Child rights and wellbeing impact assessment external guidance and templates

Stage 2 – Further Assessment of Impact

The Stage 2 CRWIA template uses questions and a sign off process to help guide the assessor through explaining:

• how the qualitative and quantitative evidence to back up assessment of potential impacts has been gathered
• how the assessor has sought out the views of children and young people who are (positively or negatively) impacted by the decision
• how the decision positively impacts children and young people based on research, and if there are negative impacts, how these have been mitigated against
• how the decision contributes to the wellbeing of children and young people;
• how all of the qualitative and quantitative research influenced the development of the piece of work
• how the organisation will make this CRWIA accessible to children and young people and share this information once it has been published

The template includes the text of the UNCRC to support an understanding of each right and make a determination of potential impact against each article.

Question 1 - What evidence has been used to inform the assessment? What does it tell about the impact on children’s rights?

In this question, simply highlight the main sources of evidence used and what they told the assessor about specific areas to inform the decision.

Make this as clear as possible, the assessor may want to start by listing each piece of evidence and how it was gathered. Then clarify what each piece of evidence told the assessor relating to the work.

E.g. statistical data from Source A demonstrated that small numbers of under 18’s use this service and therefore we felt this aspect of the project would not be as beneficial as XXX for which over X% of users are under 18. XXX would have the potential to positively impact their right to ZZZ due to…

It is not necessary to undertake different research for every impact assessment that needs to be completed. Impact assessments should not be completed in isolation, as each one is considered, a number of crossovers between impact assessments such as the CRWIA, EQIA and the Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment will come to light. Thoughtful planning and preparation early on in the process will ensure effective evidence gathering to apply results to a number of different areas and assessments. This will avoid duplication, save time, and mitigate against participation fatigue.

What evidence do I use?

CRWIAs aim to ensure reasoned and evidence-based decision-making that takes into account the rights and wellbeing of children and young people. The UNCRC requires governments to ensure they collect and have access to data that covers issues pertaining to children’s rights. Evidence should consist of a combination of quantitative and qualitative data that provides information on, for example:

• the numbers and groups of children and young people who will be potentially impacted
• the views and experiences of children and young people who will be potentially impacted
• service data from other agencies or services that will be potentially impacted, and their views on the decision

Gathering this information demonstrates that steps have been taken to ensure children and young are considered in the organisational decision-making.

Some helpful sources of evidence can be found through the following links:

• Children in Scotland - Children and Young People’s Evidence Bank
• Scottish Government - Decision-making: children and young people's participation
• Public Health Scotland - Child health data and intelligence
• the Equality evidence finder
• the National Performance Framework
• Tableau Public - Children and Young People Data
• Scottish Government Datasets
• Scottish Government Children, young people and families outcomes framework - core wellbeing indicators: analysis

Identify any gaps in the evidence base, and set out how these will be addressed.

Where possible, identify the protected characteristics (age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation) of the children and young people who will be affected or have been affected by similar programmes or projects, or work with similar themes to yours. As there can be different levels or types of potential impact on different groups, this allows the assessor to scope out a wider analysis and areas to gather evidence. It will also help identify where there are any gaps in the evidence.

Where there is insufficient, contradictory or only anecdotal evidence, a decision will have to be made on whether a well-informed assessment of the potential or actual impacts can be made without conducting further research. If it is identified that there are important gaps in the evidence, a plan should be developed to address these. If available, this plan should be discussed with analytical colleagues to help address the gap.

Case example: National Health Service (NHS) Model Complaints Handling Procedure

When reviewing the available evidence on NHS complaints, the NHS Model Complaints Handling Procedure CRWIA noted that NHS complaints statistics are not disaggregated by the age of the patient/complainant. This led to a recommendation that the views of children and young people who complain about NHS services in Scotland are routinely sought as part of a revised complaints data set, and that this information is used to inform continuous improvement.

Question 2 - Evidence from stakeholder/ partner organisations

In this question, please highlight if any existing evidence has been used, that colleagues from other organisations can provide knowledge or expertise on. Additionally, other organisations may have similar projects or programmes which to draw evidence from, both to inform your organisation’s assessment, and inform the development of the piece of work. These organisations may have already conducted focus groups, interviews, surveys etc. on topics which would be of relevance.

Question 3 - Evidence from children and young people

Why Consult?

Anyone who will be affected by a decision should be given the opportunity to present their views. This includes children and young people, their parents/carers, organisations which work with them, the practitioners who will be impacted and public or private bodies expected to deliver the work. This is an important step in taking a children’s human rights approach as it upholds the General Principle under Article 12 of the UNCRC, to involve children and young people in decisions that will affect them. Where there is no previous consultation or material which demonstrate the views of children and young people in this area, a new consultation or engagement should take place if the decision impacts them.

