Child Safeguarding Practice Review – effective multi-agency practice in identifying and responding to child neglect (Learning Briefing)

Contents

Background

This learning briefing summarises key learning from a thematic safeguarding review which looked at serious harm caused by child neglect in 3 families. 9 children, aged from early childhood to late adolescence.

All children were known to services over time including some for years. There were repeated concerns about child neglect, but help was often offered for short periods, declined by parents, or closed without sustained improvement. Some families moved between local authorities.

The review focused on how agencies worked together, what helped, what got in the way, and how practice can improve so children are protected earlier.

Key events

Across the 3 families, similar events occurred:

  • Long-standing concerns about poor home conditions and hygiene
  • Children missing school for long periods or not being seen by professionals • Health needs not being met, including missed appointments
  • Parents limiting or refusing professional access to the home
  • Lack of agency observation of children’s environments and of their lived experiences
  • Services relying on parental explanations
  • Repeated referrals
  • Serious risks becoming clear only at crisis point, leading to emergency intervention Child neglect built up over many years rather than being a single event.

Good practice found

The review identified examples of good practice, including:

  • Schools providing strong day-to-day support to children, including food, clean clothes and emotional care – ‘compensatory care’
  • Some practitioners demonstrated persistence and curiosity when they did not accept parental explanations at face value
  • Effective use of strategy meetings when concerns were finally escalated
  • Improved outcomes for children once critical incidents were revealed
  • Reflective practice by staff who openly considered what could have been done differently These examples show the importance of professional curiosity, challenge and teamwork.

Key findings and practice points

The review found that:

  • Child neglect was not consistently identified, named or analysed, particularly where harm accrued gradually
  • Thresholds and pathways for responding to neglect were perceived as unclear or inconsistently applied
  • Early help arrangements lacked clarity about purpose, expected change and consequences of non-engagement
  • Information sharing was inhibited by misunderstanding of consent rather than enabled by safeguarding responsibilities
  • Access to children and homes was not robustly challenged when parents refused or restricted entry
  • Education and health concerns were sometimes considered in isolation rather than as indicators of neglect
  • Children with additional vulnerabilities, including disability or neurodivergence, were at heightened risk without consistently tailored responses
  • The cumulative nature of neglect was insufficiently recognised, leading to repeated low-level responses until crisis occurred

Practice points

  • All agencies share responsibility for recognising and responding to child neglect
  • Parental consent must not prevent safeguarding action
  • Early Help must be purposeful, reviewed and child centred
  • Compensatory care should not replace action to address child neglect
  • Refusal of access must trigger professional challenge and escalation
  • Professional disagreement requires clear resolution pathways
  • Child neglect must be understood across physical, educational, medical, supervisory and emotional domains and in the context of the adult’s capacity to care
  • Responses must be inclusive and affirming of children with additional needs
  • Children missing education, including those on part-time timetables require prompt, coordinated oversight

Considerations for the Partnership

The review highlights the need to:

  • Support staff to recognise and name child neglect earlier
  • Clarify understanding and application of consent when supporting families
  • Improve feedback when concerns are raised but thresholds are not met
  • Strengthen responses when access to children or homes is refused
  • Improve oversight of children who are not in school
  • Support confident professional challenge across agencies

What can we do in our practice?

All managers and practitioners should:

  • Be clear and direct when naming concerns about child neglect
  • Look at the full history, not just the latest incident
  • Be professionally curious and check information rather than relying on self-report
  • If providing compensatory care, name neglect and establish supportive interventions to address the cause
  • See providing compensatory care because of neglect as a trigger to collaborate with others, refer and challenge. Be tenacious about it.
  • Promote engagement with other services that families are working with
  • Use collective chronologies to help build a clearer picture
  • Escalate concerns when early help is refused or does not lead to change
  • Ensure children are seen and spoken to alone where possible
  • Record clearly what life is like for the child day to day
  • Seek out and use supervision to reflect, challenge and plan next steps

Key message:

‘Child neglect left unaddressed does not go away; it just gets progressively worse’.

The earlier we recognise it, name it, share information, challenge risk and act together, the better the outcomes will be for children.

Published

Last Updated


Top