Search Results

Learn about the CSCP’s mission, statutory partners, and how we work together to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in Croydon. সিএসসিপি সম্পর্কে The Croydon Safeguarding Children Partnership (CSCP) works together to: Ensure the effectiveness of safeguarding arrangements Conduct Safeguarding Practice Reviews and Child death co-ordination Monitor multi-agency safeguarding performance Share multi-agency practice and procedures Provide multi-agency learning and development Carry out multi-agency audits View full MASA here The Partnership Structure Lead Safeguarding Partners Lead Safeguarding Partners are the statutory leaders responsible for overseeing and ensuring the effectiveness of local safeguarding arrangements for children. Under the Children Act 2004 (as amended by the Children and Social Work Act 2017), the three statutory safeguarding partners for Croydon are: Elaine Jackson Chief Executive Croydon Council Andrew Bland Chief Executive SWL Integrated Care Board Nick Blackburn Borough Commander Metropolitan Police Dedicated professionals committed to safeguarding children and promoting their welfare through collaborative efforts. Designated Safeguarding Partners Designated Safeguarding Partners are the key link between individual agencies and the safeguarding partnership, ensuring joined-up, effective approaches to protecting children and young people. Name Role Organisation Lewis Collins Detective Superintendent Metropolitan Police June Okochi Director of Quality – Croydon Place SWL Integrated Care Board Stuart Collins Corporate Director for Children, Young People and Education Croydon Council Shelley Davies Director of Education Croydon Council ভাগ করা মূল্যবোধ সকল CSCP সদস্য এই ভাগ করা মূল্যবোধগুলিকে সমুন্নত রাখে এবং সমর্থন করে, তাদের কাজে সেগুলিকে অন্তর্ভুক্ত করে। অংশীদারিত্ব সক্রিয়ভাবে প্রমাণ অনুসন্ধান করে যে কীভাবে এই মূল্যবোধগুলি তার সুরক্ষামূলক কার্যক্রমে প্রদর্শিত এবং অর্জন করা হয়। ফলাফল কেন্দ্রীভূত শিশুর কণ্ঠস্বর Trauma Informed Ownership & Commitment আরও শিশু এবং কিশোর-কিশোরীদের উচ্চ বিদ্যালয় থেকে স্নাতক হতে সাহায্য করুন Holding to Account CSCP Sub-groups The CSCP consists of the following sub-groups, which provide a structured approach to evidence gathering, multi-agency review, and responsive action, all focused on improving outcomes for children. To view descriptions for each group, click on one of the following tabs: - The Executive Group - The Review Group - The Quality Assurance Group - The Editorial Group The Executive Group The Review Group The Quality Assurance Group The Editorial Group The Executive Group Provides strategic leadership and oversight for CSCP, ensuring effective multi-agency safeguarding arrangements. Sets priorities, drives accountability, and responds to emerging safeguarding challenges. Meets bi-monthly to review progress and impact. The Editorial Group Monitors the uptake and impact of training, integrating insights from local and national reviews to enhance safeguarding practices. Meets quarterly to ensure ongoing refinement and effectiveness. The Quality Assurance Group Conducts multi-agency audits and performance management to assess the effectiveness of safeguarding arrangements, including Section 11 compliance. Meets bi-monthly to drive continuous improvement. The Review Group Oversees Rapid Reviews and Safeguarding Practice Reviews, commissioning and publishing LCSPRs. Responds to national reviews, ensuring local safeguarding practices align with national findings and recommendations. Meets quarterly to drive learning and improvement. Partnership Activities Links with other Strategic Partnerships Child Death Overview Panel (SWL CDOP) Early Help Partnership Board Corporate Parenting Panel MASH Operational Group Domestic Abuse & Sexual Violence Board Croydon Safeguarding Adults Board Safer Croydon Partnership SEND Board Asylum Seeker/Hotel Safeguarding Group Health & Wellbeing Board 11-25 Strategic Board Wider Partnership Links Bi-Annual Network Meeting Attended by CSCP Executive Officers, CSAB Accountable Officers and SCP Accountable Officers CSCP Focus Events Co-delivered with multi-agency partners to provide an opportunity to network, learn, and reflect. CSCP Annual Conference Attended by broad multi-agencies to review Annual Report. Published Work Annual Report Monthly Newsletter Local Safeguarding Practice Reviews & Briefings

Croydon Safeguarding Children Partnership (CSCP) promotes child safety through multi-agency collaboration, training, and safeguarding resources to protect children from harm and improve safeguarding practices across Croydon. সুরক্ষা সকলের। আপনি কি শিশুর নিরাপত্তা নিয়ে চিন্তিত? সাম্প্রতিক খবর বহু-সংস্থার সহযোগিতার মাধ্যমে, আমরা সম্মুখ সারির অনুশীলন উন্নত করার জন্য প্রশিক্ষণ কর্মসূচি, সুরক্ষা নীতি এবং সচেতনতা প্রচারণা তৈরি করি। আরও বিস্তারিত! আমাদের লক্ষ্য ক্রয়ডন সেফগার্ডিং চিলড্রেন পার্টনারশিপ (CSCP) শিশুদের সুরক্ষার জন্য প্রতিশ্রুতিবদ্ধ যাতে প্রতিটি শিশু নিরাপদ, সমর্থিত এবং ক্ষতিমুক্তভাবে বেড়ে ওঠে। আরও বিস্তারিত! অংশ নিন আমি একটি অনুচ্ছেদ। আপনার নিজস্ব লেখা যোগ করতে এবং আমাকে সম্পাদনা করতে এখানে ক্লিক করুন। এটা সহজ। আপনার নিজস্ব বিষয়বস্তু যোগ করতে এবং ফন্টে পরিবর্তন করতে কেবল "টেক্সট সম্পাদনা করুন" এ ক্লিক করুন অথবা আমাকে ডাবল ক্লিক করুন। আরও বিস্তারিত! সাম্প্রতিক খবর আমি একটি অনুচ্ছেদ। আপনার নিজস্ব লেখা যোগ করতে এবং আমাকে সম্পাদনা করতে এখানে ক্লিক করুন। এটা সহজ। আপনার নিজস্ব বিষয়বস্তু যোগ করতে এবং ফন্টে পরিবর্তন করতে কেবল "টেক্সট সম্পাদনা করুন" এ ক্লিক করুন অথবা আমাকে ডাবল ক্লিক করুন। আরও বিস্তারিত! Latest News The CSCP is making changes to its Multi Agency Training Offer Learn more about why these changes are being introduced Read more New Resource Launch: Safeguarding Adolescents in London (SAIL) A digital one-stop shop for all those working to safeguard adolescents in London. Read more Strengthening Safeguarding Practice in Croydon New CSCP Thresholds and Referrals Page and Referral Guidance Toolkit Now Live Read more আমাদের অংশীদাররা

