1. Cafcass’ role in supporting delivery of the family justice reform

2. Family Justice Review November 2011
Key outcomes:-
Establishment of Local Family Justice Board’s independently chaired from judiciary with a focus on performance.
A reduction in care duration to 26 weeks
Greater onus on understanding where experts add value.
Local Authorities to be assisted in developing and delivering robust assessments and care plans with a particular focus at the pre-proceedings stage.
Emphasis on judicial continuity and coherent case listings.
Development of 5 KPM’s to support the delivery of local performance through the introduction of CMS.

3. Care statistics: December 2012

4. Duration of care proceedings
: average case in each quarter was 54 weeks.
: Qtr 1 Ave 51 wks, Qrt 2 Ave 47 weeks.
Range:
Q4 – 36 to 79 weeks
Q1 – 28 to 74 weeks
Q2 – 30 to 65 weeks

5. Three weeks in November: Cafcass’ care study 2012
Cafcass commissioned a further study in response to the continuing rise in care applications following the 2009 analysis.
343 cases in sample. 203 (82.5%) of Guardians responded to an online survey in relation to 247 cases, involving 401 children.
Included the views of Guardians on:
Whether the application was appropriately timed
Whether the quality of the LA pre-proceedings work
was adequate

6. Three weeks in November: prior LA involvement
Guardians considered applications with shorter period of prior involvement were more appropriately timed
Table: children’s involvement with LA prior to application
Not before this application
Less than 1 year
1-2 years
2-5 years
More than 5 years
2012 (384 cases)
19.8%
32.9%
15.9%
21.9%
9.4%
2009 (82 cases)
11.5%
27.8%
10.7%
13.9%
36.1%

7. Three weeks in November: was the pre-proceedings work adequate?
In 67.1% of cases the Guardian assessed pre-proceedings work as being at least adequate
In 23.5% of cases the Guardian considered the work was not adequate
Key finding: the quality of the pre-proceedings work varied according to the timing of the application

8. What is adequate?
Robust application of the PLO supported by clear robust assessment and analysis of risk, clear care plans, evidence of effective communication with key parties focused on identification of key issues completed pre-proceedings.
Less than
Adequate
More than
Partial application of the PLO
Application of all essential elements of the PLO
Complete fulfilment of PLO
2012 findings 14.4%
45.6%
40%

9. Cafcass / ADCS court social work model Coventry & Warwickshire Pre-Proceedings Pilot –
Pre-proceedings best practice
All baseline assessments are commissioned and completed, and evidence base for proceedings finalised. Threshold analysis, chronologies and analysis of capacity to improve parenting key documents
Documentation screened by a social work manager before care proceedings are issued
Children’s guardian supports the process by aiming to build confidence e.g. between parents and the local authority
Final attempts to increase parenting capacity made
Parallel planning begins e.g., potential kinship carers identified or ruled out

10. Pre-proceedings pilot: what works?
Early involvement of Cafcass FCA in pre-proceedings: review relevant reports; visit/observe parents and child; attend formal pre-proceedings meeting; engage in case discussion with social worker and family
FCA helped promote parental engagement at pre-proceedings meeting
FCA seen as more independent than IRO (by adult parties)
Enables earlier shared understanding of cases between FCA and LA – earlier identification of outstanding issues
Helps with effective judicial decision making

11. Any questions? policyteam@cafcass.gsi.gov.uk
For further information on Cafcass’ research or any areas of policy please contact
Practice questions (i.e. What works in this area?). More detailed questions re research projects can be directed to policy team .

12. Table Discussion (15 minutes)
How will you put this in to practice?
1. Within your agency what are the presenting 5 challenges that you face in relation to improving pre-proceedings work?
2. Identify 5 key elements that would define 'adequate' and 'good' in relation to pre-proceedings practice in your agency?
3. What can you do in your agency to reduce delay?