Evaluating Agile Frameworks for Complex Enterprise System Development

This essay addresses the question of whether agile development frameworks provide the necessary tools to develop large, complex enterprise systems, considering multiple views, cultures, and competing requirements. The essay examines the use of agile frameworks, such as SCRUM and DSDM, to manage complex software development projects, gather and prioritize requirements, and address issues of culture, user values, and user trust. The analysis includes a detailed case study of Westheath Local Safeguarding Children Board, evaluating the effectiveness of agile tools in real-world scenarios. The essay explores how these frameworks support developers in delivering software on time and draws conclusions based on research and application of chosen tools, emphasizing the importance of effective requirements analysis in complex environments. The essay also highlights the importance of understanding cultural nuances and user values to build trust and ensure successful project outcomes, drawing on the case study to illustrate the practical application of these concepts. The essay emphasizes the importance of research, critical evaluation, and original thought in the development process.

This is an individual piece of work.
The Question
Do agile development frameworks provide the
necessary tools to develop large, complex enterprise
systems made up of multiple views, cultures and
competing requirements?
Introduction
An enterprise software development team requires a range of skills to write the code, carry out
analysis, understand the business context, and work with clients and end users. The team will need
to deal with different views of the development from a number of perspectives, use tools to help
understand the requirements, and develop and manage a coherent project plan. The different views
and components of the development requires management so that there is clear picture of what has
been agreed and to provide understandable documentation of the development process which is
not unnecessarily cumbersome.
Most agile software development frameworks address these issues by providing the development
team with tools that focus on the rapid development of high quality software in collaboration with
the client, at the same time as providing sufficient documentation to record the process effectively.
Some frameworks (such as SCRUM) are focus on the needs of the software developers whilst others
(such as DSDM) focus on understanding the needs from a business perspective. Nonetheless, they
offer a range of tools to help the developer understand the information needs of users of systems.
One of the complexities of large enterprise system development projects is that the developer will
find multiple views of what the system is, a wide variety of people involved in using and developing
the systems (the system user, the manager, the developer, and so on), and different cultures and
ways of thinking and working.
Overview of what you need to do
For this coursework, you should write an essay (approximately 5000 words) which answers the main
question above.
You will need to investigate how such a development framework (for example, SCRUM or DSDM)
supports the developer to understand the complexities of software development and how the
framework deals with multiple views.
Specifically, you should consider the extent to which the framework:
(a) gives understanding and helps to manage complex software development projects
(b) identifies how competing views are captured using tools within the framework
(c) supports the developer to prioritise requirements and make appropriate design choices
(d) take account of user values
(e) allows the developer to build up the trust of the users in the development process and
the final product
(f) helps to the developer to record user values
(g) manages the development process so that the system is delivered on time

You should draw conclusions based upon your research, application and evaluation of the chosen
tools as to their suitability for carrying out effective requirements analysis for large complex
environments.
Case study
Attached is a case study based upon a real life situation. It is deliberately complex and contains a lot
of information, some of which will be useful, some less so. It incorporates a need for a new system,
but there is a range of different and competing views from the various people involved.
The case study has been provided so that you can give clear examples of how effective agile
development frameworks are in developing complex enterprise systems.
Read the case study carefully and then carry out the necessary research to complete your essay.
You should make full use of the case study as a resource tool to provide examples and demonstrate
your understanding of these issues, strengths and weaknesses of the frameworks.
Checklist of Activities
To complete this coursework you will need to do the following:
1. Read the attached case study carefully
2. Identify and research an appropriate software development framework (such as DSDM or
SCRUM) to find out:
a. what tools are available within the framework
b. How it help the developer to gather requirements from competing sources
c. Whether it allows the developer to prioritise the requirements
d. How it helps the developer to manage time and effort
3. Research what is meant by “culture”, “user values” and “user trust” in the context of
answering the question
4. Identify from the case study:
a. Who are the users of the system?
b. Examples of competing cultures?
c. Evidence of different personal values and issues of “trust” or lack of it?
5. Using examples from the case study, apply and evaluate the tools you have chosen from the
development framework, particularly from the perspective of the developer
6. Write the essay!
Deliverables
An individual essay of approximately 5000 words which is well structured, uses examples from the
case study, and is properly referenced to a given standard.
The Structure
To help you write your essay, you might consider the following questions and structure:
i. Which development framework has you chosen and why?
ii. What tools are available in the framework and why are they important?
iii. Do these tools allow the developer to gather and prioritise requirements within a
complex environment?
iv. How does the framework, if at all, capture the issues of “culture”, “user values” and
“user trust”, and does this impact upon the success of the development?
v. In what way will the framework provide tools to deliver software in a timely way?
vi. What conclusions can you draw from your study?

