Child protection and family assessments

​​Request ​823758961

Under the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011, I request the following information: 

1. The total number of Child Protection Plans imposed under the category of “Emotional Abuse” in Jersey in each of the years 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025. 

2. The total number of Child Protection Plans imposed under the category of “Emotional Abuse” that were subsequently removed at the first Review Conference in each of those years. 

3. The total number of Child and Family Assessments completed within one working day in each of those years. 

4. The total number of Initial Child Protection Conferences convened with fewer than five working days’ notice to the parent in each of those years. 

5. The total number of Child Protection Plans in which the safety plan identified as “required immediately” had not been delivered at the date of the first Core Group meeting, in each of those years. 

6. The total number of Stage 3 complaint investigations upheld against Children’s Services in each of those years, and the number of those upheld recommendations that were implemented within the specified deadline. 

7. The total number of children whose cases were closed by Children’s Services and subsequently reopened on a Child in Need plan without the parent with Parental Responsibility being formally notified of the reopening, in each of those years.

Response

1. The total number of Child Protection Plans for the years under the category of “Emotional Abuse” are provided in the table below:

​​2. The total number of Child Protection Plans for the years under the category of “Emotional Abuse” that were subsequently removed at the first Review Conference in each of those years are provided in the table below:​

3. The total number of Child and Family Assessments completed within one working day in each of those years is not currently held in a data set. To provide a response in the format requested would require the extraction, interpretation, and compilation of information from multiple sources. This would exceed the time limit afforded under the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011; therefore Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 is applied.

4. The total number of Initial Child Protection Conferences convened with fewer than five working days’ notice to the parent in each of those years is not currently held in a data set. To determine the figures requested would require a manual review of a significant number of individual case files, with each record needing to be assessed against the specific criteria set out in the question. This would exceed the time limit afforded under the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011; therefore Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 is applied.

5. The total number of Child Protection Plans in which the safety plan identified as “required immediately” had not been delivered at the date of the first Core Group meeting, in each of those years, is not currently held in a data set. To determine the figures requested would require a manual review of a significant number of individual case files, with each record needing to be assessed against the specific criteria set out in the question. This would exceed the time limit afforded under the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011; therefore Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 is applied.

6. The total number of Stage 3 complaint investigations upheld against Children’s Services in each of those years, and the number of those upheld recommendations that were

implemented within the specified deadline is not centrally collated. Determining an accurate response would require a manual review of individual investigation reports spanning a six-year period.

The required elements to report such data are not consistently recorded in structured data fields and involve a degree of case-by-case interpretation. This would exceed the time limit afforded under the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011; Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 is applied.

7. The total number of children whose cases were closed by Children’s Services and subsequently reopened on a Child in Need plan without the parent with parental responsibility being formally notified of the reopening, in each of the years requested is not currently held in a data set. To determine the figures requested would require a manual review of a significant number of individual case files, with each record needing to be assessed against the specific criteria set out in the question. This would exceed the time limit afforded under the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011; therefore Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 is applied.

Article Applied

Article 16 - A scheduled public authority may refuse to supply information if cost excessive

(1) A scheduled public authority that has been requested to supply information may refuse to supply the information if it estimates that the cost of doing so would exceed an amount determined in the manner prescribed by Regulations.

(2) Despite paragraph (1), a scheduled public authority may still supply the information requested on payment to it of a fee determined by the authority in the manner prescribed by Regulations for the purposes of this Article.

(3) Regulations may provide that, in such circumstances as the Regulations prescribe, if two or more requests for information are made to a scheduled public authority –

(a) by one person; or

(b) by different persons who appear to the scheduled public authority to be acting in concert or in pursuance of a campaign, the estimated cost of complying with any of the requests is to be taken to be the estimated total cost of complying with all of them.​