1 Responding to the increase in demand
1. Cafcass looks after the interests of children
involved in family court proceedings in England, who are often
vulnerable. It provides an independent view of children's circumstances,
advising the court on the child's best interests. The majority
of cases occur when a local authority is applying for a care order
for a child ('public law care cases') and where separating parents
cannot agree on contact or residence arrangements for their children
('private law cases'). Cafcass works with many other agencies
in a complicated system designed to keep children safe.[2]
2. Cafcass was created in 2001 from 117 predecessor
organisations with differing cultures.[3]
In 2003 the Chief Executive and the entire board were removed
following a critical Select Committee report.[4]
The current Chief Executive took up post in 2004 and began the
process of seeking to create a unified organisation. Many basic
functions needed a complete overhaul, including human resources
and finance.[5]
3. By 2008 many of Cafcass's organisational problems
had not been resolved, and it was not well placed to deal with
the unprecedented and sustained increase in demand that followed
the Baby Peter tragedy.[6]
Cafcass's management expected, based on previous similar cases,
that demand would increase by around 3 per cent or 4 per cent,
and then would return to previous levels.[7]
However, within a month demand for care cases had risen by over
30 per cent and has remained above that level. Cafcass did not
have a suitable plan to respond to these circumstances. While
Cafcass could not have predicted the full extent of the rise in
demand, both the Department and Cafcass accepted that it was too
slow to respond.[8]
4. Temporary measures introduced by the judiciary
considerably helped Cafcass meet the increase in demand.[9]
In October 2009 the then President of the Family Division introduced
Interim Guidance to the judiciary setting out temporary arrangements
to prioritise cases, allocate care cases on a duty basis, and
reduce the amount of work requested by the court on private law
cases.[10]
5. Duty allocations are interim allocations to
a family court adviser to assess incoming cases and queries, intended
to ensure early attention is given to riskier cases.[11]
Following the introduction of the duty allocation of care cases,
the number of unallocated care cases reduced from a peak of 1,000
in August 2009 to 150 in September 2010.[12]
Cafcass also reduced the average time to fully allocate a care
case from 40 days in September 2009 to 27 days,[13]
but this level remained well above its goal to allocate all care
cases within two days.[14]
Duty allocation of care cases was unpopular with some Cafcass
staff, courts, solicitors and local authorities.[15]
These bodies regarded it as potentially detrimental to the children
Cafcass was supporting, because the amount of work initially conducted
on a duty case could be small.[16]
6. When the Committee took evidence from the
Department and Cafcass, the President of the Family Division was
not planning to extend the Interim Guidance, and there was anxiety
across the family justice system about the impact this would have
upon Cafcass's performance.[17]
Fifty per cent of remaining duty allocations were in London, where
demand was most pressing, and duty allocation was also significant
in South Yorkshire, where the local judiciary was keen on the
process.[18] The Chief
Executive of Cafcass was working with the judiciary to put in
place similar local agreements for another year.[19]
The Chief Executive told us that his relationship with leading
judges in the family courts around the country was strong,[20]
and he was confident that agreements would be reached.[21]
7. Cafcass and the President of the Family Division
have since made an agreement,[22]
effective from 1 October 2010 for one year, on arrangements
to assist Cafcass until the Family Justice Review is implemented.
The agreement builds on the joint working and local agreements
that were encouraged by the Interim Guidance. By having the judiciary
and Cafcass operating to the Public Law Outline,[23]
it aims to continue the reduction of backlogs in the allocation
of public law cases to family court advisers and prevent their
recurrence where they have been eliminated. The Guidance also
seeks to minimise the use of Cafcass nominated duty advisers,
except where the Designated Family Judge has agreed and published
circumstances in which they may be used. The Department told us
that the Family Justice Review,[24]
due to report in 2011, was considering Cafcass's role and may
recommend changes across the system.[25]
8. A further major challenge for Cafcass is management
of the increased number of open care cases. At the end of September
2010, Cafcass had nearly 12,000 fully allocated open care cases,
over 2,500 more than a year before.[26]
The rate at which courts were closing care cases fell from around
550 a month before the autumn of 2008 to around 150 a month in
June 2010.[27] In the
teams with the highest caseloads, family court advisers were at
the limit of what Cafcass considered a sustainable workload.[28]
To attempt to manage the increased caseload, Cafcass had improved
throughput per family court adviser.[29]
Its Chief Executive told us that their productivity had risen
by 17 per cent over the past 15 months. Cafcass is developing
a workload distribution system in partnership with trade unions
to ensure fair allocation of work across and within teams, and
limits on individuals' workloads.[30]
9. The President's Interim Guidance had also
resulted in a large drop in the number of reports requested by
the courts on private law cases. In some areas, reports were requested
in only 10 per cent of cases, whereas in others they were requested
in 40 per cent of cases.[31]
In court areas where a lower proportion of cases required reports,
late filing occurred less often. Unlike the situation for care
cases, the rate of new private law cases is falling slowly, and
Cafcass closed more than 500 additional cases than it opened in
the year to September 2010.[32]
2 Q 30 Back
3
Q 69 Back
4
Committee on the Lord Chancellor's Department, Third Report of
Session 2002-03, Children and Family Court Advisory Service
(Cafcass), HC 614-1 Back
5
Q 69 Back
6
Q 1; C&AG's Report, para 31 Back
7
Qq 38 and 46 Back
8
Q 39 Back
9
Qq 3-4 Back
10
Qq 25, 42, 80; C&AG's Report, para 18 Back
11
C&AG's Report, para 2.17 Back
12
Qq 15 and 18; C&AG's Report, para 12 Back
13
Q 18 Back
14
Qq 19-22 Back
15
C&AG's Report, para 2.19 Back
16
Q 15 Back
17
Q 77 Back
18
Q 18 Back
19
Q 14 Back
20
Q 77 Back
21
Q 14 Back
22
http://www.cafcass.gov.uk/news/2010/joint_agreement.aspx Back
23
Qq 100-102 Back
24
Family Justice Review: The current Government has confirmed the
previous Government's appointment of David Norgrove to lead a
review of the family justice system, examining how it can be reformed
to better support children and parents. It will look at the best
methods of avoiding confrontational court hearings, and resolving
family disputes outside of the court system, together with management
of the family justice system. Back
25
Qq 5 and 100-102 Back
26
Q 25; http://www.cafcass.gov.uk/pdf/Cafcass%20October%202010%20Update%20.pdf Back
27
C&AG's Report, para 2.21 and Figure 10 Back
28
Q 83 Back
29
Q 81 Back
30
http://www.cafcass.gov.uk/pdf/Cafcass%20October%202010%20Update%20.pdf Back
31
Qq 16, 44-46 Back
32
Q 75; http://www.cafcass.gov.uk/pdf/Cafcass%20October%202010%20Update%20.pdf Back
| 