Guidance on safe and effective information sharing in safeguarding. Understand legal frameworks, consent, and best practices to protect vulnerable individuals. Information Sharing and Professional Curiosity Effective safeguarding relies on timely information sharing and a culture of professional curiosity. These principles are vital for identifying risks, protecting children, and ensuring coordinated multi-agency responses. The following findings have been drawn from a series of local safeguarding briefings that highlight the importance of professional curiosity, accurate information sharing, and clear multi-agency roles in keeping children safe. Cross-Cutting Themes Professional Curiosity: Safeguarding requires practitioners to question, explore, and remain alert to the child’s voice—especially in complex family environments. Information Sharing: Delays, gaps, or failure to share information contributed to missed opportunities across all reviewed cases. Clear Roles and Escalation: Clarity of roles, thresholds, and escalation routes are essential to prevent drift and diffusion of responsibility. Cumulative Harm: Professionals must be able to identify risks that build up over time, even when each incident in isolation seems low-level. Accuracy in Referral Information: Across the cases, referral forms often lacked key details, historical context, or an analysis of risk. This contributed to decisions being made on partial or overly optimistic views of the child’s situation. Accurate, detailed, and balanced information in referrals is essential for effective decision-making. Professionals should ensure that referrals reflect the full scope of concerns, including known history, existing support, and any professional disagreements. Learning from CSCP Reviews Effective safeguarding hinges on timely, accurate, and purposeful information sharing. The CSCP has drawn key learning from a series of local reviews and briefings to support improved professional practice. This includes findings from the cases of Carlos, Cassie, Emily & Jack, and the CSCP’s updated information sharing guidance. 1. The Importance of Professional Curiosity In both the Cassie and Emily & Jack cases, insufficient professional curiosity contributed to missed opportunities for early intervention. Practitioners must ask probing, respectful questions, remain open-minded, and seek to understand the child’s lived experience beyond what is initially presented. 2. Proactive and Timely Information Sharing In the Carlos case, delayed and partial sharing of concerns led to fragmented responses and missed early warning signs. Effective safeguarding relies on all professionals understanding when and how to share information—even when a full picture isn’t yet formed. 3. Importance of Multi-Agency Collaboration The reviews reinforced that no single agency holds the full picture. In Cassie’s case, vital indicators were held across different services and never triangulated. Regular multi-agency meetings and clear escalation protocols can help unify understanding and decision-making. 4. Accuracy in Capturing and Communicating Concerns The CSCP’s 2024 guidance highlights the need for precise, evidence-based documentation during referrals. Inaccurate or vague descriptions can downplay risk or hinder appropriate thresholds being met. Clearly articulating concerns—using specific language and examples—is essential for enabling the right safeguarding response. To learn more about these cases: find a review or download a briefing Good Practice in Action A police officer attending a domestic incident involving a teenager showed professional curiosity when noticing discrepancies in family members’ accounts. The officer checked internal records and found a pattern of low-level concerns previously reported by other agencies. Rather than closing the incident as isolated, the officer flagged it through a Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH) referral. This led to a coordinated response, with joint visits by social care and police, ultimately uncovering coercive control and neglect. The officer’s initiative in questioning, documenting clearly, and seeking a multi-agency view ensured the child’s voice was heard and appropriate support was provided. Learning and Moving Forward Develop shared language and tools to improve consistency across referrals and assessments. Strengthen practitioner confidence in making referrals, especially in cases of cumulative harm or when evidence is unclear, but concerns persist. Embed reflective supervision and training focused on professional curiosity and information sharing. Promote a culture of challenge where practitioners are supported to question decisions respectfully and raise concerns when systems are not responsive. Reinforce accurate recording practices, ensuring every professional is accountable for the quality of their written communications. Further Resources 7-minute briefing: Information Sharing Department for Education guidance: Information sharing London multi-agency safeguarding data sharing agreement Multi-agency information protocol

Access up-to-date safeguarding policies, statutory guidance, and local protocols to support professionals working with children and families in Croydon. আমাদের টিম আমি একটা অনুচ্ছেদ। এখানে ক্লিক করে নিজের লেখা যোগ করুন এবং আমাকে এডিট করুন। এটা সহজ। শুধু "Edit Text" এ ক্লিক করুন অথবা আপনার নিজস্ব কন্টেন্ট যোগ করতে এবং ফন্টে পরিবর্তন করতে আমাকে ডাবল ক্লিক করুন। আপনার পৃষ্ঠায় যেকোনো জায়গায় আমাকে টেনে আনতে দ্বিধা করবেন না। আমি আপনার জন্য একটি দুর্দান্ত জায়গা যেখানে আপনি গল্প বলতে পারেন এবং আপনার ব্যবহারকারীদের আপনার সম্পর্কে আরও কিছু জানাতে পারেন। The Safeguarding Practice Review Process Learn more about the processes involved in a safeguarding practice review. Learn more CSCP Escalation and Resolution Process Find out how to resolve professional disagreements with our escalation process. View policy Croydon Neglect Strategy The Croydon Neglect Strategy serves as a practical guide for addressing child neglect. View strategy Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) This page provides information about the role of the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) in Croydon. Learn more Education Toolkit The Education Toolkit provides links to resources and support specifically for local schools and colleges. Explore toolkit When a Child Dies Child Death Reviews is the process for reviewing child deaths, including Joint Agency Response and Child Death Review Meeting. View process Policies 📄 How to Download a Policy 1. Select a Tab: Choose the type of guidance you are looking for by clicking one of the following tabs - Partnership Guidance - National/Regional Guidance - Keeping Children Safe Online 2. Download the Policy: - On Desktop: Click the relevant row in the table to download the document - On Mobile: Please switch to the desktop version of the site to access download functionality. 