Child Protection Conferences



4.1 Child protection conferences

All conferences

Note: Some Local Safeguarding Children Boards may have models or approaches as an integral part of their child protection framework, for example a Strengthening Families approach or Signs of Safety model; these approaches support assessment of risk using a strength and resilience model to engage children, young people and families. The models outline how Child Protection conferences will share and organise information and make a decision as to whether a plan needs to be in place to reduce the risk of harm to the child. It is advisable to enquire about the local approach to conferences although the basic principles in this chapter will remain the same.


4.1.1 A child protection conference brings together family members (and the child/ren where appropriate), supporters / advocates and those professionals most involved with the child and family to make decisions about the child's future safety, health and development. If concerns relate to an unborn child, consideration should be given as to whether to hold a child protection conference prior to the child's birth.


4.1.2 The tasks for all conferences are to:

  • Bring together and analyse, in an inter-agency setting the information which has been obtained about the child's developmental needs, and the parents' capacity to respond to these needs to ensure the child's safety and promote the child's health and development within the context of their wider family and environment;
  • Consider the evidence presented to the conference and taking into account the child's present situation and information about his or her family history and present and past family functioning, to decide whether the child is at risk of significant harm;
  • Recommend what future action is required in order to safeguard and promote the welfare of the child, including the child becoming the subject of a child protection plan, what the planned developmental outcomes are for the child and how best to intervene to achieve these;
  • Appoint a lead social worker from BFSWS for each child who requires a child protection plan. The social worker is responsible for ensuring that the child protection plan is developed, co-ordinated and fully implemented to timescale;
  • Identify a core group of professionals and family members to develop, implement and review the progress of the child protection plan.
  • Put in place a contingency plan if the agreed actions are not completed and/or circumstances change impacting on the child’s safety and welfare.


4.1.3 The BFSWS team manager is responsible for making the decision to convene a child protection conference. The reasons for calling the conference (or not calling a conference following completion of a sec 47 enquiry) must be recorded.


4.1.4 A conference should be convened, if requested by a professional, supported by a senior manager / named or designated professional. If there is disagreement about the decision to hold the conference between agencies, the conflict resolution procedures should be applied. See Part B: Resolution of Professional Disagreements in Work
Relating to the Safety of Children

Types of conferences

4.1.5 Depending on the circumstances there are several different types of child protection conferences:

  • Initial conferences;
  • Pre-birth conferences;
  • Transfer in conferences;
  • Review conferences.

Note: All types of child protection conferences should include not only the child subject of the specific concerns but must also include consideration of the needs of all other children in the household.


4.1.6 An initial child protection conference must be convened following a s47 type enquiry to safeguard and promote the welfare of a child who is suspected of, or likely to be, suffering significant harm.


4.1.7The initial child protection conference should take place within 15 working days of a strategy discussion, or the strategy discussion at which section 47 enquiries were initiated, if more than one has been held ; or

Within 15 working days after notification by another local authority that a child subject of a child protection plan has permanently moved into the area.


4.1.8 If there is a protection order (PO) and it is decided to hold a child protection conference, the conference should, whenever possible, be held before the PO expires.


4.1.9 Where a child assessment order has been made, the conference should be held immediately on conclusion of examinations and assessments.


4.1.10 Where there is delay, this must be reported to the BFSWS team manager (including reasons for the delay) and BFSWS must ensure risks of harm to the child are monitored and action taken to safeguard the child. ICRS must be informed of the reason for delay.


4.1.11 A pre-birth conference is an initial child protection conference concerning an unborn child. Such a conference has the same status and must be conducted in a comparable manner to an initial child protection conference. The timing of the conference should be carefully considered bearing in mind the need for early action to allow time to plan for the birth.


4.1.12 Pre-birth conferences should always be convened where there is a need to consider if a multi-agency child protection plan is required. This decision will usually follow from a pre-birth assessment.


4.1.13 A pre-birth conference should be held where:

  • A pre-birth assessment gives rise to concerns that an unborn child may be at risk of significant harm;
  • A previous child has died or been removed from parent/s as a result of significant harm;
  • A child is to be born into a family or household that already has children who are subject of a child protection plan;
  • An adult or child who is a risk to children resides in the household or is known to be a regular visitor.


4.1.14 Other risk factors to be considered are:

  • The impact of parental risk factors such as mental ill health, learning disabilities, substance misuse and domestic violence. See Part B for Guidance.
  • A mother under 18 years of age about whom there are concerns regarding her ability to self-care and / or to care for the child.


4.1.15 All agencies involved with pregnant women, where there are concerns about the unborn, should consider whether there is the need for an early referral to BFSWS so that assessments are undertaken as early as possible in the pregnancy.


4.1.16 The pre-birth conference should take place as soon as practical, however no earlier than 24 weeks and no later than 27 weeks gestation as a guide for professionals, so as to allow as much time as possible for planning support for the baby and family. Where there is a known likelihood of a premature birth, the conference should be held earlier.


