A Signs of Safety (SofS) meeting is a process of ongoing assessment to gather information, undertake analysis and reach a judgement at a point in time.
A SofS meeting can be undertaken:
- as an internal process to clarify what Communities is worried about before going out and talking to the family, and/or
- as an external process with the family and/or key stakeholders.
When planning a meeting with a child’s parents and/or extended family, child protection workers must consider family dynamics, participant safety and how this may impact on the person’s capacity to participate in the meeting.
The meeting process generally starts with ‘what’s working well’ and moves back and forth between ‘what are we worried about’ and ‘what’s working well’. At the joint meeting with the family in particular, it may be helpful to open with the questions ‘why do you think we are here?’, ‘what do you think our concerns might be?’ This will get Communities' main concerns (what the worries are in relation to harm/danger to the child) on the table and make space to talk about ‘what’s working well’ where we begin to identify existing strengths and safety.
During the process further information should be gathered to clarify if missing information and complicating factors are harm/danger or existing strengths/safety. A judgement is made against the safety scale to determine the level of safety for the child. This informs what needs to happen next and whether safety goal(s) and safety planning is needed. Refer to the SofS map (Assessment and Planning Form 255).
Refer to the following (in related resources) for further information:
- Considerations for supervisors when internally mapping a case
- Facilitation – facilitating a Signs of Safety meeting with families
- Solution focussed scaling questions
- Practice principles that build partnerships
- Genogram
- Developing family trees with Aboriginal families
- Developing social network maps with Aboriginal people
- The family map (ecomap), and
- Signs of Safety Meeting brochure.
What’s working well? (existing strengths/safety)
To identify what is working well (on the right hand side of the two columns map and the middle column on the three columns map) involves assessing:
- existing strengths and observable behaviours that indicate protection and safety for the child, including those directly relevant to the danger statement, and
- existing safety including actions taken by parents and caring adults to make sure the child is safe when danger is present.
The use of exception questions such as ‘tell me about a time when the problem could have happened but didn’t?’, ‘what did you do instead?’ and ‘when was the last time you did this?’ should be used.
During this process child protection workers should also consider who within the family network may be able to participate in safety planning at the next meeting.
What are we worried about? (in relation to harm and danger to the child)
To identify what Communities is worried about in relation to harm involves sorting the concerns into the following categories:
- past harm to the child
- future danger for the child
- complicating factors (aspects of the situation that make it more complicated), and
- missing information.
Since past behaviour is a predictor of future behaviour, child protection workers need to have a clear understanding of what has happened to the child in the past, including the risk of harm.
Child protection workers may begin by asking: ‘what are the worries regarding the child that makes this an open case to Communities?’ or ‘What has happened to the child that worries us?’
Questions need to be asked that make explicit the behaviours that are impacting/affecting the children and how these behaviours of the parent(s) or caregiver(s) are causing harm or creating danger for the children. The worries and harm should be articulated in simple, clear and behavioural words including details of the history and severity of what has or is happening for the children.
Where there are a significant number of incidents that may overwhelm the process to develop a map, workers should focus on the first, worst and last incidents, including a description of frequency.
Questions should be asked to ascertain:
- the type, pattern, degree or severity and opportunity of harm
- significant and/or persistent nature of the abuse and/or neglect, and
- likely effect and impact on the child’s safety and wellbeing.
For more information refer to:
- Chapter 2.1: Assessing and Responding to Child Protection Concerns for Children in Care, and
- Chapter 3.4: Planning
In cases of family and domestic violence identifying harm and future danger to the child requires an understanding of the harm and possible future danger for the non-abusive adult victim. Refer to Chapter 2.3 Family and Domestic Violence for further information.
Harm statement (actual harm)
A harm statement is the description of who (name of person/s if known) caused harm (describe the behaviours) to whom (child) and the impact of that harm on the child. Also include relevant statements of past harm that have been substantiated.
Danger statement
A danger statement is a description of what Communities and others at the meeting are worried might happen to the child in the future if nothing changes. The danger statement must be based on the harm statements where significant harm (actual harm) has been substantiated.
Where Communities has determined that a child is likely to suffer significant harm (future danger), child protection workers must only develop a danger statement (a harm statement is not required because there is no evidence that actual harm has occurred).