💬 Need Help? If you have any questions or need assistance, feel free to contact us at: 📧 cscp@croydon.gov.uk Partnership Guidance National / Regional Guidance Keeping children safe online Guidance to support local practitioners and organisations. Document Last updated Escalation Form 2026 31/12/2025 Thresholds and Referrals 02/12/2025 Multi-agency Pre-birth Guidance 20/08/2025 Children's Social Care - Local Assessment Protocol 06/08/2025 Croydon Children's Services Procedure Manual 31/07/2025 Safeguarding supervision 06/06/2025 MASH Operating protocol 06/06/2025 Croydon 11-25 Exploitation strategy 06/06/2025 SWL Neglect Strategy 06/06/2025 Clare's Law 06/06/2025 Escalation and resolution policy 06/06/2025 Missing protocol 06/06/2025 MASH referrals 06/06/2025 Guidance to support local practitioners and organisations. Document Working Together to Safeguard Children 2023 Keeping Children Safe in Education 2025 Information Sharing FGM: Resource Pack London Child Safeguarding Procedures London Child Exploitation operating protocol Barnahus: Improving the response to child sexual abuse in England The NSPCC provide a range of online Safety Advice including: Guidance for parents on setting up parental controls, understanding risks, and supporting children if they’ve seen harmful content. Support Services: Provides contact information for advice and support from safeguarding experts. Resources for Children: Includes tools and resources for children and young people, such as Childline. Campaigns and Advocacy: Highlights efforts to change laws and make society safer for children, including the Online Safety Act Visit: Keeping children safe online | NSPCC The Online Safety Guidance for Croydon supports schools and colleges to ensure student safety. It aligns with key statutory guidelines, including 'Working Together to Safeguard Children', 'Keeping Children Safe in Education', and the 'Online Safety Bill 2023'. This resource is crucial for meeting the welfare needs of students in the digital age. View guide here

Official learning hub Multi-Agency Audits - Access key findings from Domestic Abuse cases and relevant resources. Learning from Audits The Multi-Agency & Domestic Abuse Children as Victims: A Cross-Croydon Insight Following two multi-agency audits, the following information aims to provide practitioners with key findings, practical guidance, and essential resources to better identify, support, and safeguard children affected by Domestic Abuse (DA). Key Learning Themes from the Audits 1 Training & Workforce Development Inconsistency: Training depth varies significantly across the partnership, with gaps in understanding the impact on infant brain development. Domestic Abuse Act 2021: Limited practitioner awareness of the legal shift from "witness" to "victim" for children. Professional Curiosity : Need for more robust supervision that encourages staff to look beyond parental presentations. 2 Multi-Agency Collaboration Core Strengths: Positive collaboration evidenced in MARAC and MASH, showing strong risk-assessment cultures. Engagement Gaps: Housing involvement is often delayed, impacting the speed of safety planning and property security. Information Flow: Lack of systematic feedback loop means referring agencies often don't know the final outcome or safety plan. 3 Voice of the Child Captured Inconsistency: Older children's views are better documented, while under-7s and non-verbal children lack representation. Behaviour as Voice: Need to interpret changes in nursery/school attendance and behaviour as a form of "victim voice." Additional Needs: Children with SEND require more tailored, accessible tools to communicate their lived experience of DA. 4 Barriers & Emerging Risks Fear of Removal: Families consistently cite the fear of children being taken into care as the primary reason for non-disclosure. Economic Factors: Cost-of-living pressures are increasingly used as a tool for financial coercive control within families. Modern Risks: Rising trends in child-on-adult violence and tech-facilitated stalking/harassment require new safeguarding approaches. 5 Policy and Leadership Standalone Policies: Very few agencies have DA policies that place children at the centre rather than as a secondary concern. DA Champions: While roles exist, their visibility and influence in everyday decision-making vary across departments. Siloed Data: Inability to share real-time data on DA incidents hinders a truly preventative multi-agency response. How agencies can improve practice To address the audit findings, agencies must adopt a proactive, trauma-informed approach. The following suggestions are structured around the three pillars of improvement: Foundation, Action , and Impact , which outline key areas for local practice improvement. Pillar 1: Establish the Foundation (Workforce & Policy) Training: Ensure all staff receive mandatory, consistent training on DA, specifically focusing on the child as a victim under the DA Act 2021. Policy: Develop or update a standalone DA policy that explicitly safeguards children as victims, and ensure all staff are aware of their agency's DA champion/lead. Curiosity: Enhance clinical/case supervision frameworks to embed professional curiosity and challenge assumptions about parental and child behaviour. Pillar 2: Drive Collaborative Action (Information & Pathways) Pathways: Implement formal, clear protocols to ensure the timely and mandatory engagement of all essential partners, particularly Housing, in high-risk (MARAC/MASH) cases. Feedback: Prioritise receiving and providing explicit two-way feedback on referrals to ensure