Before starting any engagement it is crucial to carry out research into the data that already exists from recent consultations, surveys, reports, etc. Children do not want to be asked the same question if they, or their peers, have already provided a response. This will reduce the risk of consultation fatigue.

Consultation approach

Where consultation with children and/or young people is needed, it can take place using one or more of the following methods:

• adding specific questions to a broader public consultation
• targeted promotion of public consultations to infants, children and young people through relevant websites, nurseries/schools/colleges, social media – ensuring that consultation materials are written in a style that is accessible to and suitable for children
• making use of existing consultation mechanisms through children’s rights organisations that focus on participation (including, e.g. the Children’s Parliament, Young Scot, the Scottish Youth Parliament, and YouthLink Scotland, as well as local youth councils, pupil councils, young person-led organisations)
• setting up/commissioning public consultations with infants, children and young people to gather their views on the proposed decision

For the purposes of the CRWIA, the consultation must specifically ask about the decision’s potential impact on infants, children and young people, and their rights under the UNCRC.

Existing evidence may need to be supplemented. Where there is insufficient, contradictory or only anecdotal evidence, a judgement will need to be made as to whether a well-informed assessment of the potential impact can be made without commissioning further research and/or consulting with infants, children and young people, and other stakeholder groups, to fill that evidence gap.

When Direct Consultation is not possible

Where direct consultation is not possible, consider the following:

• relevant published research that involved and collected the views of infants, children and young people
• a re-analysis of children and young people’s responses to a recent consultation that is relevant to this area. Please note that you will need to gain consent to use responses in this way from the organisation who commissioned the original engagement
• sending out a ‘call for evidence’ to service providers to ask them for any unpublished or difficult-to-locate information they have collected on the views and experiences of the infants, children and young people who use them. Again, please note that you will need to gain consent to use information in this way from the organisation owns this information
• asking organisations which work with or on behalf of infants, children and young people to submit the views of those they work with - this is particularly useful to identify case study information, or the experiences of groups of children and young people living in particular circumstances; Again, please note that you will need to gain consent to use information in this way from the organisation owns this information. Looking at inspection reports that reflect the views of children and young people

Question 4 - How have the findings outlined in questions 1-3 influenced the development of the piece of work?

In this question, please outline clearly how the evidence/ stakeholder feedback, and views of infants, children and young people have been utilised to inform conclusions about the potential impacts the decision will have. Then, please explain if it has changed any parts or the entirety of the work while it is being developed. Alternatively, also note if it has reinforced the approach, features and focus which was already outlined to implement the piece of work.

Please clarify how these views have informed the children’s rights and wellbeing analysis, and the CRWIA’s conclusions/recommendations.

Question 5 – Assessing for impact against the UNCRC

The following question asks the assessor to refer to annex 1 which lists all of the articles within the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and two optional protocols which the UK is a signatory to. This allows for the assessor to fully understand what is meant by each article to make an accurate assessment of potential impact.

Using the conclusions drawn from the evidence gathered, and research in questions 1-3, please tick the relevant articles in the annex and use this information to summarise the potential impact of a project, programme or policy in this question.

In the later questions each right should be taken individually and its potentially positive or negative impact explained more thoroughly. Where impacts could be both positive and negative, please select both boxes and when there is no impact, this can be left blank.

A ‘neutral’ tick indicates that the specific rights are not relevant and will not be impacted as a result of its implementation. Rights identified as neutral do not need to be explained further in questions 6 and 7.

The assessment may reveal that the decision not only complies with the articles of the UNCRC but takes things further and helps progress the realisation of children’s rights in Scotland – i.e. gives better or further effect to the UNCRC in Scotland. CRWIAs can provide a record of that development.

Question 6 – Positive impact

As previously mentioned, we all have a responsibility to respect, protect and fulfil children’s rights in the services we provide. The UNCRC is not explicit about what respecting, protecting and fulfilling rights means but the intention is to ensure that advances in giving better and further effect to rights should be made and there should be no regression of rights.

Respect: decisions must not prevent or lessen a child’s enjoyment of their rights.

Protect: action should be taken to ensure children’s rights are not interfered with by others.

Fulfil: steps must be taken to ensure each right defined in the UNCRC is fully fulfilled.

