Improving Coordination

One of the greatest challenges in realising the vision of Bairns Hoose is that it requires a fundamental reimagining of existing systems and processes, alongside an integrated, multidisciplinary approach to delivery.

Multidisciplinary working is critical to deliver Bairns Hoose. As highlighted in the Bairns Hoose Evaluation phase two report :

"The North Strathclyde Bairns Hoose and Children First strive to implement a child-rights based approach which informs the approach to multi-disciplinary working. In the context of Bairns Hoose it aims to help ensure the model remains responsive to children’s experiences and needs, helping systems become more accountable to children both individually and collectively." ⁷⁴

This is no small task for services that have historically operated in isolation and developed siloed practices.

"{For}... somebody who has come through their career mainly in the children and justice world, I think you become, no matter how much you try not to, you become part of that challenge, part of that programme, because you say, actually this is how it’s always been done.  And you think about it very much from an adult perspective, at times.  But what happens is, Children First always, and rightly, put the child at the centre and challenge why these adult things have to happen the way they do.” (Professional 7) ⁷⁵  

While great strides in multidisciplinary working have been made among the social work, police, justice, health and third sector teams working within the North Strathclyde Bairns Hoose, the extent of leadership, practice and cultural change required to realise the gold standard of Bairns Hoose should not be underestimated.

The independent Children First North Strathclyde Bairns  Evaluation Phase One report, by the University of Edinburgh found that:

‘Evaluation respondents from all sectors admitted to a lack of clarity about the roles and remits of different services, despite working to support the same children and families...The police were saying that they left an interview at that time with a child, believing that if there was any support needs social work would do it, and then …social work were saying, unless there’s child protection concerns, we don’t have a remit.”⁷⁶

At this stage in developing Bairns Hoose the interview team and support workers continue to be able to identify ways in which the justice and recovery experiences of families can be strengthened through better coordination between professionals from health, education, children and family social work services with Bairns Hoose staff and processes. This section of the practical guide sets out our learning about how key functions can achieve the seamless, trauma-informed, multi-disciplinary support that is at the heart of the Bairns Hoose ‘four rooms’ model.

In many areas, the introduction of the Scottish Child Interview Model has marked the first time police and social work have been co-located and worked collaboratively from before the Interagency Referral Discussion (IRD) through the interview process and beyond.

In the first four years of North Strathclyde partnership of the co-located SCIM interview team and Children First Bairns Hoose rights, advocacy and recovery workers, the majority of children and young people referred for IRD have not been open to social work at the point of the notification of concern being received. It is however, clear that having ongoing social work support prior to the IRD can greatly assist in the assessment of children and young people’s needs.

Role of social work

• Voluntary - social work may seek to offer voluntary supports to the child or young person and their family. This may involve allocating a social worker to undertake specific work which would help to address any worries that professionals, the child or young person or their family may have and offer support, advice and guidance for the required period.
• Statutory - In instances where there is believed to be significant risk(s) to a child or young person, social work will initiate a child protection assessment. The purpose of this would be to understand any risks that the child or young person could be exposed to, as well as any protective factors which may negate them. This will involve them linking in with the Child Interview Team in relation to their completed joint investigative interview. At the end of this assessment three options are available; no further action or involvement by social work, a period of voluntary support to address any identified risks, or an Initial child protection planning meeting could be recommended. In the case of the latter, that multi agency meeting would consider whether the child’s name should be placed on the local child protection register for a period. The purpose of that would be to provide specific supports to offset identified risks and to further assess the situation. Subsequent meetings would be held until there is no longer need for child protection registration.
• Where there are significant worries about a child or young person, as well as a child protection assessment being initiated, social work may refer the situation to Court or the Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration (SCRA) to consider compulsory measures of care.
• Where there is no identified need for support identified from IRD, the family and involved professionals will be notified that social work intend to close the initial concern raised to them. As there has been an IRD, social work would retain detail of that on record for the specified time in each local authority retention guidance. This is a legal requirement of them and is in case that information is needed again in future

In both statutory and voluntary involvements, social workers will work closely with the child or young person, their family, and other professionals, such as police, health, education, Children First and the Child Interview Team to avoid  duplication and maximise the effectiveness of the support they provide.