multi-agency decisions and actions are fully understood and enacted. Data : Improve local data collection to be consistent and unified, enabling a clearer view of the scale of DA and the outcomes for children. Pillar 3: Maximise Child Impact (Voice & Support) VoC Tools: Actively seek out and utilise specialist, non-verbal tools and creative methods to consistently capture the voices of the most vulnerable, including under-7s and children with additional needs. Reassurance: Proactively reassure families that engaging with support services does not automatically lead to child removal, addressing a key identified barrier. Risk : Stay alert to emerging risks such as online harm, coercive control, and harmful sexual behaviours. Further Resources Croydon Services Domestic abuse and sexual violence - General service information and support links. Croydon MARAC - Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference information. Family Justice Service - Access to legal and family support services. Domestic violence and homelessness - Information on housing support for victims. Become a community ambassador - Community awareness and training. Training CSCP Training: DA Course List - Mandatory Training. Learning from Case Reviews | NSPCC - Learning for improved practice around domestic abuse Women's Aid E-learning (PDF) - Distance learning for professionals. London Safeguarding Board - Regional safeguarding resources. Briefings & Podcasts Protecting children | NSPCC - Key guidance on impact and principles. Helplines Insight Briefing - Impact data and insights. How to Protect Children | NSPCC - General info and advice. Podcast: How DA affects children - Practitioner format (2024). Podcast: Protecting babies - For the youngest victims (2025). Family Support Women & Babies Support (PDF) - Women's Aid professional guide. Wish Centre Resources - Youth-focussed materials. Creative Wellbeing Programme - Local 'This is Croydon' initiative for children with DA experience.

Discover the key safeguarding procedures UK for safe, lawful information sharing to protect children and enhance welfare efforts. Multi-agency information sharing protocol 1. Purpose and Principles Safeguarding children requires timely, accurate, and confident information sharing. Practitioners must be clear that data protection legislation is not a barrier to sharing personal information where there are concerns about the safety or welfare of a child. This principle is reinforced through statutory guidance in Working Together 2023, the UK GDPR, and the Data Protection Act 2018. The London Safeguarding Children Partnership (LSCP) has clarified through recent correspondence that some national interpretation, including within inspection activity, has created confusion by over‑emphasising consent-based sharing, despite statutory guidance stating otherwise. This updated protocol ensures that Croydon practitioners are supported to make confident, lawful, and timely information-sharing decisions. 2. Statutory Basis for Information Sharing Working Together 2023 makes clear: Practitioners must be proactive in sharing information as early as possible to help identify, assess, and respond to risk. This applies both when problems are emerging and where a child is already known to children’s social care. The Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR support the sharing of relevant information for safeguarding , and concerns about sharing information must not be allowed to stand in the way of protecting children. The ICO further clarifies that while consent is one possible lawful basis, it is not required in safeguarding contexts, and in most safeguarding scenarios a more appropriate lawful basis will apply. Lawful Bases Frequently Used in Safeguarding Public Task – performance of a task in the public interest Legal Obligation – compliance with a statutory requirement Vital Interests – to protect life These do not require consent. 3. Consent: Clarification and Correct Use The LSCP review of ILACS (Inspecting Local Authority Children's Services) reports across London found widespread inconsistency, including repeated suggestions that consent should normally be obtained before sharing information. LSCP notes that this is contrary to statutory guidance and risks undermining timely safeguarding responses. When consent is not required Consent is not necessary when information is shared: To safeguard and promote the welfare of a child To prevent significant harm To fulfil a public task or legal obligation Consent is also not appropriate where: It could delay urgent action Seeking consent would place a child at additional risk The threshold for consent (specific, time‑limited, freely given, revocable) cannot be met 4. Working Openly With Families Both LSCP and Ofsted agree that good practice includes working collaboratively and transparently with families where possible. Ofsted’s response emphasises that openness is important but must not delay safeguarding action. Practitioners should therefore: Inform families where this is safe, appropriate, and will not delay action Clearly record the rationale where information is shared without informing parents due to safeguarding risk or urgency Ensure management oversight for such decisions, as reflected in Ofsted’s position. 5. Understanding and Responding to Sector Confusion National uncertainty has been reinforced by: Mixed interpretations in inspection activity The Judicial Review into the Haringey judgement, which contributed to concerns about sharing without parental consent. Practitioner anxiety about the lawful basis for information sharing, highlighted in the Foundations evaluation of MASH practice. This protocol directly addresses those concerns by restating the clear statutory direction: information must be shared proportionately and without delay when safeguarding is at stake. 