a specific recording format, however, a suggested template form is provided at Appendix A.

It is essential that all professionals are aware of the correct named contacts for escalation within their own organisation. The details of this for your agency can be recorded in the template at Appendix B.

In some cases, the dispute may be resolved through natural case progression rather than through the escalation procedure outlined here. In such cases there may be a risk that the same situation, and discord, could arise again. It is therefore recommended that in these situations the escalation procedure is progressed, and an outcome reached. This will allow any policy or procedural issues, or other relevant issues, to be identified and addressed, and help to reduce the likeliness of the same situation from recurring.

For example:

There is disagreement around how agencies manage a child who has gone missing. The escalation process is started but the child returns home, therefore resolving the issue that caused the disagreement. However, unless the underlying reasons for the disagreement are resolved by continuing the escalation process, there is a risk that the same disagreement could arise again if that child or another child goes missing.

3.1 Stages to follow

If at any stage it is felt necessary to make a formal complaint, each agency should follow their own complaints procedure and adhere to any specified timescales.

Pre-escalation: Professional discussion

Initially, professionals should attempt to resolve differences through discussion, within a timescale that protects the child from harm. However, if there is a concern that a child is at imminent risk of harm and the other agency disagrees, Stage 1 of the escalation process should be initiated immediately.

Stage 1: Senior Staff

If practitioners are unable to / anticipate they will be unable to resolve differences through discussion and within a timescale that protects the child from harm, the disagreement must be addressed by more senior staff. In most cases this will mean the first line managers of the agencies involved. If the conflict is with the line manager or equivalent, then the disagreement should be referred to the next manager in line. This should be recorded on the relevant system for each agency.

Stage 2: Escalation Manager

If agreement cannot be reached by first line managers within a timescale that protects the child from harm, the issue must be referred without delay up through each agencies line management structure up to a Head of Service (or equivalent). It is recommended that agencies have a named manager for escalation. This should be a senior member of staff who can exercise authority within their agency to resolve difficulties. It is recommended that this is formally recorded (see Appendix A).

Stage 3: Senior Management

If professional disagreements cannot be resolved at Head of Service (or equivalent) level then consideration should be given to progressing the disagreement through further layers of senior management up to for example, Strategic heads of Service or Director level.

Stage 4: Chair of BSCP

f the issue is still not resolved and/or the discussions raise issues where quality assurance scrutiny may be needed, the issue should be referred to the Independent Chair of the BSCP (see Section 5.1 for contact details). The Chair will either make the final binding decision or agree on an appropriate course of action to reach this binding decision.

4. Specific Situations

4.1 Mental Capacity Act

Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, a young person aged 16 or 17 may be deemed to lack the mental capacity to make specific decisions in relation to their own care or treatment. However, in such cases there is some overlap with the provisions of the Children Act 1989. Where there are disagreements about the care, treatment or welfare of a young person aged 16 or 17 who lacks mental capacity to make relevant decisions, legal advice should be sought if no consensus or agreement can be reached by following the escalation procedure. In such instances, the case may need to be referred for decision through either the Family Courts or the Court of Protection. Further information can be found in the Code of Practice to the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

4.2 Disagreement at / arising from Child Protection Conference

If the chair of a Child Protection Conference is unable to achieve a consensus as to whether a child is to be made the subject of a child protection plan, then they will make the decision, and any views to the contrary will be recorded in the minutes.

The agency or individual who disagrees with the chair’s decision must determine whether to challenge the conference decision further.

Should the professional who disagrees believe that the decision reached by the chair places a child at (further) risk of significant harm, they should formally raise the matter with their agency’s Designated Person for Child Protection/Operations Manager/Detective Inspector (i.e. the agency’s contact at stage 2 of the escalation process, see Section 3.1).

If that Designated Person agrees with the concerns of the professional, they should immediately alert the Conferencing Service Manager.

In the light of representations made, the Conferencing Service Manager must determine whether to:

Uphold the decision reached by the conference chair
Put an immediate interim child protection plan in place
Request that a review conference is brought forward
Refer the matter to relevant Head of Service.

4.3 Allegations against staff and volunteers

Where there is disagreement in the initial handling of an allegation against a member of staff or volunteer working with children, the Designated Senior Manager for allegations should inform the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) on 01296 382070.

Where a member of staff or volunteer disagrees with a decision by the Designated Senior Manager not to consult the LADO, or is concerned that the LADO will not be appropriately consulted (where a child/children are at risk of significant harm); the person with this concern should make direct contact with the LADO (see Section 4.4, Whistleblowing).

If there is a disagreement in the management of an allegation that cannot be resolved following consultation with the LADO, or the disagreement relates to the advice given by the LADO, the matter should be referred to the Named Senior Officer for Allegations in the agencies concerned.

4.4 Whistleblowing

Fear of repercussions may make it challenging for staff or volunteers to raise child protection concerns about colleagues or managers. These concerns may relate to harm posed directly to children by a colleague or manager, or they may relate to poor practice observed in the safeguarding of children.

Senior Managers should, therefore, ensure provision of a well-publicised ‘Whistleblowing’ or ‘Speak out’ procedure that provides alternative methods of reporting concerns.

For more information please see Whistleblowing chapter.

5. The role of Buckinghamshire Safeguarding Children Partnership (BSCP)

BSCP has a role in coordinating and ensuring the effectiveness of local arrangements to safeguard and promote the welfare and safety of children. However, it is not accountable for the operational work of its partners or any other agency working with children and young people in Buckinghamshire. Any complaints about the operational work of such organisations should initially be directed through the relevant organisation’s complaints procedure. The organisation should be contacted directly for further information on how to do this.

If you feel that BSCP is acting against the interests of children and young people and wish to make a complaint about the way we discharge our functions, you should address your concerns to the Independent Chair.

Complaints can be made in writing, by email or telephone. The Independent Chair will give due consideration to all complaints and take any remedial action necessary. Complaints will be acknowledged within 10 working days and a full response provided within 28 working days. If we are unable to respond within these timescales then we will contact you and explain why.

5.1 Contact details

Email:

FAO Independent Chair of BSCP
[email protected]

Postal address:

3rd Floor, Walton Street Office
Walton Street
Aylesbury
Bucks
HP20 1YU

Telephone:

01296 387146

Where immediate action is required to prevent a life threatening episode or to reduce the risk of significant harm to a child, intervention will be required by all relevant parties whilst any dispute is ongoing. In these circumstances, where an agency maintains a position of non-involvement and other agencies disagree with this, the BSCP should be informed as soon as possible.

Please note that all email communications should be sent securely – please check your agency policy and guidance. Guidance for Buckinghamshire Council staff can be found here.

Appendices

Was this helpful?

Yes

Thanks for your feedback!

CONTENTS