Children’s Advocacy in the Children Hearings System: Expert Reference Group: March 2024

Attendees and apologies

Chair, Scottish Government (SG), Pam Semple
Advocacy Service Aberdeen, Kevin McBeath
Angus Independent Advocacy, Heather MacMaster
Barnardo’s, Selwyn McCausland
Borders Independent Advocacy Service (BIAS), Eve Manderson
CAPS Independent Advocacy (CAPS), Jane Crawford
Centre for Excellence for Children’s Care and Protection (CELCIS), Elaine Adams 
Clan Childlaw, Vicki Straiton
East Ayrshire Advocacy Services, Annmarie Denny
Independent Advocacy Perth and Kinross (IAPK), Sarah Fogg
Partners in Advocacy (PiA), Pauline Cavanagh
Research Scotland, Katy MacMillan
Scottish Children’s Report Administration (SCRA), Melissa Hunt
Social Work Scotland (SWS), Vivien Thomson
SG, Louise Piaskowski
Who Cares? Scotland (WC?S), Kay McKerrell 

Apologies

Children 1st, Bryan Evans
Children’s Hearings Scotland (CHS), Edward McKim 
Independent Advocacy Perth and Kinross, Julie Hutton
Scottish Independent Advocacy Alliance (SIAA), Suzanne Swinton 
Scottish Government, Tom McNamara

Items and actions

Items and actions

This note provides an overview of the agenda, discussion, and action points from the meeting of the children’s hearings advocacy expert reference group (ERG). Once agreed by members the meeting note will be published. 

The meeting was held as a videoconference on Thursday 14 March 2024. Papers issued for this meeting included: the agenda; minutes from last meeting 30 November 2023; Scottish Government update paper; and Scottish children’s reporter administration (SCRA) update paper.

Welcome and introductions

The chair welcomed members, noted the apologies, and introduced guest Katy MacMillian, Director of Research Scotland who joined for agenda item 6 - External Evaluation. 

Agenda item 2 - actions and activity since last meeting on 30 November 2023

The chair noted changes made to the draft note of last meeting including: a typo corrected luggage changed to language; and correction where it mentioned Neil Hunter from SCRA this was incorrect, and name was changed to Neill Mitchell who was involved in the meeting about non-instructed advocacy. The note was agreed. This will be published. 

The chair provided an update on the actions and activity from the last meeting.

Action – SCRA and SG agreed to conduct some auditing across SCRA records and reported numbers from provider organisations over the next 12 months.

Update – Ongoing, to be carried forward. This auditing has not yet started.

Action – SCRA will work with their data manager on the best way to provide the advocacy data. They will consider if a run of figures for Safeguarders in hearings can be provided alongside the advocacy worker presence information. They will also consider if further breakdowns of numbers, e.g. by local authority area, can be provided but cautioned small numbers may make this tricky.

Update – Ongoing work. The SCRA written update paper for this meeting provided data by local authority level breakdown and by age. Further work to develop the data set and comparisons will continue to be worked on.

Action – SCRA hope to be able to continue to provide updates on the counts for ongoing consideration at future meetings. Added explanation will be provided on what is captured. For example, advocacy worker present, is this physical attendance and/or occasions where advocacy work may not be present, but advocacy support has been recorded including when advocacy statement/report provided and considered in the hearing.

Update – Ongoing work. See SCRA written update issued for this meeting covered under agenda item 3.

Action – SG and NPN to discuss use of self-assessment tool with advocacy organisations with a view to amending Grant Letters or reviewing the National Practice Model more broadly. Selwyn agreed to add the topic to the National Provider Network (NPN) agenda.

Update – Ongoing, carried forward to next NPN meeting.

Action – ERG Members to inform SG if your organisation is keen to be engaged in the external evaluation work and SG will mention at the initiation meeting.

Update – Completed. Katy MacMillan from Research Scotland was at the meeting to discuss the next steps for the external evaluation.

Action – SG will consider officials to attend the next meeting to provide update on SG response to the Hearings for Children Report and Children’s Hearings Redesign work.

Update – Ongoing. Officials were not available to join this meeting and considered timing of next meeting to be better to update on the evolving work. There will be an agenda item devoted to this topic for the next ERG on 4 July 2024.

Update - SG and Gordon Main would share the Language Leaders presentation slides with ERG members.

Update - Completed. Slides issued with draft meeting note.

Agenda item 3 - Members updates

Scottish children’s reporter administration (SCRA) Update – a written paper accompanied this item.