6. Practice Expectations for Croydon Practitioners You must share information when: A child is at risk of harm, exploitation, neglect, or abuse There is professional concern, even if the threshold for statutory intervention is not yet met Another agency requires information to assess risk or deliver support You have additional information that would help another agency understand the child’s circumstances You do not need consent when: A safeguarding concern exists (at any level of need) Seeking consent would create delay Consent cannot be freely given or maintained Recording requirements Document the concern Document what was shared, with whom, and why Document why consent was not sought or obtained Document management oversight where appropriate 7. Alignment with London Safeguarding Children Procedures (CP9) The London Procedures emphasise: Information sharing is essential for early identification and response Data protection law is not a barrier Practitioners have never been sanctioned for sharing information to safeguard children The welfare of the child is the overriding consideration Your updated local guidance is now fully aligned with this position. 8. Escalation and Professional Challenge Where practitioners encounter: Agencies wrongly stating that consent is required Delay caused by misunderstanding of data protection law Conflicting expectations in inspection or audit practice They must escalate through line management and, if necessary, through CSCP’s escalation pathway. The LSCP executive has formally challenged Ofsted on this inconsistency, reinforcing the legitimacy of local professional challenge. Key Messages Safeguarding overrides consent. No delay is acceptable where risk is present. Sharing information is a statutory expectation, not an optional action. The lawful basis for sharing is usually public task or legal obligation, not consent. Transparency with families remains important where it is safe and appropriate. Croydon practitioners are fully supported in sharing information lawfully and confidently.

Explore the Croydon Safeguarding Children Partnership newsletter archive for updates, training opportunities, and insights into safeguarding initiatives supporting children and families in Croydon. Newsletter Library Stay connected and informed with our archived newsletters, where you can access key updates on the latest safeguarding news from the CSCP. These newsletters are a valuable resource to help stay abreast of important developments and insights. We encourage you to explore the archives and keep your knowledge current. Your engagement is essential in fostering a safe community. 2026 Click on the date below to view the newsletter for the respective month. January 2026 February 2026 2025 April 2025 May 2025 June 2025 July 2025 August 2025 September 2025 October 2025 November 2025 December 2025

Find information on how to submit a Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the CSCP and access previously published data and responses. FOI Requests The Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOI) provides the public with a general right of access to information held by public bodies, such as local government, the police, the NHS, and state schools. The Croydon Safeguarding Children Partnership (CSCP) is a statutory partnership established under the Children Act 2004 and is not a public authority for the FOI. It is therefore exempt from the duty to provide information under the FOI. Section 3 of the FOI provides that: (2) For this Act, information is held by a public authority if— (a) it is held by the authority, otherwise than on behalf of another person, or (b) another person holds it on behalf of the authority. A FOI request may be made directly to partner agencies of the CSCP. Where a CSCP partner which is deemed to be a public authority under the FOI holds information for its own purposes, then it does so otherwise than on behalf of another person and the information held will be subject to the FOI. However, partners in possession of CSCP minutes, documents, reports etc. are holding this information on behalf of ‘another person’ (the CSCP) and it is therefore not liable to disclosure under a FOI request. Details of how to access information from a public body can be found on the Information Commissioner’s website at https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/officialinformation

Learn from safeguarding case reviews where young people died by suicide. Explore risk factors, warning signs, and prevention strategies to protect vulnerable adolescents. Seeing the Whole Child: Learning from practice The CSCP has drawn critical learning from a series of Case of Concern reviews, an innovative process developed to examine complex cases that fall below the statutory review threshold but still offer significant opportunities for system-wide improvement. The cases of Cassie, Carlos, and Camille reveal key learning about the importance of centering the child’s voice, applying professional curiosity, and strengthening multi-agency coordination. This thematic study highlights cross-cutting issues and promotes reflective supervision, encouraging practitioners to embed these insights into everyday safeguarding practice. Each case offers a distinct lens into the risks and responsibilities of multi-agency work. Together, they form a critical thematic learning opportunity. Cross-Cutting Reflections: Strengthening Systems by Centring the Child A review of the Cassie, Carlos, and Camille cases identifies consistent patterns that expose systemic vulnerabilities. These are not isolated failings but indicators of broader practice challenges requiring collective ownership and deliberate change. 