Police Inspectorate’s Report into Cleveland Police’s handling of Child Criminal Exploitation (CCE)
Summary
As part of the child protection rolling inspection programme[1], the Police Inspectorate has released a report into Cleveland Police’s handling of child criminal exploitation (‘CCE’), with the force ranked from adequate-inadequate in all areas; no areas of good or outstanding practise are identified.
Details
In particular, the report concludes that there are two causes of concern: the force’s response to missing children reports and its investigations into child sexual exploitation, although improvement is also urgently required more broadly.
Five areas are explored: (1) leadership of child protection arrangements, (2) working with safeguarding partners, (3) responding to children at risk of harm, (4) assessing risk and referring, (5) investigating reports of abuse and exploitation.
The findings are stark. In relation to (1), there are not enough trained officers within the complex exploitation team and those often aren’t experienced enough to perform their role. At the time of the report, the team consisted of half of its target number – a mere 11 officers. There were gaps in data recording related to cases, including half of the case files examined having no recorded ethnicity data about the child. There were also issues with the force’s performance data, including instances of leadership emphasis on quantitative data targets rather than outcomes.
The force’s ability to work with safeguarding partners is adequate. In approximately half of the cases, strategy discussions hadn’t taken place where they should have and as per the Working Together to Safeguard Children guidance. Positively, information sharing was seen to be good, with national and local partner organisations supporting children in contact with the police. However, there remained a lack of evaluation about the impact of some of the initiatives run by the force.
In relation to (3) the report finds that the force doesn’t consistently recognise the risks posed to missing children or respond appropriately. There were disparities in the data collected from the force when compared to national data, for instance in relation to looked after children, with just 1.7% of incident reports for this group held to be ‘high risk’ as opposed to a national average of 14.2%.
Concerns are also raised about delays in response to missing children reports, lack of investigative action and a lack of professional curiosity when conducting prevention interviews with children; officers were content to take what the child as true said without probing to identify risk of harm, offence locations etc. This lack of curiosity extends to other scenarios, for instance, there were occasions where it appeared the force had concluded children were ‘safe’ in a domestic incident, having accepted information that they were upstairs asleep, rather than documenting that they had checked on the welfare of the child.
However, there were also some positive child-centred practises identified within this area, including the police prioritising finding suitable accommodation for children before taking them to a police station, and effectively using public protection notices (‘PPNs’) and strategy discussions to minimise trauma to the child where there is no pre-existing safe space for them to go.
The force was assessed as requiring improvement in assessing risk to children and making appropriate referrals (4). This included in the quality of Public Protection Notices (“ PPNs”), although it was noted that PPNs were regularly being submitted. Perhaps more worryingly, there was an overall documented lack of referrals to the National Referral Mechanism (“NRM” – the framework for identifying and referring potential victims of modern slavery) where the force was involved in cases where children had or appeared to have been criminally exploited. This failure to recognise signs of exploitation is also reflected in a finding that strategy discussions were not always initiated when they should be.
Finally, the force’s investigation into reports of exploitation (5) is ranked as inadequate, with inconsistent service being offered to children and cases triaged without clear rationale. A lack of experienced and trained officers is contributing to the failings in this area, resulting in lost opportunities to safeguard evidence and a lack of investigative action in some areas, for instance, in sextortion cases. Instances of inappropriate behaviour are documented, for instance, giving a mother an Action Fraud leaflet and failing to submit a PPN where she had reported her 16-year-old son was suicidal as a result of being sextorted.
Commentary
It is concerning that the force failed to achieve a ranking beyond ‘adequate’ in any area despite its commitment to safeguarding children. Indeed, many of the recommendations in the report are what those regularly working with children would recognise as basic requirements – for instance, to ensure officers are sufficiently trained; to allocate investigations into exploitation to officers with appropriate knowledge; and to follow lines of reasonable enquiry. That this is not being consistently done is alarming. The findings of this inspection make clear that lawyers working with children, and in particular solicitors who are the first point of contact, must be aware of the potential missed opportunities – whether that be in relation to the preservation of evidence, the NRM or safeguarding. Where first responders are not yet adequately handling cases, children must not be allowed to fall through the cracks.
This damning report should serve as a warning to other police forces to ensure they are meeting their obligations to safeguard children who are potential victims of exploitation and promote the welfare of children.
Please follow these links for the YJLC guides to trauma informed lawyering and child criminal exploitation. YJLC also offer professional training on Child Criminal and Sexual Exploitation, please email [email protected] for more information.
Written by
Violet Smart, Doughty Street Chambers
[1] https://hmicfrs.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/publications/national-child-protection-inspections-2024/#:~:text=In%20February%202024%2C%20His%20Majesty's,force%20in%20England%20and%20Wales.