School support and safety planning needs to be a feature of the holistic, GIRFEC based support plans for children and young people using Bairns Hoose.

Every child’s experience of school is unique.

For some children, schools are a protective space and have the potential to be a source of additional support, usually through the availability of individual pastoral care, access to school based ‘wellbeing hubs’ and counselling.

For other children school is the context in which abuse or violence occurs. Children regularly describe school as a place that presents further challenges and for many their experiences of abuse and corresponding engagement in child protection and justice processes impacts significantly on their school attendance and attainment.

Focusing on how to ensure safe, regular school attendance is an important aspect of the Bairns Hoose post interview support offer,  to ensure that child witnesses attain their educational potential and achieve their ambitions for the future. This is also important to ensure that the rights of children who report abuse and harm to access education are upheld (UNCRC, Article 28). 

One aspect of the justice process for child victims and witnesses that requires further work is that they are required at times to give evidence in respect of children’s hearings process. This happens when the person they have alleged within interview that has caused them harm is themselves under 18 years of age and where the case has been referred to the Scottish Children's Reporter Administration (SCRA). In this situation the child who is referred to the Children’s Hearing has access to care and support measures to ensure that they understand the process, with guides available to provide information about each stage of the process and their rights within this.

Child victims or witnesses who are required to give evidence in the proof hearing do not have routine access to the same degree of advice and support as those giving evidence in criminal proceedings. There is a lack of information targeted specifically for them to explain the process, their involvement in this and their rights. For the child victim or witness the proof hearing provides the defence agent representing the ‘suspected’ child who may be contesting the grounds of referral (and the evidence given by the child victim or witness) the right to cross examine the child victim or witness. Whilst these proceedings are held in private, they will usually take place within a Sherriff Court setting. As the focus of the proceedings is the child who is the subject of the referral to the Children’s Hearing, there can inadvertently be less focus on the needs of the child witness, who does not have automatic access to special measures within this process.

Within the Children First North Strathclyde Bairns Hoose a number of children have described their experience of being questioned within a proof hearing as a cross examination of their evidence. Their accounts show a high degree of similarity in relation to the levels of stress they experience, when compared to giving evidence within criminal proceedings. In addition, their needs as child witnesses appear to be given less priority within this process. Whilst professionals understand that a proof hearing and a criminal court hearing are different, children’s experience of these are remarkably similar.

Child witnesses describe the experience of going to court to talk about what happened to them as highly stressful and retraumatising, regardless of whether this is within a proof hearing or a criminal court process. In addition, due to the less formal setting of the proof hearing for the child victim or witness there can be the additional pressure of both families meeting each other on the day and a heightened sense of emotions around which of the young people are telling the truth. The Children First North Strathclyde partnership is committed to developing the means to offer routine access to the Justice Suite for child victims and witnesses participating in proof hearings within children’s hearing process.  However, the mechanism enabling this to happen still need to be developed and tested.

⁷⁴ Mitchell, M., et. al. (2024) The story so far - North Strathclyde Bairns Hoose Evaluation – Phase two evaluation report. University of Edinburgh. p.21

⁷⁵ Mitchell, M., et. al. (2024) The story so far - North Strathclyde Bairns Hoose Evaluation – Phase two evaluation report. University of Edinburgh. p.2

⁷⁶ North Strathclyde Bairns Hoose Evaluation, Phase One Report, March 2023, Dr Mary Mitchell, Dr Camille Warrington, Professor John Devaney, Dr Jennifer Lavoie & Dr Peter Yates

⁷⁷ Mitchell, M., et. al. (2024) The story so far - North Strathclyde Bairns Hoose Evaluation – Phase two evaluation report. University of Edinburgh. p.20