4.1.17 Transfer in conferences should take place when a child, who is the subject of a child protection plan, moves from the original LA area to another LA area to live there permanently e.g. for a period of more than 3 months. BFSWS, designated health professionals and the police should be notified promptly.


4.1.18 The transfer in conference should receive reports from the original LA and the original authority should be invited to attend the conference, which should take place within 15 working days of the notification. Such a conference has the same status and purpose and must be conducted in a comparable manner to an initial child protection conference.


4.1.19 A review conference is intended:

  • To review whether the child is continuing to suffer, or is likely to suffer, significant harm, and review developmental progress against the child protection plan outcomes.
  • To consider whether the child protection plan should continue or should be changed.


Every review should consider explicitly whether the child is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm and hence continues to require safeguarding from harm through adherence to a formal child protection plan. If the child is considered to be suffering significant harm, the local authority should consider whether to initiate family court proceedings. For further guidance see the Children Act 1989 Guidance and Regulations

If not, then the child should no longer be the subject of a child protection plan and the conference should consider what continuing support services may benefit the child and family and make recommendations accordingly.


4.1.20 Thorough regular review is critical to achieving the best possible outcomes for the child and includes:

  • Sharing and analysing up-to-date information about the child's health, development and functioning and the parent's capacity to ensure and promote the child's welfare;
  • Maintaining contact with Health professionals such as GPs and Health Visitors about the child
  • Considering the impact on the child of the capacity and functioning of the parent/carer
  • Ensuring that the measures already in place to safeguard the child from harm are effective and in line with local arrangements;
  • Regularly reviewing the progress of all aspects of the Child Protection Plan
  • Making changes to the child protection plan (e.g. where a family is not co-operating);
  • Deciding what action is required to safeguard the child if there are changes to the child's circumstances;
  • Setting or re-setting desired outcomes and timescales;
  • Seeking and taking into account the child's (possibly changed) wishes and feelings;
  • Making judgements about the likelihood of the child suffering significant harm in the future;
  • Deciding whether there is a need for a new assessment.


4.1.21 The first child protection review conference should be held within three months of the date of the initial child protection conference.


4.1.22 Further reviews should be held at intervals of not more than six months for as long as the child remains the subject of a child protection plan. If the initial conference was a pre-birth conference the review conference should take place within one month of the child's birth or within three months of the date of the pre-birth conference, whichever is sooner. Subsequent review conferences should take place within six months thereafter.


4.1.23 All review conferences should consider the timescales to meet the needs and safety of the child. An infant or child under the age of 5 where there are serious concerns about the levels of risk might require the timescales to be shorter than those set above. The decisions should reflect the circumstances of the child and the impact on the child of the concerns rather than any agency constraints.

Additionally, some Local Safeguarding Children Boards have systems in place to routinely review children, who have been subject of a Child Protection plan for over 2 years to reconsider the progress of the plan. Such systems should be specifically concerned about children under the age of 5 years.


4.1.24 Reviews should be brought forward where / when:

  • Child protection concerns relating to a new incident or allegation of abuse have been sustained;
  • There are significant difficulties in carrying out the child protection plan;
  • A child is to be born into the household of a child or children already subject of child protection plans;
  • An adult or child who poses a risk to children is to join, or commences regular contact with, the household;
  • There is a significant change in the circumstances of the child or family not anticipated at the previous conference and with implications for the safety of the child;
  • A child subject of a child protection plan is also looked after by the local authority and consideration is being given to returning them to the circumstances where care of the child previously aroused concerns (unless this step is anticipated in the existing child protection plan);
  • The core group believe that an early cancellation of the need for a child protection plan should be considered.


4.2 Looked after children and child protection conferences

Looked after children with child protection plans

4.2.1 Children who are already looked after will not usually be the subjects of child protection conferences, though they may be the subjects of a s47 enquiry. The circumstances in which a child who is looked after may be subject to a child protection plan or be considered for a child protection conference would be:

  • A child, who is the subject of an interim care order, who remains at home pending the outcome of the final family court proceedings hearing;
  • A child, who is subject of proceedings without any order, pending the outcome of the final family court proceedings hearing;
  • A child subject to a care order who is to be returned to their birth family / returned home;


A child looked after under s20 of the Children Act 1989 who has been or is about to be returned to a parent's care about whom there are concerns in terms of safeguarding the child's welfare; see The Children Act 1989 Guidance and Regulations Volume 2: Care Planning, Placement and Review.


4.2.2 If it is proposed that a child subject to a care order should be returned to their birth family / returned home, the members of the statutory looked after child case review para 4.3 of Regulations and Guidance Volume 2 (2011) considering the proposal for rehabilitation must decide and record whether an initial child protection conference should be convened. If the decision of the Review is that an initial child protection conference should be convened, the child's social worker must request it.


