Professionals back retention of supervision orders as option for courts in care proceedings, but half call for changes to be made

April 12, 2021

Nine out of ten professionals think standalone supervision orders should continue to be an option in care proceedings, according to a survey by the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory (NFJO).

In a report the NFJO said a key reason for this was “the need for a proportionate order between a care order and no order when children were returning home at the end of proceedings in which the threshold for a care or supervision order had been established”.

Supervision orders are one of the options available to courts hearing care proceedings if they are satisfied that the grounds for a care or supervision order exist. The order places a child under the supervision of the local authority which then has a duty to ‘advise, assist and befriend’ the child.

The NJO said previous research by Lancaster University had raised questions about the effectiveness of standalone supervision orders, and identified varying practice across regions.

The Public Law Working Group – which was set up by the President of the Family Division to investigate steep rises in public law cases and recently made 47 recommendations in its final report – had meanwhile called on the government to review supervision orders with the aim of providing “a more robust and effective form of a public law order”.

According to the NFJO report, reasons identified by survey respondents for making or arguing for supervision orders, or for seeing them as helpful, included:

keeping the local authority involved with the child and family
encouraging the local authority to provide support
the need for a proportionate order
to support children and parents where the situation had improved but where ongoing help was necessary
where some risk remained that the return home might not be successful
where children were older and did not want a care order
to encourage engagement between parents and the local authority
for supervision of contact

Half of the 291 professionals surveyed by the NFJO between 15 February and 8 March 2021 thought that some changes were needed to make supervision orders more effective, however.

Concerns about supervision orders and their use included:

the support identified was not always provided
they were not properly enforceable
there was a lack of clarity about accountability
they added little to the support that could be provided under a child in need or child protection plan.

Proposals made by respondents to the survey for improving the effectiveness and robustness of the order included:

specific obligations for both parents and local authorities should be set out in a written plan
the support plan should be specific to the needs of the child and parents, and not formulaic
measurable outcomes should be identified
there should be an agreed process for reviewing the progress of the support plan, which should involve an independent element
the process for returning to court if the support plan is not being followed should be clearer and available to all parties
there should be more flexibility in the time periods supervision orders can be made for
there should be more funding available for the implementation of support plans

The NFJO added: “Overall, responses to the survey reflected previous research regarding the wide variation in practice, the management of supervision orders once proceedings are over, and the support provided under them. Concerns about the effectiveness of supervision orders were also reflected.”

Its director, Lisa Harker, said: "The Nuffield Family Justice Observatory is committed to holding up a mirror to practice in the family justice system. For some time questions have been raised about the effectiveness and value of supervision orders. Respondents to this survey highlighted many of the problems. However, there was also strong support for retaining supervision orders if these problems can be addressed."