The chair invited Melissa to give an update. Melissa referred to the SCRA update paper which provided data from 1 November 2023 to 29 February 2024. The details were discussed, and highlights for this period included:

• Five hearings deferred with a reason of ‘for advocacy for the child’ in four different local authorities
• The total count of children with an advocacy worker at their hearing is 942 or 21% (total for the period is 4568 children)
• The total count of hearings with an advocacy worker present is 1285 or 17% (from a total of 7563). This is a 1% increase from the previous update provided to the November meeting
• A new addition (as requested by ERG members) is data further categorised by age and by local authority, presented in counts in table format and percentage in chart format

Melissa explained the run of the data for this period was completed quickly ahead of the meeting and would not offer any analysis. The data has been presented with additional breakdowns by local authority and age. Safeguarder figures were not provided, as discussion with Children’s 1st and look behind the figures in respect of experience for children and young people is needed to understand if and how data may be presented and run together. SCRA are confident in the data produced, although a few runs will be needed to build the data set (to complete a full year) for it to become more robust.

Melissa highlighted this data is new and has been gathered and provided for the purpose of this group’s work and is not part of the official stats published on the SCRA dashboard. Further work to audit and develop the data set will continue with SG and advocacy providers during the next twelve months.

The chair thanked Melissa and her colleagues for producing the data and that the breakdown by local authority and age was helpful and would be useful to look at further going forward in context of local circumstances.
Kay appreciated the breakdown snapshots and noted it will become more useful as more data is produced. The data highlights topics that will be discussed within the next NPN meeting to analysis more the barriers in certain areas and build learning around where things are going well. The percentage of children in the higher age brackets is also useful in considering those coming through and who may remain in the system longer up to age 18 as result of children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) bill provisions.

Vivien and Jane asked if the data could be shared with local authorises. Melissa confirmed they are confident in the data produced and would be happy for this to be shared with partner organisations. Vivien offered to assist with sharing the information with local authorities via chief social work officers and could share with social work scotland children and families standing committee too. Melissa confirmed she would share with SCRA Locality Report Managers and would encourage them to support sharing of the data. She mentioned that it may also help to invite them to be involved in any local meetings to support further promotion and practice (e.g. referral handling) improvements. 

Selwyn asked for clarity on whether the data recording made any distinction between who provides the advocacy i.e. children’s hearings national provision only or all advocacy provision. Melissa clarified the count is all-encompassing where a child is linked with/supported by an advocacy worker this is what is recorded in the system.

Children’s Hearings Scotland Update

Chair advised Edward was having technical issues and would join if possible. Chair confirmed, if Edward could not join a written update would be requested and shared with the draft meeting note.

National Provider Network (NPN) Update

Kay started with thanking Selwyn for his work as the Chair of the NPN over two years prior and following a hand-over at the turn of the year, she chaired the most recent meeting of the network at end February. There remain some pockets of issues but also lots of good practice including examples of early referral pathways working well in areas. At part of the February meeting the group had a good session with Katy MacMillan on developing the methodology for the evaluation field work. 

There were questions put back to the NPN following the meeting with CHS and SCRA about non-instructed advocacy and the group’s desire to reassert the position and explain the reasoning for the amendments/clarification that would be helpful to see in practice notes. Kay and Pauline have a meeting set to move this forward.

There was also a good discussion within the group about the promise scoping report on lifelong advocacy for care-experienced people published in February. It was noted there is no fixed timescales or an implementation plan as part of this report. The network had a good discussion on the opportunities and potential threats for the network. Sean McCartney from Scottish government promise team also joined the meeting and provided an update on plans for further engagement with provider organisations and other relevant stakeholders and he would bring further information to the group as those plans are developed.

Kay also mentioned the network would be organising a wellbeing conference for all frontline workers and a sub-group coordinated by Jillian McFadyen of Partners in Advocacy would support the planning.

Scottish Government Update – a written paper accompanied this item.

Pam highlighted some timebound items from the written update paper including:

• UNCRC (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024 consultation launched on draft statutory guidance on Part 2, and Part 3, section 18 – responses requested by 16 May
• Children’s (care and justice) (Scotland) bill stage 2 update and engagement plans ahead of stage 3
• National care service (Scotland) bill stage 1 vote on 29 February 2024 was successful general principles and financial resolution. Stage 2 will present opportunity to deliver the improvements needed to ensure that all children and families can benefit fairly and doing this work with COSLA and partners including users with lived experience and the workforce
• Disclosure Scotland consultation on reviewing fee waivers, discounting and registration fees. The public consultation will run until 28 May 2024.
• The Promise Scotland Lifelong Advocacy. Work is underway with colleagues in relevant policy areas across Scottish government to consider what is required to implement the approach recommended in The Promise Scotland scoping report
• Including discussions with the children’s advocacy team on the proposed expansion of the national practice model for children’s Hearings; and the cross-government advocacy network. We are considering the recommendations and proposals in both reports including planning a series of engagement with advocacy providers to gather insight to further inform next steps. We will be in touch more about this.