4.2.3 If a parent removes or proposes to remove a child looked after under s20 from the care of BFSWS and there are serious concerns about that parent's capacity to provide for the child's needs and protect them from significant harm, the BFSWS social worker must discuss the case with their team manager and make a decision about whether a child protection enquiry should be initiated. If a child protection enquiry is initiated, the reasons for this must be clearly recorded on the child's record and may lead to an initial child protection conference. In such circumstances, the BFSWS social worker and manager should consider whether legal action is required to protect the child.

Children with child protection plans who become looked after

4.2.4 If a child subject of a child protection plan becomes looked after under s20, their legal situation is not permanently secure, and the next child protection review conference should consider the child's safety in the light of the possibility that the parent can simply request their removal from the local authority's care. The child protection review conference must be sure that the looked after childcare plan provides adequate security for the child and sufficiently reduces or eliminates the risk of significant harm identified by the initial child protection conference.


4.2.5 If a child ceases to be subject of a child protection plan as a result of a decision at a child protection review conference, and the parent then unexpectedly requests the return of the child from the local authority's care, the BFSWS social worker and manager should discuss the need for an initial child protection conference. The social worker must record the reasons for the decision whether or not to hold a conference.


4.2.6 If a court grants a care order in respect of a child who is subject of a child protection plan, the subsequent child protection review conference must make an assessment about the security of the child, considering issues such as contact and the looked after care plan for the child. If the care plan for the child involves remaining in or returning to the family of origin, the child protection review conference should give careful consideration to whether the child can be adequately protected through the framework of the child care reviews.

Review conferences and children who are looked after

4.2.7 Where a looked after child remains the subject of a child protection plan there must be a single plan and a single planning and reviewing process, led by the Independent Conference + Review Service (ICRS). This means that the timing of the review of the child protection aspects of the care plan under the requirements of these Procedures should be the same as the review under the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (England) Regulations 2010. (This will ensure that up to date information in relation to the child's welfare and safety is considered within the review meeting and informs the overall care planning process.


4.2.8 Consideration should be given to whether the criteria continues to be met for the child to remain the subject of a child protection plan and consideration to bring forward a Review conference should be addressed. Significant changes to the care plan should only be made following the looked after child's review.


4.2.9 Consideration should be given to the ICRS chairing the child protection conference where a looked after child remains the subject of a child protection plan despite there being:

  • Different requirements for independence of the ICRS function compared to the chair of the child protection conference; and
  • A requirement for the child protection conference to be a multi-agency forum while children for the most part want as few external people as possible at a review meeting where they are present.


4.2.10 This should be decided on an individual case basis and managed to ensure that the independence of the independent reviewing officer is not compromised. Similarly, the child might benefit from another independent chair and where it is possible should be consulted about the use of the ICRS as chair. Where it is not possible for the ICRS to chair the child protection conference the ICRS will attend the child protection review conference.


4.3 Membership of child protection conference

4.3.1 A conference should consist of only those people who have a significant contribution to make due to their knowledge of the child and family or their expertise relevant to the case. This is likely to include:

  • The child or their representative;
  • Parents and those with parental responsibility;
  • Family members (including the wider family);
  • Foster carers (current or former);
  • BFSWS social worker and first line manager
  • Professionals involved with the child (e.g. health visitor, school nurse, paediatrician, GP, school staff, CAMHS, early years staff, education welfare officers,);
  • Professionals with expertise in the particular type of harm suffered by the child or in the child's particular condition (e.g. a disability or long-term illness);
  • Those involved in investigations (e.g. the police);
  • Voluntary Organisations such as Home Start etc
  • A professional who is independent of operational or line management responsibilities for the case as Chair. The status of the Chair should be sufficient to ensure multi-agency commitment to the conference and the child protection plan;


4.3.2 Invitations to conference should be provided to all professionals with a need to know or who have a contribution to the task involved. These may include:

  • Local authority legal services (child protection), if it is anticipated that legal advice will be required;
  • The child/ren's guardian where there are current court proceedings;
  • Professionals involved with the parents or other family members (e.g. family support services, adult mental health services, probation, the GP;
  • Midwifery services where the conference concerns an unborn or new-born child
  • Probation or the Youth Offending Team;
  • Local authority housing services;
  • Domestic violence adviser;
  • Alcohol and substance abuse services;
  • A representative of the armed services, in cases where there is a service connection;
  • Any other relevant professional or service provider;
  • A supporter / advocate for the child and/or parents (e.g. a friend or solicitor); solicitors must comply with the Law Society guidance: Attendance of solicitors at local authority Children Act meetings 2013.


4.3.3 A professional observer can only attend with the prior consent of the Chair and the family and must not take part in discussions or decision-making.


