NSPCC attacks quality of serious case reviews

Too often serious case reviews (SCRs) do not say simply and clearly what went wrong, a leading children’s charity has claimed.

The NSPCC said the reviews are critical in the drive to improve child protection in England, providing crucial information for agencies when a child dies or is seriously harmed by abuse.

A spokesman said: “Producing effective serious case reviews is complex and skilled work. Local Safeguarding Children Boards need to ensure these reviews deliver simple and clear recommendations on how to protect children better. The NSPCC is working with partners across the country to embed their lessons in practice and support them in developing better evaluation of how well their learning is being applied.

“However, too often these reviews do not say simply and clearly what went wrong. The NSPCC believes they must focus on the key moments where agencies could have done more to help the child, where they missed opportunities, or made mistakes. In particular, they should reveal whether professionals saw and spoke to children alone and whether they waited too long before acting to protect a child.”

The charity described the requirement for boards to report back on how agencies are acting on the recommendations of SCRs as “the vital step”. It added: “A serious case review should be judged not on how well it is written but what it is changing for children.”

Last month the Children’s Secretary, Ed Balls, said Local Safeguarding Children Boards would in future be required to produce “clear and comprehensive” executive summaries of SCRs and set out in their annual reports what actions have been taken following their publication.