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?
A social worker from a specialist exploitation team based within children’s social care recognised reoccurring names of five young men - aged 14-16 - at operational multi-agency meetings. Each of the young people were receiving support from services, including the specialist exploitation team, edge of care team, and the youth offending service (YOS). Some of the young people were at risk of extra-familial harm (EFH), specifically child criminal exploitation (CCE). The young people spent significant time together as they were not attending school regularly. There were concerns the peers would be placed in unsafe situations due to suspected involvement in vehicle offenses, including underage driving. The young people had also been banned from a commercial area due to “anti-social behaviour” (ASB). This raised concerns that the young people would relocate to unknown and possibly unsafe locations, particularly during the holiday period where they could meet more freely.
What was the response?
Response to these concerns drew upon Contextual Safeguarding (CS) Level 2 – work around peer groups and locations - and included the following:
- YOS peer mapping software was used to identify key connections.
- The social worker identified the professional network involved in case management and direct work with the five young people. These included social workers from the specialist team and other teams in children’s social care, YOS workers and mentors and advocates from the youth service.
- A meeting was convened with these professionals to coordinate a planned response to maintain safety for the young people during the holiday period.
- A peer assessment was conducted to understand the group dynamics and peer-led, group-based work undertaken as part of a safety plan.
- A reallocation of cases was decided to facilitate practitioner-young person engagement across the peer group.
- A programme for the peer group was coordinated with support of the youth service. This involved a group activities in a youth club e.g. fitness and gaming sessions and day trips alongside educative and mentoring sessions.
- Risk assessments for programme activities were conducted by the specialist team and YOS workers forming a safety plan for the programme and the peers as a collective. This safety plan was fed back to the young people to discuss as a collective.
- Consent was attained from parents or carers for each young person’s involvement in the programme.
- Professionals visited the youth club for individual sessions as part of the existing support plan or youth justice processes.
What were the challenges?
The programme is dependent on additional financial resources and the team must plan ahead to secure funding. This could pose a challenge if the approach is extended for other cohorts of young people in future.
What difference did this make?
Feedback from the young people suggested they felt they felt safe and enjoyed the youth club environment. They regularly attended the sessions and there no further reports of “ASB” or other unsafe activity during this period. The young people were collectively able to input in the programme through offering suggestions for activities. The specialist team and youth service orientated part of the programme around their common interest – cars and music -in a fun and managed ways to reinforce the importance of safety. A team around the young people as a collective worked well alongside individual direct work and helped break down barriers with a range of statutory professionals. The work opened communication between the young people and professionals, particularly social workers within the specialist team who were able to engage in less formal discussion around being safe in the community. This provided opportunity for informal mentorship with the young people. The peers also discussed their relationships with young women, which was an opportunity for professionals to positive attitudes towards women and discuss healthy relationships. The programme reassured parents or carers that their child was in a safe space with professionals and provided some respite from tensions within the home.
What did we learn?
The group-based work reinforced the importance of accessible youth spaces for young people at risk of EFH. It also highlighted the value of combining statutory social care or youth justice work with another programme of work so young people build relationships with a range of professionals. This approach also provides opportunity for community guardianship to be established where accessible youth spaces are available, and links are being made with other youth service workers. The specialist team are now working in partnership with YOS and the youth service to further roll-out the group work programme to identified peers vulnerable to EFH.