4.3.4 Professionals who are invited but unable to attend for unavoidable reasons should:

  • Inform the conference administrator;
  • Submit a written report; and
  • Arrange for a well-briefed agency representative to attend and speak to the report.
  • Agencies are expected to share a report about the child and family in written form with the family and other agencies as appropriate, prior to the conference, whether or not they are able to attend the conference.  See PART B; Information for conference.


4.3.5 Babies and young children should not normally be present during the conference, as they will cause distraction from the focus of the meeting. Parents should be assisted to make arrangements for their care where necessary.

Location, timing and safety for conferences

4.3.6 The location and timing of the conference should be planned to ensure maximum attendance from the most critical attendees. In exceptional circumstances it may be considered for key professionals to contribute via conference calls. Conferences should not be scheduled for times when parents will be busy looking after children at home (e.g. after the end of the school day). Wherever possible, BFSWS should provide parents with the opportunity to utilise appropriate day care for their children to enable their attendance at the conference.


4.3.7 BFSWS is responsible for taking into account health and safety issues and security arrangements when planning each conference. 

Conference quorum

4.3.8 As a minimum quorum, at every conference there should be attendance by BFSWS and at least two other professional groups or agencies, which have had direct contact with each child who is the subject of the conference. In addition, attendees may also include those whose contribution relates to their professional expertise or responsibility for relevant services. In exceptional cases, where a child has not had relevant contact with three agencies (that is, local authority children's social care and two others), this minimum quorum may be breached.


4.3.9 In exceptional circumstances, the Chair may decide to proceed with the conference despite lack of agency representation. This would be relevant where:

  • A child has not had relevant contact with three agencies (e.g. pre-birth conferences);
  • Sufficient information is available; and
  • A delay will be detrimental to the child.


4.3.10 Where an inquorate conference is held, an early review conference should be arranged.


4.4 Involving children and family members

4.4.1 It is important that the principles of partnership with children and parents are maintained in the child protection process. The following are minimum requirements for all attendees of the conference and the responsibility of the Chair of the conference to uphold:

  • Parents must be invited and encouraged to participate in all child protection meetings unless it is likely to prejudice the welfare of the child.
  • Parents should be supported to enable them to participate by timely preparation and information, such as leaflets, being provided about the process and their role.
  • Advocates should be facilitated to support parents.
  • A meeting with the Independent Chair prior to the meeting should take place.
  • Those parents for whom English is not a first language must be offered and provided with an interpreter, if required. A family member should not be expected to act as an interpreter of spoken or signed language. See Part B Working with interpreters / communications facilitators.


Exceptionally, it may be necessary to exclude one or more family members from a conference, in whole or in part. Where a parent attends only part of a conference as a result of exclusion, they must receive the record of the conference. The Chair should decide if the entire record is provided or only that part attended by the excluded parent (see PART B:  Exclusion of family members from a conference).


4.4.2 Explicit consideration should be given to the potential for conflict between family members and possible need for children or adults to speak without other family members present.


4.4.3 The child, subject to their level of understanding, needs to be given the opportunity to contribute meaningfully to the conference.


4.4.4 In practice, the appropriateness of including an individual child must be assessed in advance and relevant arrangements made to facilitate attendance at all or part of the conference.


4.4.5 Where it is assessed, in accordance with the criteria below, that it would be inappropriate for the child to attend, alternative arrangements should be made to ensure their wishes and feelings are made clear to all relevant parties (e.g. use of an advocate, written or taped comments).

Criteria for presence of child at conference, including direct involvement

4.4.6 The primary questions to be addressed are:

  • Does the child have sufficient understanding of the process?
  • Have they expressed an explicit or implicit wish to be involved?
  • What are the parents' views about the child's proposed presence?
  • Is inclusion assessed to be of benefit to the child?


4.4.7 The test of 'sufficient understanding' is partly a function of age and partly the child's capacity to understand. The following approach is recommended:

  • A (rebuttable) presumption that a child of less than twelve years of age is unlikely to be able to be a direct and/or full participant in a forum such as a child protection conference;
  • A presumption (also rebuttable by evidence to the contrary) that from the age of twelve and over, a child should be offered such an opportunity.


4.4.8 A declared wish not to attend a conference (having been given such an explanation) must be respected.


4.4.9 Consideration should be given to the views of and impact on parent/s of their child's proposed attendance.


4.4.10 Consideration must be given to the impact of the conference on the child (e.g. if they have a significant learning difficulty or where it will be impossible to ensure they are kept apart from a parent who may be hostile and / or attribute responsibility onto them). Consideration must be given in particular to the extent to which it is appropriate for a child to hear details of a parent's personal difficulties and a parent's view about this must be respected.


4.4.11 In such cases, energy and resources should be directed toward ensuring that, by means of an advocate and / or preparatory work by a social worker, the child's wishes and feelings are effectively represented.

