1. Learning from Ofsted Patrick Ayre Department of Applied Social Studies University of Bedfordshire Park Square, Luton email: pga@patrickayre.co.uk web: http://patrickayre.co.uk

2. Review evaluations 2007-9

3. Timescale

4. An approach to implementing the learning Divide the challenges into three phases: S tanding systems and processes C ommencing: Setting up each SCR R eviewing progress: Managing the review as it proceeds

5. Reasons for delay Appointing independent author Internal staffing pressures preventing work Inability to compel other agencies to cooperate Coordinating across areas & agencies Different internal review processes in different agencies

6. Reasons for delay Inexperience of staff conducting IMRs Need for additional guidance from LSCB Coroners’ courts and criminal proceedings Agencies agreeing final recommendations and action plan

7. The Panel Strong correlation between membership of panels and the providers of IMRS. Lack of involvement of adult services and drug and alcohol teams Independence needs strengthening?

8. IMRs Harmed by poor ToR (new document) No analysis or critique of practice Narrow, simplistic approach Defensive stance (who are authors?) Key issues missed Inadequate recommendations Authors not competent to judge

9. IMRs Poor presentation Absence of basic information Inadequate chronologies No agreed format for completion No clarity about terms of reference Failure to challenge poor IMRs Need for briefings (but is that enough?)

10. Overviews: the writer Open minded, independent approach Can stand back and critically analyse Can collate a large amount of information to distil key findings Has writing skills Knowledge and expertise in child protection

11. Overview and after Failure to address family involvement Failure to address race, language, culture, religion, and disability Some independents lack sufficient knowledge, too academic Recommendations limited, inappropriate, vague, don’t address key issues Action plans lack clear process for monitoring implementation and impact

12. Improvements in year 2 LSCBs agree IMR format Senior managers take responsibility for process IMR authors better and training offered Workshops at the beginning re timescale, ToR, known issues, project management Quality assurance processes within agencies for IMRs IMRs presented to SCR panel by authors

13. Outstanding overview Thematic analysis under sub-headings, with sub-conclusions; Critical analysis of actions taken and decision making; Key turning points are identified; Good practice recognised; Lessons identified nationally and locally.

14. Involving family: good practice Different methods of making contact with families; Include family members other than the parents; Offer more than one opportunity to participate; Overview reports say whether family involved, and evaluate appropriateness.