1. Centring the Child’s Voice Is Not Optional Across all cases, the child's perspective was either diminished, misinterpreted, or deprioritised in favour of procedural, legal, or operational constraints. A child-centred approach must go beyond statutory compliance, it requires: Actively seeking the child's voice, especially during transitions or crisis points Understanding behaviour as communication, particularly where verbal expression is limited or trust is fractured Embedding mechanisms for children to participate in planning decisions, and not just be recipients of them 2. Professional Curiosity Requires Depth, Not Just Compliance Curiosity is not simply asking more questions, it is about asking the right questions and being open to answers that challenge professional assumptions. These cases demonstrate that: Risk is often hidden behind procedural conformity; a plan being in place does not mean it is effective Biases—such as adultification and criminalisation, undermine safeguarding by reframing vulnerability as culpability Curiosity must extend to peers and other professionals, checking assumptions across the network, not just within individual assessments 3. Escalation and Decision-Making Must Be Process-Led, Not Person-Dependent Inconsistent escalation routes, reliance on informal relationships, and lack of clarity in roles contributed to drift and risk exposure in each case. Improvements are needed in: Clarifying escalation protocols and thresholds across agencies, particularly for non-statutory but high-risk cases Ensuring decision-making processes are transparent, auditable, and collaborative Using formal structures (e.g. case of concern process, strategy meetings) to generate system-wide solutions, not just single-agency actions 4. Placement Sufficiency and Suitability Must Be Understood as a Safeguarding Issue The shortage of regulated placements and delays in mental health access are not logistical issues alone, they are safeguarding concerns that have direct consequences for children's safety and wellbeing. Professionals must: Continue to escalate placement barriers through appropriate strategic channels Advocate persistently for placements that meet therapeutic and relational needs, not just beds that are available Monitor the impact of unsuitable arrangements as active risk, not just as temporary compromises Cassie: System Drift, Missed Protocols and Emotional Safety Cassie, a vulnerable child with mental health needs, remained in A&E for over two weeks due to the absence of a coordinated discharge and placement plan. Despite the existence of inter-agency protocols, their inconsistent application delayed care and led to further harm when Cassie later self-harmed and required secure accommodation. Learning Themes: Child’s voice was secondary to systems-focused discussions around process, placement, and risk ownership Failure to escalate proportionately, with decisions relying on relationships rather than structured processes Mental health interventions were not prioritised early enough, delaying access to essential care Why Read the Full Briefing: Cassie’s case underscores the importance of professional vigilance in managing escalation, monitoring care pathways, and ensuring the child’s emotional safety is never sidelined by procedural complexity. Cassie: 7 minute briefing Carlos: Discharge Failures and Dual Victimhood Carlos sustained injuries after being attacked by a group of young people, but was discharged from hospital into police custody shortly after surgery. His mother was not informed, and he was interviewed under general anaesthetic recovery, with a scheme-allocated adult instead of a family member. Learning Themes: Unconscious bias: Carlos’s identity as a child was overshadowed by his perceived criminality Lack of joined-up communication meant agreed safety plans were not followed Insufficient safeguarding lens during critical transition points such as discharge and police procedures Why Read the Full Briefing: Carlos’s case demonstrates how safeguarding can fail when children are viewed through a deficit lens, and how professional curiosity is needed to challenge assumptions and see the whole child. Carlos: 7 minute briefing Camille: Placement Breakdown, Crisis Response and Unseen Harm Camille was placed in emergency accommodation due to an urgent lack of suitable placements. The environment failed to meet her complex needs, resulting in multiple police callouts and hospital admissions. The case prompted questions about national placement sufficiency and local agency coordination. Learning Themes: Her voice became lost amidst urgency and structural limitations Systemic strain on placements left professionals to make difficult compromises Reactive rather than trauma-informed response, escalating Camille’s vulnerabilities Camille’s case illustrates the importance of building resilient systems that prevent short-term placement decisions from compounding trauma. It also highlights the importance of listening to the child, even under crisis conditions. Further Resources and Tools Practitioners are encouraged to revisit: CSCP Escalation and Resolution Policy CSCP Multi-Agency Practice Guidance Reflective Supervision Prompts: Embedding Learning into Practice These prompts are designed to support reflective dialogue during supervision, team debriefs, and case audits. They move beyond task completion to explore the quality, intent, and impact of professional interventions Voice of the Child How have we ensured the child’s voice is represented in this case? What are we hearing from the child—not just through their words, but through their behaviour and circumstances? Have we made space for the child to contribute meaningfully to decisions affecting them? Professional Curiosity What assumptions are we making about this child, and where have they come from? Have we explored all alternative explanations for what we are seeing or being told? What do we know, what are we inferring, and what do we need to test or challenge? Decision-making and Escalation Are the decisions being made grounded in process and evidence, or shaped by informal dynamics? Have we escalated this concern through the right channels, at the right time? Do all partners understand and agree the plan—and is it being implemented with accountability? Placement and Planning Is this placement in the child’s best interests, or is it the only available option? How is the child experiencing this placement, and have we reviewed their safety, wellbeing, and sense of belonging? Are we advocating robustly enough when the system is not meeting the child’s needs? System-wide Practice What does this case tell us about wider practice issues in our service or partnership? Are there recurring themes from other cases that this situation reflects? How are we capturing learning and applying it to improve systemic responses, not just individual casework?