Pam emphasised that there are lots of interdependencies and policy connections within these areas.

Pam also reminded advocacy provider organisations about year-end grant claims and reporting deadlines including a reminder to complete a fair work survey and a self-assessment using the national practice model tool. Pam also mentioned that the Scottish government budget bill 2024-25 had been passed by parliament and we are working through internal processes for seeking agreements on making grant awards. A letter was sent to organisations to provide reassurance of our expectation to continue funding but explaining that at this stage we could not be definite about amounts. Pam also indicated that consideration is being taken on whether we would be able to request a multi-year agreement to help with longer-term planning and considering the challenges organisations have staffing on short-term contracts.

Actions

• Vivien offered to support SCRA with sharing the data on children’s advocacy in hearings with local authorities and social workers via chief social worker officers and the SWS children and families standing committee.
• Kay would take SCRA data to next NPN meeting for deeper discussion on learning points.
• Scottish government would ask Edward if he wanted to provide an update for CHS in writing to be circulated with the draft meeting note.
• SCRA, SG and advocacy providers agreement remains to work together to conduct some auditing across SCRA records and reported numbers from provider organisations over the next 12 months.
• SCRA will speak to Children 1st and consider if a run of figures for Safeguarders in hearing can be provided alongside the advocacy information. 

Item 4 - Update - Comms and engagement activity 

Louise provided an update on the outputs from the ERG Communications and Engagement Sub-Group meeting held on 18 January 2024 as detailed in the Scottish government written update paper. Louise thanked members for contributions in driving forward promotional work at local and national level. Louise mentioned the SIAA and SCRA comms colleagues supporting promotion of the website through the SIAA general audience newsletter and member organisation’s communications.

Louise also mentioned the latest analytics on the use of the hearings-advocacy website, including the numbers of page views slight rise, a bit of a drop in views to the contact someone local page, but increases in views of the children’s hearings and advocacy and Q&A page.

Pauline contributed information on testimonials for children and young people and for professionals wanting to become an advocacy worker was also part of the work being taken forward to develop the website content.

Jane mentioned a new training opportunity listed in the Scottish council for voluntary organisations (SCVO) calendar on how to become an advocacy worker. The Group could find out more about this.

Pam also updated on Scottish government activity as members of the internal Scottish government advocacy group (mentioned in the Scottish government update paper) and recently delivered a presentation to the advocacy sub-group of the NCS programme – all very interested in our provision and how it works and honest discussion about barriers.

Pam also asked Members for their views on whether we should start now to consider some kind of awareness raising campaign, or an event like the webinar to celebrate the first year of implementation, to mark four years since the  start of implementation in November 2020? Is this a good time to do something like this? We will have, at end of October, the findings from the external evaluation to draw upon in terms of highlighting good practice and suggesting areas for improvement. Views were invited from ERG members.

Kay commented in support of doing whatever might be possible within capacity. There is never a bad time to raise awareness. Sarah also commented in support and mentioned that have been discussing within the local child protection committee meetings opportunities to work on promotion to improve referral behaviours and increase uptake. Aware, also that what is happening in Perth may not be same approach across Tayside broadly.

Pam indicated Scottish government are open to doing some sort of event/s and need to promote the good practices and celebrating the successes. The evaluation report will offer opportunities to highlight good practice and areas to focus attention for improvement. Feedback from last webinar was that it should not be a ministerial fronted event but instead should be more focussed on looking at the data and supporting local learning, so perhaps geographically located series of events – we have a great opportunity when the local stats can be backed-up. We need to also make sure the sequencing of activities is right too as we are very mindful there is lots going on.

Actions

• Scottish governmtn and advocacy organisations explore what the new SCVO training on how to become an advocacy worker covers and opportunities it may offer.
• Scottish government to consider resource and opportunities to plan promotional/celebratory events over the year.

Item 5 – Update – Training and CPD

Louise thanked Vicki for the written update on behalf of clan childlaw included in Scottish government update paper. Louise reminded organisations the support required by managers to ensure all new staff complete the self-study training by provide details to clan childlaw to register these people for login/access to the moodle e-learning platform and that this is completed at their induction stage. Louise also mentioned the final training follow on session took place on 12 March and in the year, clan childlaw have delivered sessions to 90 attendees.