Direct involvement of a child in a conference

4.4.12 In advance of the conference, the Chair and the BFSWS social worker should agree whether:

  • The child attends for all or part of the conference, taking into account confidentiality or parents and / or siblings;
  • The child should be present with one or more of their parents;
  • The Chair meets the child alone or with a parent prior to the meeting.


4.4.13 If a child attends all or part of the conference, it is essential that they are prepared by the social worker or independent advocate who can help them prepare a report or rehearse any particular points that the child wishes to make.


4.4.14 Provision should be made to ensure that a child who has any form of disability is enabled to participate.


4.4.15 Consideration should be given to enabling the child to be accompanied by a supporter or an advocate.

Indirect contributions when a child is not attending

4.4.16 Indirect contributions from a child should, whenever possible, include a pre-meeting with the conference Chair.


4.4.17 Other indirect methods include written statements, e-mails, text messages and taped comments prepared alone or with independent support, and representation via an advocate.


4.4.18 Childcare professionals should all be able to represent a child's views and a particular responsibility falls upon the BFSWS social worker to do so. It is more important that the child feels involved in the whole process of child protection assessment rather than merely receiving an invitation to the conference.


4.5 Exclusion of family members from a conference

4.5.1 The conference Chair, or other participants, must be notified as soon as possible by the social worker if it is considered necessary to exclude one or both parents for all or part of a conference. The Chair should make a decision according to the following criteria:

  • Indications that the presence of the parent may seriously prejudice the welfare of the child;
  • Sufficient evidence that a parent may behave in such a way as to interfere seriously with the work of the conference such as violence, threats of violence, racist or other forms of discriminatory or oppressive behaviour, or being in an unfit state (e.g. through drug, alcohol consumption or acute mental health difficulty). In their absence, a friend or advocate may represent them at the conference;
  • A child requests that the parent / person with parental responsibility is not present while they are present;
  • The presence of one or both parents would prevent a professional from making their proper contribution through concerns about violence or intimidation (which should be communicated in advance to the conference Chair).
  • The need (agreed in advance with the conference Chair) for members to receive confidential information that would otherwise be unavailable, such as legal advice or information about a criminal investigation;
  • Conflicts between different family members who may not be able to attend at the same time (e.g. in situations of domestic violence).


4.5.2 Where a worker from any agency believes a parent should, on the basis of the above criteria, be excluded, representation must be made, if possible at least three working days in advance, to the Chair of the conference.


4.5.3 The agency concerned must indicate which of the grounds it believes is met and the information or evidence on which the request is based. The Chair must consider the representation carefully and may need legal advice.


4.5.4 If, in planning a conference, it becomes clear to the Chair that there may be a conflict of interest between the children and the parents, the conference should be planned so that the welfare and safety of the child remains paramount.


4.5.5 Any exclusion period should be for the minimum duration necessary and must be clearly recorded in the conference record.


4.5.6 It may also become clear in the course of a conference that its effectiveness will be seriously impaired by the presence of the parent/s. In these circumstances the Chair may ask them to leave.


4.5.7 Where a parent is on bail, or subject to an active police investigation, it is the responsibility of the Chair to ensure that the police representative can fully present their information and views and also that the parents participate as fully as circumstances allow. This might mean that if the police representative is a police officer they may be asked to leave a conference after providing information. It is not appropriate for a police officer to administer a caution to parents prior to the conference; the purpose of the conference is to enable analysis and not to progress a criminal investigation.


4.5.8 The decision of the Chair over matters of exclusion is final regarding both parents and the child/ren.


4.5.9 If, prior to the conference, the Chair has decided to exclude a parent, this must be communicated in writing with information on how they may make their views known, how they will be told the outcome of the conference and about the complaints procedure.  See PART B: Dissent from the conference decision and Complaints.


4.5.10 Those excluded should be provided with a copy of the BFSWS social worker's report to the conference and be provided with the opportunity to have their views recorded and presented to the conference. The Chair will determine whether or not the excluded parent should receive the record of the conference.


4.5.11 If a decision to exclude a parent is made, this must be fully recorded in the record. Exclusion at one conference is not reason enough in itself for exclusion at further conferences.


4.6 The absence of parents and / or children

4.6.1 If parents and / or children do not wish to attend the conference they must be provided with full opportunities to contribute their views. The social worker must facilitate this by:

  • The use of an advocate or supporter to attend on behalf of the parent or child;
  • Enabling the child or parent to write or tape or use drawings to represent their views;
  • Agreeing that the BFSWS social worker, or any other professional, expresses their views.


4.7 Information for the conference

4.7.1 In order for the conference to reach well-informed decisions based on evidence, it needs adequate preparation and sharing of information on the child/ren's needs and circumstances by all agencies that have had significant involvement with the child and family, including those who were involved in the assessment and the s47 type enquiry. All reports must be clear and distinguish between facts, allegations and opinions.