View CSCP annual reports to learn about our safeguarding progress, performance, and priorities in protecting children and young people in Croydon. আমাদের টিম আমি একটা অনুচ্ছেদ। এখানে ক্লিক করে নিজের লেখা যোগ করুন এবং আমাকে এডিট করুন। এটা সহজ। শুধু "Edit Text" এ ক্লিক করুন অথবা আপনার নিজস্ব কন্টেন্ট যোগ করতে এবং ফন্টে পরিবর্তন করতে আমাকে ডাবল ক্লিক করুন। আপনার পৃষ্ঠায় যেকোনো জায়গায় আমাকে টেনে আনতে দ্বিধা করবেন না। আমি আপনার জন্য একটি দুর্দান্ত জায়গা যেখানে আপনি গল্প বলতে পারেন এবং আপনার ব্যবহারকারীদের আপনার সম্পর্কে আরও কিছু জানাতে পারেন। 2024/25 CSCP Annual Report Read More 2024/25 SW London CDOP Annual Report Read More 2024/25 Private Fostering Annual Report Read More 2023/24 CSCP Annual Report Read More 2023/24 CDOP Annual Report Read More 2023/24 LADO Annual Report Read More

Access quick, easy-to-read 7-minute briefings on key safeguarding topics. Ideal for busy practitioners needing bite-sized learning and updates. আমাদের টিম আমি একটা অনুচ্ছেদ। এখানে ক্লিক করে নিজের লেখা যোগ করুন এবং আমাকে এডিট করুন। এটা সহজ। শুধু "Edit Text" এ ক্লিক করুন অথবা আপনার নিজস্ব কন্টেন্ট যোগ করতে এবং ফন্টে পরিবর্তন করতে আমাকে ডাবল ক্লিক করুন। আপনার পৃষ্ঠায় যেকোনো জায়গায় আমাকে টেনে আনতে দ্বিধা করবেন না। আমি আপনার জন্য একটি দুর্দান্ত জায়গা যেখানে আপনি গল্প বলতে পারেন এবং আপনার ব্যবহারকারীদের আপনার সম্পর্কে আরও কিছু জানাতে পারেন। Case of Concern: Camille Camille’s case reveals major gaps in urgent placements, communication, and legal processes, after unsuitable emergency housing led to police involvement and hospital admissions. ১১ ডিসেম্বর, ২০২৫ Published: Read review National Review: John Smyth QC The CSCP Independent Scrutineer reviewed the Church of England's safeguarding practices to ensure robust protection for vulnerable individuals. ৮ এপ্রিল, ২০২৫ Published: Read review National Referral Mechanism The document provides information on the National Referral Mechanism (NRM) in the UK for identifying and supporting victims of modern slavery. ২১ নভেম্বর, ২০২৪ Published: Read review LCSPR: Serious Youth Violence This briefing summarises the thematic review which examined the cases of seven children/young people who were involved in the killings of three other children in 2021. The review highlights the voices of the affected families, practitioners, and community members. ২৬ জানুয়ারী, ২০২৪ Published: Read review Information Sharing Guidance for practitioners and organisations in understanding how to share personal information lawfully and appropriately, ensuring compliance with the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR. ২৪ আগস্ট, ২০২৩ Published: Read review LCSPR: Carl & Max This briefing examines the tragic case of 16-year-old Carl, who was fatally stabbed, and highlights issues such as homelessness, neglect, and a disrupted education. ২৫ ফেব্রুয়ারী, ২০২২ Published: Read review LCSPR: Vulnerable Adolescents In the summer of 2017, three Croydon teenage boys known to social services lost their lives. The CSCP agreed to conduct a thematic review that would determine whether there were any patterns in the children’s experiences. ১৪ ফেব্রুয়ারী, ২০১৯ Published: Read review Case of Concern: Christine This briefing draws on learning from an Appreciative Inquiry review into the experiences of “Christine”, a young person who became vulnerable following her primary carer’s imprisonment at the age of 14. ১৭ অক্টোবর, ২০২৫ Published: Read review Case of Concern: Carlos Our latest briefing outlines the case of a 15-year-old young person with a complex history, highlighting the importance of learning from timely, coordinated safeguarding responses. ৭ এপ্রিল, ২০২৫ Published: Read review Right Care, Right Person This briefing serves as a resource for safeguarding partners, local authorities, and police officers involved in Right Care Right Person for children. ১৯ জুলাই, ২০২৪ Published: Read review LCSPR: Chloe 'Chloe,' a 17-year-old who experienced early trauma and entered statutory care in her early teens, tragically lost her life. The inquest concluded her death was an accident, finding no clear intent to take her own life. ২০ অক্টোবর, ২০২৩ Published: Read review LCSPR: Jake The review of 17-year-old Jake’s case highlights challenges, including late entry to care, placement instability, and mental health concerns. Emphasising the need for earlier support and better responses to dual diagnosis. ২১ জুলাই, ২০২৩ Published: Read review LCSPR: Ben This review highlights lessons in engaging vulnerable young parents, mainly when domestic abuse is a concern. The missed opportunities to support the mother and her child, Ben, led to tragic outcomes. ২১ জানুয়ারী, ২০২২ Published: Read review Leadership, Trust & Accountability This briefing is intended for trustees, board members, senior leaders, and individuals in positions of trust. It also supports those who may have concerns about the behaviour or suitability of individuals in trusted roles. ৯ মে, ২০২৫ Published: Read review Case of Concern: Cassie This briefing reflects on a case about a child who experienced multiple incidents requiring intervention and highlighting the need for improved agency coordination. ২০ ডিসেম্বর, ২০২৪ Published: Read review LCSPR: Baby Eva Baby Eva, four months old, was hospitalised with a fracture; scans revealed multiple injuries of different ages. The