Louise invited Vicki to offer anything more from their work through training and the legal advice service over the year. Vicki mentioned the last session was well attended with 30 people completing the course. Vicki mentioned feedback returns had been low and it would be good if managers could offer any encouragement to their staff to complete the feedback forms. This has been the first complete year of using the moodle self-study. Not all those who have been registered have completed this. clan childlaw will reach out to staff and managers to understand why this might be and resolve any issues.

Pauline asked if the induction/self-study part of the training could be made available to upskill all children’s advocacy workers support other projects within organisations but who may also be part of contingency plans to build flexibility in capacity and resource.

Pam clarified the funding to clan childlaw to make the training available is limited to those advocacy workers employed for/paid by the children’s hearings advocacy scheme. Vicki also commented that there are other training opportunities offered by clan childlaw that can be explored.

Louise mentioned Scottish government’s intent is to work with clan childlaw again on a programme of training and legal support next year. Scottish government are currently in discussion with Clan around what training and support might be required for next year’s training commitment given advances in legislation and focus on children’s rights incorporation expansion / redesign of children’s hearings.

External Evaluation 

Pam stated we are delighted this evaluation is finally happening and we are eagerly awaiting the reports. Pam introduced Katy. Katy explained that the evaluation has started with background work and a literature review has provided tons of good information. The aim is to have the Literature Review Report completed in April. Using research tools, Research Scotland are planning the fieldwork now aiming not to repeat what has already been done and to focus on what we want to learn. Discussion guides are being written too. Katy wants to seek views in order to get a sense of what needs to happen to support the field work and support from the group members would be appreciated to help to make contacts/reach the various people (children and young people, Panel Members, Reporters, Social Workers, Safeguarders, legal representatives and other professionals involved in the child’s Hearing) by survey and to set up interviews. A lot of information has been gathered on the impact and views from children and young people. Katy spoke at the NPN in February and has been meeting individually with the advocacy organisations to help firm up the approach. The plan is to use both a short online survey to gather a breadth of views and well as in-person/online interviews (around 35) to gain deeper information.

Katy is also looking to set up a session with advocacy workers from across the providers. She is also organising a session with managers in April although availability of managers on a common day/time is looking tricky so plans may need to change.

Vivien commented the approach sounds comprehensive and worth noting that whilst a survey is not the only way to do this, there are so many people who are impacted on children and young people in children’s hearings. It would be impossible to cover all but aim to do the best. With reference seeking views from parents and carers, we should remember these are distinct and will have a different slant on issues. For example, kinship carer will have a different perspective to a residential childcare worker. Managers within local authorities with strategic responsibility for looked after and accommodated children are in a key position to assist with reaching the right people. Vivien confirmed she would be happy to support Katy to contextualise the information and assist with dissemination of it.

Melissa commented the survey tool would be useful as this could maximise potential reach across the children’s hearings community. SCRA and CHS can assist with contextualising and sharing the information with the right people.

Pauline contributed the local CHIP contacts may also be able to assist with information sharing and promotion. Pauline also noted that varied timing of interviews, possibly some in the evening may suit some people better e.g. parents.

Elaine confirmed she would be happy to share through the CHIP network and CELCIS networks.

Selwyn also suggested The Promise related forums would be good places to support sharing of information about the research. He suggested that it may help to identify where research on advocacy is or has happened already and what questions have been asked. He is keen to support this, and noted there will be variations in what comes back in perspectives and understanding. In recognition of the timing, or at what stage a child or young person is at in their journey through their Hearing, may distort the feedback.

Pauline offered a couple of question suggestions - a question for children and young people/parents' feedback, did you get the decision you hoped for? Or did you feel listened to by those at the hearing?

Katy responded with thanks for the offers of support. She also explained they know they will need to be careful about when these questions are asked to give a clear recognition to the stage people are at in the hearings and advocacy experience. They will share discussion guides soon too.

Actions

• Vivien and Katy to connect on research work to support to contextualise information and dissemination for Social Workers and local authorities.
• Melissa and Katy to connect on research work to support to contextualise information and disseminate with the children’s hearings community.
• Katy and Elaine to connect on research work to support to contextualise information and dissemination across the CHIP and relevant CELCIS networks.

Any other matters and date of next meeting – 4 July 2024

No other matters were raised. The date of the next meeting is 4 July 10:30-12:30. Pam thanked everyone for their attendance and participation and closed the meeting.