Complicating factors
Complicating factors are issues that are identified that may make a case more difficult. Examples could include mental health issues or alcohol and drug use. These are not the actual abuse or neglect, but make the abuse worse, or stop the parents addressing the danger. Child protection workers should seek further information to assess if it is a danger/worry.
Child protection workers may need to consult with the team leader or senior practice development officer to distinguish if the complicating factor is a danger/worry.
Missing information
Missing information can be related to the complicating factor and child protection workers should seek further information to assess whether it is a danger/worry or strength/safety. A frequent example is who else is in the house with the child.
Safety scale (judgement)
After completing harm statements and/or danger statements, complicating factors, existing strengths and existing safety, a judgement needs to be made to determine the level of safety for the child.
The judgement is undertaken using a safety scale where participants are asked "on a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 means that there is sufficient safety for the child to stay with the parents and Communities will close the case, and 0 means if nothing changes in the current situation, the child will be taken into care, where would you rate the situation right now?"
Other examples of safety scales can include:
- On a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 means that there is sufficient safety to return the child to the parents’ care, and 0 means the recurrence of similar or worse abuse for the child is certain, where would you rate the situation right now?
- On a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 is their life is on track and they have everything they need emotionally, socially, educationally and practically to continue to grow up as well as they and you could hope, and 0 means the child’s life is out of control, there are no good supports in or around the child and their life is going backwards fast, where would you rate the situation for this child right now?
- On a scale of 0 to 10, with 10 meaning the problems are solved, and 0 means you are certain the child will be abused again and you believe we should take action immediately, where would you rate the seriousness of this situation?
Following this, the worker can then ask, "You rated the situation a 3, what can be done to increase the situation to a 4?" The use of a scaling question here could give information about possible actions that may lead to immediate progress.
When asking a scaling question child protection workers should:
- write down the parameters of the scale, and
- in a group situation, make sure the same question is asked of each person and note down each individual judgement.
Child protection workers can use the questioning approach when undertaking safety scaling to determine what needs to change to move up the scale. Child protection workers may ask a supplementary question such as "what makes this a number 5 for example rather than 4?"
Child protection workers should consider the following when using scaling questions:
- Scaling questions can cause confusion as participants may get ‘stuck’ in the number, rather than the desired outcome
- The description of what the number means in behavioural terms is the important part of scaling
- Participants can be asked to imagine what it would look like to be a 10 on the scale and describe it, and
- The scaling should be presented verbally or visually. Options for presenting the question visually include: using a whiteboard; butchers paper; post it notes or physically positioning people on an imaginary line.
Child protection workers should consider using the same questions over time to map movement/progress. The same questions can be asked of the parents, the child, the safety network and the other workers involved. When progress has been made, child protection workers can ask the participants "what has improved to lift your/their rating to a XX on the scale?"
Other uses for scaling questions
Child protection workers can use scaling questions as an engagement tool at duty, during an assessment, safety planning, Appreciative Inquiry or to formulate and review case and care plans. Scaling questions can be asked of children, parents, the safety network, workers in Communities and in other agencies, and those referring a concern to Communities. In cases of family and domestic violence scaling questions can be used to elicit and monitor the non-abusive adult victims’ assessment of the level of risk posed by the perpetrator.
Scaling does not have to be from 0 to 10. For children, scaling can be completed by the use of diagrams and pictures such as a line which goes from a sad face (0) to a smiley face (10). Workers can be creative in how they construct scales and they can also take other forms, for instance a dart board score with 0 being off the board and 10 being a bullseye. Refer to Solution Focussed Scaling Questions (in related resource) for further information.
What needs to happen?
If there is not enough safety and protection for the child, the child protection worker should translate the danger statements into safety goals.
Safety goals and family goals
The safety goals are developed out of the danger statement and include:
- Communities' safety goals - the specific behaviours that need to be seen for us to be confident that the child is safe, and
- Family safety goals - the family’s ideas about what needs to happen to keep the child safe.
‘Words and pictures’ safety explanation
Child protection workers should involve the parents and the children to develop a ‘words and pictures’ to explain to the child the following for:
- Children in the CEO's care: why Communities and the Court decided the child could not live with their parents, and
- Children with a safety goal: what has happened that led to the serious child protection concerns.
Refer to Words and Pictures Article, Words and Pictures Example, Checklist, Questions for the Child and Questions for the Parent (in related resources) for further information.