review stresses the need for proactive risk assessment before and after birth. ৭ এপ্রিল, ২০২৪ Published: Read review Rapid Review: Intra-Familial CSA This briefing summarises key findings from a rapid review into a case of intra-familial child sexual abuse, highlighting areas for professional reflection and opportunities to strengthen safeguarding responses. ২৪ আগস্ট, ২০২৩ Published: Read review Unexplained Deaths (under 1s) This briefing explores recommendations from case reviews, emphasising the need for robust safeguarding practices and multi-agency collaboration to prevent future tragedies. ২১ জুলাই, ২০২২ Published: Read review LCSPR: Emily & Jack Following a tragic incident where a three-month-old baby girl, referred to as 'Emily', was killed by her mother, a serious case review was conducted and identified the need for improvements in local agency information sharing. ২১ জুন, ২০২০ Published: Read review

SPRs are commissioned when a child dies or is seriously harmed, identifying ways to strengthen safeguarding. Explore local and national lessons to improve policy and practice. What happens when a child dies We understand that reporting the death of a child is an incredibly difficult and sensitive task. The following guidance aims to provide the important steps to help ensure the right support and learning can follow. If you are a professional needing to report a child’s death, please complete the eCDOP form using the link below, so that the appropriate agencies are notified and the necessary review processes can begin. Please remember, it is a statutory requirement to notify CDOP of all child deaths from birth up to their 18th birthday. If multiple agencies are involved, please liaise to agree which one will submit the notification. However, unless you know someone else has already done so, please notify CDOP with as much information as possible. Note: Only complete a notification form if you are registering a death for the first time. Complete eCDOP form here Once submitted, a coordinator will contact all professionals and agencies who were involved with the child or family. Those identified will be sent a reporting form to complete and return as soon as possible to support the review process. If abuse or neglect is suspected as a possible cause of death, the Child Death SPOC will inform the Head of Safeguarding for Children and Business Manager of CSCP who will then log a Serious Incident Notification . Child Death Reviews The Child Death Review process applies to all children, defined by the Children Act 1989 as individuals under 18 years of age. A review should be conducted for every child death, regardless of the cause. This includes the death of any live-born baby for whom a death certificate has been issued. Croydon is part of the Southwest London Child Death Overview Panel (SWL CDOP), which also includes the boroughs of Sutton, Merton, Wandsworth, Richmond, and Kingston. All child deaths of Croydon residents will be reviewed by Croydon / SWL CDOP. Prior to review at the SWL CDOP, there will have been a Joint Agency Response (JAR) meeting IF the JAR criteria are met. This must be held within 5 working days of a child’s death. The Joint Agency Response meeting is chaired by the Designated Doctor for Child Death Reviews. Joint Agency Response (JAR) criteria are set out in Working Together 2023 . A JAR is required if a child’s death: is or could be due to external causes is sudden and there is no immediately apparent cause (including sudden unexpected death in infancy/childhood) occurs in custody, or where the child was detained under the Mental Health Act occurs where the initial circumstances raise any suspicions that the death may not have been natural occurs in the case of a stillbirth where no healthcare professional was in attendance. All child deaths will be subject of a Child Death Review Meeting (CDRM). The CDRM is chaired by a Consultant Paediatrician from Croydon University Hospital. This is the multi-professional meeting that takes place prior to the child death review partners review (SWL CDOP). At the meeting, all matters relating to an individual child’s death are discussed by professionals involved with the case. Learning from cases will be published in an annual report this data is also shared with the National Child Mortality Database. eCDOP form child death review process What professionals need to complete Professionals who receive a reporting form are asked to review their agency’s case records for the child or family members. Any information known to them or their organisation should be included on the form. If certain details are not available, please make a note of this on the form, rather than leaving any sections blank. Supporting guides Please read the following useful guides to learn more: eCDOP B Report Form User Guide (PDF, 463KB) Child Death Reporting Form Flowchart (PDF, 107KB) when-a-child-dies-leaflet-NCMD.pdf For further detailed information about child death reviews read the child death review statutory and operational guidance. Croydon SPOC for Child Deaths contact details Email: CDOPCroydon@croydon.gov.uk Resources Southwest London CDOP Annual Report 2023-24 Samaritans Bereavement Support Lullaby Trust National Child Mortality Database (NCMD) Guidance cdop resources