6.7 Escalating Concerns
‘Effective Escalation Supports Effective Safeguarding’
‘Professional Disagreement Must Not Affect Outcomes for Children & Young People’
DO NOT HESITATE - ESCALATE
Dispute Resolution is a term used to describe the process of resolving disputes or disagreement between parties. When working with children and their families’ professional disagreement can be positive as challenge allows for review and can foster creative ways of working.
Disagreements can however impact negatively on positive working relationships and consequently on the ability to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. Disagreements therefore always require resolution.
SEFTON SCP’s Multi-Agency Procedure for Escalating Professional Safeguarding Concerns is expected to be used frequently, between front-line staff, line managers and senior managers (steps 1 and 2), to resolve professional disagreements before escalation to Sefton SCP representatives (Steps 3 & 4) is required.
When working in the arena of safeguarding children and young people it is inevitable that, at times, there will be disagreement between professionals. Whilst this is accepted it is vital that such differences do not affect outcomes for children and young people or detract from ensuring that the child or young person is safeguarded.
Disagreements can arise in a number of areas of multi-agency working, as well as within single-agency working, but are most likely to arise in relation to:
- Criteria for referrals;
- Outcomes of assessments;
- Roles and responsibilities of workers;
- Service provision;
- Information sharing and communication.
This procedure aims to ensure that professional disagreement is resolved, to an agreed position, which supports the effective safeguarding of a child or young person and is applicable to all Safeguarding Children agencies. This includes the voluntary, community and the faith (VCF) sectors.
What is Escalation?
Escalation is a process of formally challenging a decision made by another professional, group or organisation. Escalation procedures ensure that all professionals have a quick and straightforward means of resolving professional differences in order to safeguard the welfare of children and young people.
Escalation & Working Together
Effective working together depends on an open approach, clarity of roles and responsibilities and genuine, and honest, relationships between agencies. Escalation is a means of resolving professional differences and as such is an integral part of joint working to safeguard children.
This procedure is not designed to replace complaint processes established within individual partner agencies.
Principles of Resolving Professional Differences
Effective Challenge is Encouraged by Sefton SCP
Sefton SCP encourages effective challenge to support effective safeguarding. All agencies across the partnership have agreed to work in a culture of genuine partnership working and have committed to the following principles;
The Safety & Wellbeing of Children & Young People Must Remain the Paramount Consideration
The safety and wellbeing of children and young people must be the paramount consideration in any professional disagreement. Professional disputes which obscure the focus on the child or young person must be avoided.
Unresolved Significant Harm Concern
Attempts at dispute resolution may leave one professional, or agency, believing that the child / young person remains at risk of significant harm. This professional, or agency, has responsibility for communicating such concerns, through their line management, to an equivalent manager in Children's Social Care.
Escalation for Resolution is a Positive Action
Escalation of professional disagreement should not be viewed as a negative action. Professionals must know that escalation is undertaken so that outcomes for children and young people are improved.
All Professionals Must Take Responsibility
All professionals should take responsibility for their own cases as well as their actions, taken or otherwise, in relation to safeguarding children and young people.
Simple & Quick Resolution
Difficulties between agencies at practitioner or front-line worker level should be resolved as simply and as quickly as possible. (See Appendix 1 for logging concerns)
Respect the Views of Others
All practitioners should respect the views of others irrespective of their seniority or level of experience. They should also be mindful of the difficulties that challenging more senior or experienced practitioners may present to others.
Working Together
Working together effectively depends on resolving disagreements to the satisfaction of professionals and agencies through a genuine commitment to partnership working. Working together effectively depends on an open approach and honest relationship between agencies.
Airing & Sharing
Professional disputes are reduced when there is clarity about roles and responsibilities and problems are aired and shared appropriately in relevant network forums.
Open Mind
Practitioners and managers should always be prepared to review decisions and plans with an open mind remembering at all times that the welfare of the child is the paramount consideration.
Contents
SSCP Professional Escalation Flowchart
Escating Step by Step Process
Escalation can be via telephone, face-to-face or internet meeting. All escalations should be recorded to ensure that the procedure is effective, transparent and for SSCP auditing purposes. Escalation via e-mail is not recommended as effective multi-agency working requires professional challenge in a suitable format and escalation is to resolve conflict and areas of concern relating to children and their families, a priority need. Any escalation should follow the steps below within the timescales stated.
Step 1 - Direct Professional to Professional Discussion Differences of opinion or judgment should be discussed amongst frontline professionals to attempt to achieve a shared understanding and agree a local resolution, in line with the plan, or to ensure a plan is developed if needed. This must occur immediately with an acknowledgement and mutually agreed plan of action, including timescales within 2 working days | |
| 6.7.1 | |
Step 2 - Direct Manager to Manager Discussion If Step 1 does not resolve the issue then each professional should discuss the issue with their line manager or safeguarding supervisor. The line manager should review the concerns and ensure that they are justified and meet the purpose of this protocol. The line manager should then liaise with the other professional’s line manager in an attempt to reach a resolution. Consultation with senior managers within each organisation can be used if this would be felt to assist resolution. The discussion between managers must occur within a further 2 working days of step 1 (4 days total), with a mutually agreed plan of action including timescales. Respective Managers should record cases escalated using the Agency Escalation Summary Log (Appendix 1) | |
| 6.7.2 | |
Step 3 - Direct Head of Service to Head of Service Discussion If Step 1 and 2 do not reach a mutually agreeable resolution, then the agencies’ Head of Service should be contacted immediately to liaise with the other agency’s Head of Service or assist as appropriate to resolve the conflict. A mutually agreeable plan of action including timescales should be in place within a further 2 working days (6 days total). This may involve a resolution meeting to ensure the learning points are recorded and brought forward. Respective Service Managers should report to SSCP using the Report to SSCP (Appendix 2) | |
| 6.7.3 | |
Step 4 - Urgent resolution required - SSCP Independently Chaired Meeting If the Senior Managers cannot resolve the issue that is causing conflict between professionals and agencies, then a meeting should be convened with an independent chair selected from the SSCP Senior Leadership Team. SSCP Chaired Meeting will make final and binding decision for resolutions and communicate this to all WITHIN A FURTHER 5 WORKING DAYS (11 days total) Outcome of the meeting should be reported to the SSCP using the Report to SSCP (Appendix 2) | |
| 6.7.4 | |
| 6.7.5 | |
At every step discussions and actions should take place within stated timescales and be followed up in writing, between the agencies, and recorded in single agency records.
| |
| 6.7.6 |