Damning report exposes safeguarding crisis in Northamptonshire

A damning report found Northamptonshire had a “legacy” of children “exposed to chronic, and periodically acute, harmful experiences” some of which were “unlikely to have been either assessed or addressed”.

However, the chief executive of Northamptonshire County Council, Paul Blantern, has claimed children were not harmed as a result of the failings in child protection revealed in the Ofsted report published yesterday.

Asked whether he accepted children would have been harmed rather than being at risk of harm, he said: “No. I think this is a really important thing. We are there to safeguard against harm and what this is saying is that, in terms of how we’ve been doing things, there might have been situations where we haven’t [protected them].

“Therefore there might well be people out there who will be at greater risk than if we were doing those things well.

“What it does say is that where there are people at harm, the professionals intervene. Learning from those is enacted.

“What they are saying is there was a potential greater risk, not that this has happened and that has happened because of [the failings].”

Mr Blantern, speaking alongside NHS and police representatives, denied the problems identified across the council, police and NHS were due to cuts and job losses.

He also said the departure of the chairman of the county Local Safeguarding Children’s Board, Janet Galley, last year – which was revealed only last month – was “for personal reasons”.

And he also strongly denied the departure of Charlie McNally, head of children’s social services, last month was linked to the failures exposed by the inspectors.

He said: “I’m going to look everybody in the eye and say the reason why Charlie McNally is not in the organisation is nothing to do with where we were with children.”

In the words of the inspectors, their findings…

“Key partner agencies do not focus sufficiently on the potential risks faced by children to ensure that further harm is prevented.

“There have been delays in disseminating the learning from several recent serious case reviews. There are currently three that are yet to be published and a further one very recently agreed to be undertaken.

“There are significantly more young people identified as children in need than in similar authorities.

“Out of hours services too often apply thresholds that are too high, leaving some children and young people in a vulnerable position, for example those in overnight police custody and others in hospital or community settings.

“For social care out-of- hours service, missing children and those vulnerable to sexual exploitation, fully effective service provisions are not in place.

“Those experiencing persistent and/or high risks from domestic violence receive a fragmented service by agencies across the partnership.

“The understanding of risk to young people through sexual exploitation and trafficking is not properly understood and systems to protect them are, as a result, not robust.

“Children are left in unsafe circumstances if practitioners are unclear about indicators of significant harm.

“Decisions had often been based on optimistic reliance on parental accounts and remorse, rather than robust assessment of risk and the likelihood of further harm.

“The out-of hours service’s failure to get detailed information and take steps to protect children leaves some open to the risk of further harm.

“Despite serious concerns, identified previously, of children being inappropriately detained in police custody, because the local authority does not prioritise identifying suitable accommodation, the position has not improved.

“The poor quality of a high number of child protection reports and a lack of challenge by other professionals contributes to the poorer outcomes some children have, and they continue to experience continuing harm for longer.

“Inspectors saw a number of case files that showed a lack of response to change, with children being exposed to avoidable harm, despite evidence of increasing risk.

“Agencies rely on quantitative rather than qualitative information.

“Some elements of service are clearly insufficiently resourced to meet reasonable, sustainable expectations, for example the children’s advocacy service, and services to work with male perpetrators of domestic violence.”