CONCERNS have been raised about the safeguarding of children who are involved in family court proceedings in Worcestershire and Herefordshire.

An Ofsted inspection into the Children and Family Court Advisory Support Service (Cafcass) which covers the two counties revealed the overall effectiveness of service was hampered by inadequacies in several areas.

Out of 15 categories, six were rated inadequate and nine satisfactory.

The inspection looked at the Cafcass service covering families in Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Stoke-on-Trent and Telford.

The report said: “Despite some clear strengths, the service area is inadequate in several important aspects and there are significant concerns about safeguarding practice in some cases.

“A significant number of cases demonstrate that some staff fail to take appropriate steps to protect children at risk of harm.”

Other concerns were raised about how assessments are not shared consistently with children and families, how complaints are handled and how Cafcass contributes to the promotion of improved outcomes for children and young people.

But inspectors praised the leadership, saying it was “clear and purposeful” and said the majority of reports to courts are “satisfactory or better”.

The report said: “Direct work with children and young people is strong and in most cases there is evidence of effective advocacy for them in both public and private law cases.”

Inspectors said services must immediately improve to ensure safeguarding practices fully comply with statutory guidance and children awaiting the service have their cases allocated consistently.

The report also states that over the next three months processes must be implemented to ensure case plans are shared with children and families appropriately and complaints are managed consistently.

Anthony Douglas, chief executive of Cafcass, said: “In three cases, we did not comply with our own safeguarding framework, which is unacceptable, but no child was placed at risk.

“Ofsted points out areas where we can do better, but sometimes underestimates the positive impact of our work on children in both public and private law cases. But where we need to change, we will continue to do so."

WHAT THE INSPECTORS SAID: Overall effectiveness – Inadequate Safeguarding of children and young people – Inadequate Outcomes for young people – Inadequate Complaint handling – Inadequate Work to promote equality and diversity – Inadequate User engagement – Inadequate Evaluation – Inadequate Capacity for improvement – Satisfactory Ambition and prioritisation – Satisfactory Performance management – Satisfactory Workforce development – Satisfactory Partnerships – Satisfactory Value for money – Satisfactory Service responsiveness – Satisfactory Assessment Intervention and direct work with children – Satisfactory Reporting and recommendations to the court – Satisfactory