BFSWS report

4.7.2 BFWS report should provide all conferences with a written report that summarises and analyses the information obtained in the course of the assessment undertaken in line with the child protection enquiries under s47 of the Children Act 1989 and information in existing records relating to the child and family. Reports to Review conferences should include a clear analysis of the implementation and progress of the Child protection plan including any new information or obstacles to implementation.


4.7.3 Where decisions are being made about more than one child in a family the report should consider the safeguarding needs of each child.


4.7.4 The record of the assessment by the BFSWS social worker should form a part of the report.


4.7.5 The conference report should include information on the dates the child was seen by the BFSWS social worker during the course of the section 47 type enquiries, if the child was seen alone and if not, who was present and for what reasons.


4.7.6 All children in the household need to be considered and information must be provided about the needs and circumstances of each of them, even if they are not the subjects of the conference.


4.7.7 The report should be provided to parents and older children (to the extent that it is believed to be in their interests) at least two working days in advance of the initial conferences and a minimum of five working days before review conferences to enable any factual errors to be corrected and the family to comment on the content.


4.7.8 The report should be available to the conference Chair at least two working days prior to the initial conference and five working days in advance of the review conference.

Reports from other agencies

4.7.9 Information by all agencies about their involvement with the family should be submitted in a written, legible and signed report for the conference. The report should be available to the conference Chair and other attendees two working days in advance of the conference and five working days for a review conference. All agencies should have a conference report proforma, approved by the BFG Safeguarding Board. The report should be discussed with the child, if appropriate and the family prior to the conference (to the extent that it is believed to be in their interests).

Information from children and families

4.7.10 Children and family members should be helped in advance to consider what they wish to convey to the conference, how they wish to do so and what help and support they will require (e.g. they may choose to communicate in writing, by tape or with the help of an advocate).


4.7.11 Families may need to be reminded that submissions need to be sufficiently succinct to allow proper consideration within the time constraints of the child protection conference.

See PART B:  Involving child/ren and family members.


4.8 Chairing the conference

Conference Chair

4.8.1 The Chair of a child protection conference will be ICRS accountable to the chain of command ( CoC) . They must not have or have had operational or line management responsibility for the case. Wherever possible, the same person should also chair subsequent child protection reviews in respect of a specific child.

4.8.2 If a decision is made that a child requires a protection plan to safeguard their welfare, the Chair should ensure that:

  • The risks to the child are stated and what is needed to change is specified;
  • BFSWS is identified as a Lead social worker to develop, co-ordinate and implement the child protection plan.
  • A core group is identified of family members and professionals;
  • A date is set for the first core group meeting within ten working days of the initial conference and timescales set for subsequent meetings;
  • A date for the child protection review conference is set;
  • The outline child protection plan is formulated and clearly understood by all concerned including the parents and, where appropriate, the child.


4.8.3 If the conference determines that a child does not need the specific assistance of a protection plan but does need help to promote their welfare, the Chair must ensure that:

  • The conference draws up a child in need plan or makes appropriate recommendations for a plan.
  • The conference considers any local protocols in place referred to as “step down procedures” or Family Group Conference processes.


4.9 The child protection plan

Threshold for a child protection plan

4.9.1 The conference should consider the following question when determining whether a child requires a multi-agency child protection plan:

  • Has the child suffered significant harm? and
  • Is the child likely to suffer significant harm in the future?


4.9.2 The test for likelihood of suffering harm in the future should be that either:

  • The child can be shown to have suffered maltreatment or impairment of health or development as a result of neglect or physical, emotional or sexual abuse, and professional judgement is that further ill-treatment or impairment is likely; or
  • A professional judgement, substantiated by the findings of enquiries in this individual case or by research evidence, predicts that the child is likely to suffer maltreatment or the impairment of health and development as a result of neglect or physical, emotional or sexual abuse.


4.9.3 If a child is likely to suffer significant harm, then they will require multi-agency help and intervention delivered through a formal child protection plan.


4.9.4 The primary purposes of this plan are to:

  • ensure the child is safe from harm and prevent him or her from suffering further harm;
  • promote the child's health and development; and
  • support the family and wider family members to safeguard and promote the welfare of their child, provided it is in the best interests of the child.

Decision that a child needs a child protection plan

4.9.5 If a decision is taken that the child is likely to suffer significant harm and hence in need of a child protection plan, the Chair should determine which category of abuse or neglect the child has suffered or is at risk of suffering. The category used (that is physical, emotional, sexual abuse or neglect, see Part A, responding to concerns of abuse and neglect for definitions) will indicate to those consulting the child's social care record the primary presenting concerns at the time the child became the subject of a child protection plan.


4.9.6 The need for a protection plan should be considered separately in respect of each child in the family or household.


4.9.7 Where a child is to be the subject of a child protection plan, the conference is responsible for recommendations on how agencies, professionals and the family should work together to ensure that the child will be safeguarded from harm in the future. This should enable both professionals and the family to understand exactly what is expected of them and what they can expect of others.


