The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham, 1997−2013

Ansbro, Maria

doi:10.1177/0264550514561361

Cited by 22 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It strengthened multiagency practice between police, child protection and organizations providing out-of-home care to improve information sharing and support disruption of the activities of perpetrators preying on vulnerable children (Victorian Government, n.d.). In the UK, child sexual exploitation has received extensive attention after a series of high-profile cases, including the Rotherham case whereby a network of men preyed on vulnerable young people (Jay, 2014) (Jones et al, 2006), targeting HSB and foster carers and the 'Youth Relationship Project' (Wolfe et al, 2003).…”

Section: Pockets Of Promising Prevention and Response Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It strengthened multiagency practice between police, child protection and organizations providing out‐of‐home care to improve information sharing and support disruption of the activities of perpetrators preying on vulnerable children (Victorian Government, n.d.). In the UK, child sexual exploitation has received extensive attention after a series of high‐profile cases, including the Rotherham case whereby a network of men preyed on vulnerable young people (Jay, 2014). Since that time the UK government has developed a Tackling Child Sexual Abuse Strategy (HM Government, 2021), which included a CSE Disruption Toolkit aimed at frontline workers—law enforcement, education, out‐of‐home care, specialist services and child protection—to assist a coordinated, multiagency response to CSE.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implementing the Power to Kids programme in home‐based (foster) care: Identifying the SAFETY approach

McKibbin

Bornemisza

Fried

et al. 2022

Child & Family Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sexual abuse and dating violence are chronic problems for children and young people in out-of-home care. This study explored the impact of a prevention and response programme Power to Kids, which targets harmful sexual behaviour (HSB), child sexual exploitation (CSE) and dating violence (DV) for children and young people in homebased (foster) care. Twenty-eight case managers, 25 foster carers and 13 children and young people participated in a mixed methods study in Victoria, Australia informed by the research question: How does the Power to Kids programme impact the sexual health and safety of children and young people in home-based (foster) care? The data analysis revealed a SAFETY approach whereby the sexual health and safety knowledge of carers and case managers was enhanced, and carers were given permission to have Brave Conversations with children and young people, who could then apply the new knowledge to their lives. Case managers were upskilled in identifying indicators of sexual abuse and empowered to escalate stalled therapeutic and disruption practice when children and young people were identified as experiencing HSB, CSE or DV.

show abstract

Section: Pockets Of Promising Prevention and Response Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing the Power to Kids programme in home‐based (foster) care: Identifying the SAFETY approach

McKibbin

Bornemisza

Fried

et al. 2022

Child & Family Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recognition of Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE) as a distinct form of child sexual abuse (CSA) gathered traction in the last decade. Greater Manchester Police's investigation into CSE in Rochdale (Gri ths, 2013), Oxfordshire Police's investigation into CSE in Oxford (Bedford, 2015) and the South Yorkshire Police investigation into Rotherham CSE (Jay, 2014) raised the public and political pro le of this abuse. Independent inquiries (Jay, 2014), examination by the Home Affairs Select Committee (Parliament UK, 2013), serious case reviews (Gri ths, 2013), and scrutiny from Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC, 2013) highlighted multi-agency failings which left children unprotected and offenders able to perpetrate further harm.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discovering a Predictive Mechanism to Identify Risk and Harm in Extra-Familial Child Exploitation: Time to Reconsider the Multi-Agency Child Exploitation (MACE) Response?