While these three definitions are more closely aimed at Governments, to support a cultural change which progresses children’s rights and wellbeing across the whole of Scotland your organisation should still provide measures that respect, protect and fulfil children’s rights where possible. They should not cause regressions unless responding to an extreme set of circumstances which may require temporary restrictions of rights to protect public safety. In cases such as these, mitigations and alternative options must be put in place and these restrictions should not be imposed longer than is necessary to respond to the circumstance.

Positive impact can take several different forms such as:

• the work has given further realisation and enjoyment of children’s rights
• the work has been improved based on the UNCRC articles
• the work further respects, protects or fulfils the rights of children in Scotland
• the work has helped to give better or further effect to the rights of children, i.e. going above and beyond the UNCRC articles

Answers to Question 6 may cover how the decision/ work will do this.

Ensure the explanation of potential positive impacts is linked back to all those rights identified in the annex in question 5.

Question 7 - Negative Impact

If no rights have a potentially negative impact identified, then simply put N/A to this question and move onto question 9.

While all decisions and work should respect, protect and fulfil children’s rights, there may be some unintended potential negative impacts uncovered throughout consultation and evidence gathering.

Negative impact can take several different forms such as:

• the decision may impede or actually reverse the enjoyment of existing rights, requiring mitigating measures be put in place
• the decision may positively impact some groups of children and young people but disproportionately have a negative impact on a particular group

For this question, link back to all rights highlighted in question five, and fully explain what the potential negative impact is. Additionally, the evidence gathered should inform the overall assessment of the extent of this impact.

In this question, explain why this potential negative impact either is or is not proportionate to warrant alternative options or mitigations.

Question 8 - Options for modification or mitigation of negative impact

If the assessment indicates a potential negative impact, options for modification or mitigation of the original decision must be presented. The assessor should also highlight the steps they will take so that this impact is lessened to neutral or positive. This should be clearly laid out in this question.

Options should:

• be proportionate to the severity of negative impact
• refer to any potential resource implications associated with the change
• indicate how the proposed change(s) or mitigating actions will rectify or minimise the negative impact

Careful consideration should also be given as to whether any potential negative impacts are necessary and proportionate when weighed against the decision. Again, evidence must be used to back up the assessment on proportionality of potential impact.

One example of this could be that it is clear that the public benefits clearly outweigh the potential negative impacts and are justified by evidence. Therefore, the decision has the least possible intended impact on the enjoyment of the rights in question and so is the best option. Again, this should be backed up by evidence and where possible demonstrate how groups and communities most likely to be impacted by the decision has been consulted.

Case example: Assessing a negative impact & listing options for modification or mitigation of the policy/measure

Although the Development of a Digital Learning and Teaching Strategy CRWIA identified a range of positive impacts when looking at creating a digital learning strategy to support the Curriculum for Excellence, it also identified potential and unintended negative impacts in relation to safety and health issues. The CRWIA listed three options that were considered to mitigate the potential negative impact in relation to internet usage safety – leading to additional safeguarding responsibilities being given to local authorities and education establishments – and two options to mitigate the potential negative impact in relation to a child’s right to health. The CRWIA recorded that, in respect of the risk that increased use of digital technology may harm a child’s health, it was decided that no action should be taken in recognition that the evidence to date is inconclusive. However, it also recommended that evidence in this area continue to be monitored and reviewed on a regular basis.

Question 9 - Impact on Wellbeing: will the decision contribute to the wellbeing of children and young people in Scotland?

As previously mentioned CRWIAs use two frameworks to assess potential impact:

1. UNCRC articles which have been analysed through assessment of rights in the previous questions

2. GIRFEC wellbeing indicators – which is what we will focus on in this question

The concept of wellbeing is outcomes-focused, with positive wellbeing as the intended result of conducting child-centred practice. It is part of the Getting It Right for Every Child (GIRFEC) initiative which is Scotland’s national approach to improving the wellbeing and life chances of children and young people. It applies not only to children’s services but other services that affect children and young people, all of which are required to safeguard, support and promote the wellbeing of children in an integrated and efficient manner (s.9(2) Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014).

‘Wellbeing’ is defined in s.96(2) of the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014, through eight non-hierarchical and interconnected indicators: Safe, Healthy, Achieving, Nurtured, Active, Respected, Responsible and Included also sometimes known as ‘SHANARRI’. Like the articles of the UNCRC, the SHANARRI indicators focus on the whole child. The eight wellbeing indicators (SHANARRI) provide a framework for assessment and planning in relation to wellbeing. Practitioners and organisations should consider each of the eight wellbeing indicators (SHANARRI) (as listed below) in collaboration, with children or young people and their family.