4.9.8 The outline plan should:

  • Describe specific, achievable, child-focused outcomes intended to safeguard each child;
  • Describe the types of services required by each child (including family support) to promote their welfare;
  • Set a timescale for the completion of the assessment, if appropriate;
  • Identify any specialist assessments of each child and the family that may be required to ensure that sound judgements are being / can be made on how best to safeguard each child and promote their welfare;
  • Clearly identify roles and responsibilities of professionals and family members, including the nature and frequency of contact by professionals with children and family members;
  • Identify the resource implications for each agency as far as possible and determine the agency representation, who can commit agency resources, to the first core group meeting;
  • Lay down points at which progress will be reviewed, the means by which progress will be judged and who will monitor this;
  • Develop a robust contingency plan to respond if the family is unable to make the required changes and the child continues to be at risk of significant harm (e.g. recommend the consideration of legal action and the circumstances which would trigger this).


4.10 Child does not require a protection plan

If the conference decides that a child is not likely to suffer significant harm then the conference may not make the child the subject of a child protection plan. The child may nevertheless require services to promote his or her health or development. In these circumstances, the conference should consider the child's needs and make recommendations for further help to assist the family in responding to them.


4.10.2 The decision must be put in writing to the parent/s, and agencies as well as communicated to them verbally.

Discontinuing a current child protection plan

4.10.3 The conference should use the same decision-making process to reach a judgement for when a protection plan is no longer needed. This includes situations where other multi-agency planning might need to replace a protection plan.


4.10.4 A child may no longer need a protection plan if:

  • A review conference judges that the child is no longer likely to suffer significant harm and no longer requires safeguarding by means of a child protection plan;
  • The child has moved permanently to another local authority when a protection plan can only cease after the receiving authority has convened a transfer child protection conference (See Part A: Chapter 6  Children and Families in need who move across boundaries, ) and confirmed in writing responsibility for case management;
  • The child has reached eighteen years of age, has died or has been judged to have permanently left British Forces community overseas, when their name can be removed.


4.10.5 The consultation with other agencies and the decision to discontinue the child protection plan must be clearly recorded in the BFSWS child’s record.


4.10.6 When a child is no longer subject of a child protection plan, notification should be sent, as a minimum, to the agencies' representatives who were invited to attend the initial conference that led to the plan.


4.10.7 When a child protection plan is discontinued, the  BFSWS social worker must discuss with the parents and child/ren what services might be needed and required, based on the re-assessment of the needs of the child and family. A Child in need plan should be developed for any continuing support. The plan should be reviewed at regular intervals of no more than every six months.


4.11 Professional dissent from the conference decision

4.11.1 If an agency does not agree with a decision or recommendation made at a child protection conference, their professional dissent will be recorded in the record of the conference. The procedures to apply the escalation process for professional disagreements should be implemented as soon as practicable after the conference has concluded.  See Part A: Resolution of Professional Disagreements in Work Relating to the Safety of Children


4.11.2 Each LSB and their partner agencies should have a local protocol in place with a policy and procedure to address professional disagreements and dissent about the outcome of child protection conferences as well as core group meetings.


4.12 Complaints by children and /or parents

4.12.1 Parents and, on occasion, children, may have concerns about which they wish to make representations or complain, in respect of one or more of the following aspects of the functioning of child protection conferences:

  • The process of the conference;
  • The outcome, in terms of the fact of and/or the category of primary concern at the time the child became the subject of a child protection plan;
  • A decision for the child to become, to continue or not to become, the subject of a child protection plan.


4.12.2 Complaints about aspects of the functioning of conferences described above should be addressed to the conference Chair. Such complaints should be passed on to the Chair's manager in BFSWS and the Command complaints manager.


4.12.3 Whilst a complaint is being considered, the decision made by the conference stands.


4.12.4 The outcome of a complaint will either be that a conference is re-convened under a different Chair, that a review conference is brought forward or that the status quo is confirmed along with a suitable explanation. Local Protocols may be in place and should be made accessible to parents and families.


4.12.5 Complaints about individual agencies, their performance and provision (or non-provision) of services should be responded to in accordance with the relevant agency's own complaints management process.


4.13 --- blank ---


4.14 Administrative arrangements for child protection conferences

4.14.1 ICRS is responsible for administering the child protection conference service which includes:

  • Clear arrangements for the organisation of child protection conferences including:
  • Arrangements for sending out invitations to children, parents and professionals;
  • Information leaflets for children and for parents translated into appropriate languages;


4.14.3 All conferences should be recorded by a dedicated person whose sole task within the conference is to provide a written record of proceedings in a consistent format. Alternatively, an audiotape or digital recording may be made by BFSWS social care for later transcriptions


4.14.4 The conference record, signed by the conference Chair, should be sent to all those who attended or were invited to the conference within 20 working days of the conference. Any amendments should be received within one week of receipt of record.