Wilson¹,

Mueller‐Johnson

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the multi-agency identification of risk and harm in extra-familial Child Exploitation (CE). It explores several data prediction methods to effectively target and prevent harm. It provides a taxonomy analysis of repeat-victimisation and cumulative victim harm. It also examines the relationship between age and harm and finally, the conditional probability of repeat victimisation in exploited children. Research Question Are the most harmed exploited children referred to Multi-Agency Child Exploitation (MACE) Panels and what other methods exist to identify and prevent high harm in child exploitation? Methods This is a descriptive quantitative statistical analysis using a whole population of children in a Northern English county, aged between 10-17 who were recorded in police data as either victims, offenders or MACE referrals between January 2017 and June 2018, encompassing 12,457 children. It utilises an 18-month study window, an 18-month follow up and 18-month prior time censored period using data between 2015 and 2019 inclusive. This data identifies CE victims using CE flagging and additionally, offence classification with familial abuse and familial exploitation cases removed. It identifies repeat-victims and those children referred to MACE for tailored multi-agency intervention. Application of Sherman et al.’s (2016) Cambridge Crime Harm Index (CCHI) provided an analysis of harm in victimisation and offending. Findings 90.7% of exploited repeat-victims were not referred to MACE and there was no significant difference in the harm they sustained in the 18-months following a repeat victimisation compared to exploited children subject to MACE. The most harmed CE victim (Victim-CCHI 15,330) in the 18-month study window was not referred to MACE, nor was the highest frequency CE victim within 18-months (31 victimisations). Exploited victims, victim-offenders and MACE children are re-victimised at a significantly higher rate than other children. 73.4% of exploited victims will not suffer a repeat victimisation of any kind. 42% of exploited repeat-victims will have a third victimisation given a second and this will attract additional mean victim harm of 464 (For comparison, Penetrative Sexual activity with a girl under 16 by an Offender 18 or over has a CCHI harm score of 365). Conclusion Whilst MACE provides a forum to share multi-agency information, it only does so for 9.3% of exploited repeat-victims. This has implications for the role and focus of MACE. Whilst several quantitative methods were explored to predict harm in CE, this research favours the use of conditional probability and harm association. By using this method, 90.7% of missed repeat victims become visible to professionals. This is essential in providing the opportunity to minimise the risk of further victimisation and increased harm that 42% of this group will have within an 18-month period. This research provides a predictive and evidence-based framework to identify exploited children at risk of further harm and victimisation.

show abstract

“…); section 9 of the Children Act 1989 which legislates that the child's interest must be paramount; section 53 of the Children Act 2004 which legislates that a child's wishes must be ascertained; Working Together to Safeguard Children guidance which promotes a ‘child‐centred approach to safeguarding’ (HM Government, 2018, p. 9); and a growing body of evidence around listening to the voices of children and young people in relation to child protection matters (see e.g. Sanders & Mace, 2006; Smith, 2010; Tucker, 2011; Everley, 2020 and of course, Jay, 2014), this Review specifically included CYP participants to explore how safe they felt when attending their chosen club.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of safeguarding in grassroots football: Children and young people's perspectives

Monk

2023

Child Abuse Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2021, Birmingham County Football Association (BCFA) in partnership with Newman University carried out a quantitative online review to assess coaches, volunteers, parents and young people's understanding of safeguarding information, policies and procedures in relation to football. This paper examines the findings from the children (aged 5–11) and young people (aged 12–17) using the Six Principles of Safeguarding to assess the current safeguarding measures in place to protect children and young people (CYP) playing grassroots football. The review found that whilst most CYP felt safe when playing organised football, there were some concerns raised from the young people in relation to angry parents, abuse and racism. Most children in both groupings had heard of the term safeguarding, but fewer had heard of the term welfare, and struggled to explain what welfare meant. A key finding and concern is that many CYP are not aware of the role of the Club Welfare Officer at their football club or that this might be someone to whom they can disclose issues concerning them. Furthermore, it became evident that further research, awareness raising and implementation of listening to and acting on children's voices needs to be fully embedded into safeguarding practice in children and young people's organised football.

show abstract

The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham, 1997−2013

Cited by 22 publications

References 0 publications

Implementing the Power to Kids programme in home‐based (foster) care: Identifying the SAFETY approach

Implementing the Power to Kids programme in home‐based (foster) care: Identifying the SAFETY approach

Discovering a Predictive Mechanism to Identify Risk and Harm in Extra-Familial Child Exploitation: Time to Reconsider the Multi-Agency Child Exploitation (MACE) Response?

A review of safeguarding in grassroots football: Children and young people's perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About