Similar to question 5, this question asks the drafter to assess against each of the wellbeing indicators in annex 2 by ticking yes if the decision is thought to improve wellbeing through promotion of that particular indicator. This reasoning should then be explained in question 9.

The 8 indicators to assess against are:

• safe: growing up in an environment where a child or young person feels secure, nurtured, listened to and enabled to develop to their full potential. This includes freedom from abuse or neglect
• healthy: having the highest attainable standards of physical and mental health, access to suitable healthcare, and support in learning to make healthy and safe choices
• achieving: being supported and guided in learning and in the development of skills, confidence and self-esteem, at home, in school and in the community
• nurtured: growing, developing and being cared for in an environment which provides the physical and emotional security, compassion and warmth necessary for healthy growth and to develop resilience and a positive identity.
• active: having opportunities to take part in activities such as play, recreation and sport, which contribute to healthy growth and development, at home, in school and in the community
• respected: being involved in and having their voices heard in decisions that affect their life, with support where appropriate
• responsible: having opportunities and encouragement to play active and responsible roles at home, in school and in the community, and where necessary, having appropriate guidance and supervision
• included: having help to overcome inequalities and being accepted as part of their family, school and community

Below is an example of how the Articles of the UNCRC could be mapped to the Wellbeing Indicators is shown below. N.B. The Articles of the UNCRC can be mapped under more than one wellbeing indicator.

Best start in life: Ready to succeed

Having the best start in life helps create:

• Successful learners
• Responsible citizens
• Effective contributors
• Confident individuals

The wellbeing indicators and the UNCRC Articles that apply are:

• safe (11, 19, 22, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38)
• included (3, 6, 18, 23, 26, 27)
• responsible (3, 12, 14, 15, 40)
• respected (2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18)
• active (31)
• nurtured (4, 5, 18, 20, 21, 25, 27)
• achieving (4, 18, 28, 29)
• healthy (3, 6, 24, 39)

Further information on SHANARRI/UNCRC intersectionality can be found on Getting it right for every child principles and values.

Question 10 - How will the organisation communicate to children and young people the impact of the decision on their rights?

As previously discussed in question 3, it is good practice to include those impacted by the piece of work in the decision-making and development of it.

As all of this work to assess the potential impacts of the decision has been undertaken, it is good practise to should ensure that those affected can see that their views have been taken into account during its development. Additionally, the assessor should ensure to feedback to those involved directly that the CRWIA has been published so they can see how their views have influenced the decision. Therefore, if possible we would recommend amending any complex language or area-specific jargon within the CRWIA to ensure transparency and accessibility. You may also, where possible, want to consider publishing a child friendly version of the CRWIA.

Question 11 - Planning for the evaluation of impact on child rights

Much like at the end of the Stage 1, this question gives the opportunity to pre-plan for future step in the CRWIA process.

Stage 3 is the Child Rights Impact Evaluation (CRIE) and it allows the organisation to consider if:

• the anticipated impacts assessed in relation to children’s rights materialised after a period of implementation of the decision
• there were any additional unintended/ unanticipated impacts

There is not a fixed period of time after a decision when an evaluation should be completed. As stated above, it is most appropriate to undertake a CRIE a period of time after the decision has been implemented or when a change of approach is being considered. Therefore, this could be 1, 3 or 5 years after the start date of the decision.

As part of the review and reporting cycle, the impact of previous decisions and their implementation should be routinely monitored, measured and evaluated. Therefore, together both stage 2 and 3 of the CRWIA help to ensure that the best interests of the child are a primary consideration in all actions and decisions that may affect them.

It should also be noted that Stage 3 and in some situations Stage 2 will be undertaken/updated more than once. For example, if there is a change to an ongoing programme or project. Rather than undertaking a full CRWIA, the original Stage 2 can be updated.

In preparing for Stage 3 detail planning how the impacts the existing piece of work has had on children and young people will be evaluated. This plan should include a provisional date for commencing this evaluation. Additionally, detail the intended approach that will be taken to gather evidence to support the evaluation.

As with Stage 2, this evidence should include both qualitative and quantitative data. When preparing for and undertaking the evaluation of impact, please give consideration to ensuring that the data collection remains open to unintended results by including some open-ended questions in interviews and questionnaires, and by encouraging reporting of unexpected results.

Question 12 – Sign off process

Completed CRWIAs should be signed off by the relevant manager, confirming that the decision has been assessed for its potential impact on children’s rights and wellbeing. Please also ensure that the annexes are deleted prior to publication as they are fully explained in the answers to the questions.