4.14.5 A copy of the conference record should be given to and discussed with the parents by BFSWS within 20 working days. The conference Chair may decide that confidential material should be excluded from the parent's copy. The Decision letter should be sent to parents within 24 hours of the Conference taking place.


4.14.6 Where a friend, supporter or solicitor has been involved, the Chair should clarify with the parent whether a record should be provided for those individuals.


4.14.7 Relevant sections of the record should be explained to and discussed with the child by the BFSWS social worker.


4.14.8 The conference Chair should decide whether a child should be given a copy of the record. The record may be supplied to a child's legal representative on request.


4.14.9 Where parents and / or the child/ren have a sensory disability or where English is not their first language, the BFSWS social worker should ensure that they receive appropriate assistance to understand and make full use of the record. A family member should not be expected to act as an interpreter of spoken or signed language. See Part B chapter 50, Working with interpreters / communications facilitators.


4.14.10 Conference records are confidential and should not be shared with third parties without the consent of BFSWS, the conference chair or an order of the court.


4.14.11 In criminal proceedings the police may reveal the existence of child protection records to the Army Prosecuting Authority, and in care proceedings the records of the conference may be revealed in the court.


4.14.12 The record of the decisions of the child protection conference should be retained by the recipient agencies in accordance with their record retention policies.

Decision letter

4.14.13 The outline plan, signed by the conference Chair, should be sent together with the decision letter, to all those who attended or were invited to the conference, including the parents and where appropriate the child, within one working day of the conference.  The letter should give details of conference decisions and recommendations, the name of the social worker and details about the right to complain.

Managing and providing information about a child


BFSWS is responsible for:

  • Ensuring that records on children who are subject of a child protection plan are kept up to date;
  • Ensuring enquiries about children about whom there are concerns or who are subject of child protection plans are recorded and reviewed in the context of the child’s known history.  
  • Managing notifications of movements of children who are subject of a child protection plan, looked after children and other relevant children moving into or out of the local authority area;
  • Managing notifications of people who may pose a risk of significant harm to children who are either identified within the local authority area or have moved into the local authority area;
  • Managing requests for local authority checks to be made to ensure unsuitable people are prevented from working with children. E.g. prospective child minders, foster carers etc.


4.14.15 Information on each child known to BFSWS should be kept up-to-date on the electronic record system. This information should be confidential but accessible at all times to legitimate enquirers. The details of enquirers should always be checked and recorded on the system before information is provided 

4.15 Digital recording

Advances in technology make the recording of meetings and other conversations e.g. via smart phones much more easily available to individual service-users. This may be simply because they wish to have a verbatim record of the conversation to refer back to, or because they have difficulties in following or recalling conversations. They may, however, seek to use the recording for other purposes such as admission into evidence in family court proceedings, or even for wider broadcast.

This practice may arise in the context of child protection / safeguarding meetings, private law or public law proceedings, and may involve recording of conversations between parents, between parents and professionals, conversations between parents and children or discussions in meetings.

The recording may take place overtly or covertly.

There are no specific legal restrictions on the recording of face-to-face conversations by individuals (as opposed to recordings by organisations), whether this is overt or covert. Thus, whilst good practice would suggest that advance consent should be sought for any planned recording, a blanket ban on recording by individuals is unlikely to be lawful.

This is not a clear-cut area, and legal advice must be sought as appropriate. Practitioners should be mindful that covert recording may be taking place and should endeavour to ensure that they do not make statements during 'private' conversations which they would not be prepared to hear produced as evidence in court.

Where the making of an audio or video record of a child protection/safeguarding meeting is proposed then this request should be considered by a senior manager who will consult participating agency managers and others as required, in the light of up-to-date local policy and legal advice.

In the case of Child Protection Conferences, the Conference Chair should determine the response in consultation with Conference members and/or by taking legal advice. For Core Group meetings the chair, often a Manager, or Lead social worker will determine the response.

In considering the request by any party, it should be ensured that agreeing to such a request will not impact on the quality of the information-sharing and discussion or compromise the decision-making with regard to the safeguarding of the child. The interests of the child must be the primary concern and confidentiality must be observed.

Whilst the recording itself may well be legitimate, there may be restrictions on its use.

If a party seeks to admit such material into court proceedings, then it is at the discretion of the court whether to allow this or not. Such evidence will only be admitted if it is relevant to the issues in the case and not, for example, in furtherance of a personal grievance by a parent against a social worker.

Wider distribution, for example, making such material available via the internet, could result in breaches of the General Data Protection Regulations and the Data Protection Act 2018. It may also be the case that the recording may contain information (including possible 'sensitive personal information') relating to third parties, and the distribution of such information so as to enable those third parties to be identified is likely to be in breach of data protection provisions. If the issues in question are the subject of ongoing court proceedings, then there is also a possible contempt of court.