In 2017, the Contextual Safeguarding programme (CSP) began partnering with local authorities to begin testing the Contextual Safeguarding (CS) framework in practice. This project was the first systematic attempt at evaluating the extent of the programme’s reach and impact. The Reach and Impact (R&I) workstream aimed to evidence the value that the CSP adds in terms of influencing policy and practice in response to extra-familial harm (EFH). Below is one of the case studies from the Reach and Impact Project. This case study describes how Contextual Safeguarding has influenced local systems and practice to improve the lives of young people experiencing or at risk of extra-familial harm. Names and some details have been changed to preserve young people’s anonymity.
What was the issue?
This case study describes the implementation of schools’ pilot within one local authority area. The pilot combined Contextual Safeguarding (CS) and restorative practice approaches. The CS-restorative practice approach responds to identified issues for pupils and staff in primary and secondary schools. It has been recognised that extra-familial harms (EFH), such as serious youth violence impact upon the relationships between pupils and staff and the school community as well as impact individual young people. In addition, serious incidents or individual reporting by pupils and parents and carers can surface the lack of safety in the immediate area around the schools, creating further vulnerability for young people.
What was the response?
The pilot was developed by Youth Offending Service (YOS) and safeguarding adolescents’ teams and a voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) organisation, who specialise in supporting organisations to embed and develop restorative practice. The approach aims to help pupils build sustainable relationships with peers and staff and to address the relational and contextual harms experienced. The CS-restorative practice team (including VCSE senior representative, YOS lead, project officer) work in together to implement the pilot and embed the CS-restorative practice approach in schools. The following phased approach is used:
- The selection and engagement of schools
- Identification of schools via scoping exercise of existing interventions, including meetings with Council education representatives
- Visiting Pupil Referral Units to learn about challenges faced by staff and pupils
- Meetings held with senior leadership teams e.g., headteachers and school governors within selected schools to identify areas of strength and weakness in fostering relationships and safety
- An implementation strategy is built with the school’s senior leadership team, including a staff training plan
- Assessment of schools’ needs and contextual risk for young people
- Surveys distributed to staff, parents and carers and pupils to identify safety concerns within the school and immediate community contexts
- Safety planning exercises conducted with headteachers and staff
- Holding meetings with community policing teams e.g., safer schools’ and safer neighbourhood officers within schools
- Peer mapping exercise to highlight relationships of strength or risk
- Virtual outreach and consultation with parents and carers to inform of pilot activities and developments
- Supporting and equipping staff and pupils to follow approach
- CS-restorative practice team will lead school assemblies to introduce the ideas involved in building a cohesive school community and the importance of strengthening and sustaining relationships
- Training workshops for all school staff, including training workshops by staff role e.g., meal and playground supervisors or pastoral leads
- Learning workshops for all pupils, adapted according to key stage
- Support in introducing and facilitating ‘restorative circles’ for building connection and belonging within the school
- Selection of primary or secondary pupils to offer training in peer mentoring
- Twilight Workshop for Parents and Governors to discuss merits of restorative culture change in the school and to consider alignment of approach between school and home
- Coaching for leadership on ensuring the embedding and sustainability of the approach within the school
- Ongoing support and shared learning opportunities through a virtual network for involved staff across the schools
- Forums are established where traumatic incident has occurred; this connects the school community for shared dialogue and support
What were the challenges?
Engaging with schools was challenging. Some had restorative practice was already in place and were unclear about additional benefits of the pilot and others were more used to using punishment and exclusion approaches in response to behavioural concerns of individual young people. Where schools lack budgetary resources or when there has been a turnover in leadership poses sustainability challenges.
What difference did this make?
There are early indications that introducing the CS-restorative practice approach into schools equips staff and pupils with the skills needed to respond to trauma and extra-familial risk and build self-esteem and relationships to help young people navigate future risks within the community. Pupils report feeling valued and listened to and staff have become aware of young peoples’ safety concerns in the school and community context. For example, pupils have identified unsafe routes to and from schools and bus stops where they feel vulnerable there when it is dark. Peer mentor training has provided pupils with the understanding and skills to navigate relational difficulties in the school context e.g. how to manage tensions within the playground rather than asking adults to step in. Staff have reported strengthened relationships with pupils and more willingness to talk or share their concerns.
There is evidence of a sense of a school community being enhanced in pilot schools. Parents and carers endorse the approach as it places the safety and wellbeing of their children at the forefront and seeks their consultation on issues that matter. It also fosters positive relationships and between parents and carers and the school. Some headteachers have become a champion of the approach and encourage other schools to implement it. The approach has also helped further develop and facilitate partnership work with community police, which can help identity trusting adults to increase community safety and guardianship for pupils
What did we learn?
The initial in-person meetings, tailored school needs, are essential in engaging schools. Liaising with the council’s education team helps facilitate the identification of schools and the initial engagement. Safety mapping may be more beneficial during the initial engagement and implementation strategy phase. This would underline the level of change required before deciding if the school is well-placed for implementation. Taking a ‘whole school’ approach to EFH has fostered the notion that the school community has a place in cultivating positive communication and relationships and creating safety for young people. The pilot work does not solely focus an intervention on pupils and/or staff within a school context; it’s a whole school and community approach responding to the impacts of extra-familial risks and relational strain. To test the benefits of the approach further, there are plans for implementation in a large secondary school and surrounding ‘feeder’ primary schools.