Formative Feedback
During the course of your assessment there will be an opportunity for you to obtain verbal formative
feedback from your tutor on your progress which may include the key themes of your discussion.
The date of this will be advised by your tutor.
Important information for you to consider
1. The case study contains a lot of data and identifies a number of different organisational
cultures and individual points of view. These include elements of personal values and
issues of trust. You should examine this information carefully to work out what is
important and what is not.
2. This coursework is testing your ability to research and critically evaluate a set of tools
from a software development framework, examine the importance of culture, user
values and user trust as they are applied to information systems development, and draw
conclusions about the development process.
3. It is your views and experiences that are important and these should make up the bulk
of your essay. Although you may use some reference material to emphasise a point,
referenced material should not make up more than 10% of the essay. Any material used
from other sources should be properly referenced using Harvard referencing standard.

Grading Criteria
A
 select an appropriate framework and clearly justify your choice;
 show a thorough understanding of the issues relating to the impact of culture on the
success or failure of a systems development;
 critically analyse the tools found in software development framework;
 critically appraise the importance of user values and user trust in the development
process;
 evaluate clearly the tools chosen ;
 draw conclusions clearly based upon your analysis and evaluation
 demonstrate a wide reading of the subject area;
 bring original thought to the argument in a well structured, properly referenced essay.
B
 Select an appropriate framework with justification for choice;
 show good understanding of the issues relating to the impact of culture on the success or
failure of a systems development;
 show critical understanding of the tools found in software development framework:
 show understanding of the importance of user values and user trust in the development
process;
 Draw appropriate conclusions based upon your work
 demonstrate some reading of the subject area;
 produce a well structured, essay with evidence of original thought.
C
 you would be expected to show some understanding of the issues relating to the impact
of culture on the success or failure of a systems development;
 give reasonable assessment of the tools found in software development framework;
 identify examples of why user values and user trust are important;
 draw some conclusions based upon your analysis of tools;
 demonstrate some reading of the subject area;
 Produce a well structured, referenced essay based on the reading and understanding of
the case study.
D  You would be expected to show understanding of at least two different issues relating to
the impact of culture on the success or failure of a systems development;
 Show understanding of some uses of software development framework tools;
 Talk about the role of user values and user trust;
 Give outline conclusions from your analysis of tools;
 produce a structured referenced essay based upon understanding of the case study.

Case study - Westheath Local Safeguarding
Children Board
Requirements Overview
Westheath Local Authority and Westheath LSCB require an integrated system to audit and monitor
all organisations within the region who work with young people using an integrated online tool.
Initially this will cover the statutory Section 11 requirements, but it is envisaged that this will grow to
include other types of monitoring (such as monitoring actions arising from Serious Case Reviews).
It is noted that this is a general problem for all LSCBs in the country. There may be an opportunity for
Westheath to sell this system in the future to other LSCBs. It is thought that a countrywide view of
data is possible if all LSCBs were using the same system (or similar systems which can talk to each
other). A key factor here will be agreeing the way Section 11 audits are designed and used.
It is also noted that some organisations (for example the Police) cover more than one LSCB, so
capturing the data once for many audits would be useful function.
Guidelines have been issued as to how a Section 11 audit should be managed within a local
authority. However, each local authority has come up with its own way of asking the questions and
collecting the data. Some LSCBs use a RAG (red, amber, green) system to identify the extent that an
organisation is compliant with each question whilst others just record answers to the questions.
Westheath do not currently use RAG rating approach.
Westheath Local Authority originally commissioned an IT company, Reform Systems, to carry out a
review of all current systems used for child protection and Section 11 auditing. They were asked to
make a proposal for the development of a web based application to manage Section 11 audits. The
following functions were identified by a senior management team:
1. allow organisations to record Section 11 self-assessment online
2. allow monitoring of any actions identified from audit
3. record LSCB evaluation of assessment to communicate back to organisation
4. keep a record of all contacts within organisations involved in child protection
5. allow sharing of data between neighbouring LSCBs
6. be expandable to include other kinds of audit (such as Serious Case Reviews)
7. provide ad hoc reporting as necessary
8. be secure – data should only be available to those with a need to see it
9. draw data from existing systems wherever possible
Westheath Local Authority - background
The following information is provided to give scope to the project.
Westheath Local Authority is a small to medium sized Local Authority in the South of England. The
following is taken from a recent review of the children’s services in the area and gives a good picture
of the current state of play of groups working with children in Westheath:
“Westheath has a population of approximately 70,000 children and young people aged 0 to
18, which represents about 28% of the total population of the area.

In the January 2013 school census 23.2% of the school population was classified as belonging
to an ethnic group other than White British. English, Punjabi and Polish are the most
commonly spoken community languages based on the January 2013 census, and 12.5% of
pupils speak English as an additional language.
Schools and other education establishments
Westheath manage 88 schools including 78 primary schools (for children aged 5-11), ten
secondary schools (for children 11-18) and four special schools (for children with special
needs). There are also four secondary schools and one primary school which are in the area
but not managed by Westheath local authority. Within the area there are 144 Early Years
Centres and nurseries (for children 18 months – 5 years). Most of these are managed by
voluntary sedctor organsitations.
Managing Child Protection in Westheath
The Westheath Children’s Trust was set up in December 2008 and includes representatives of
Westheath Council, NHS Westheath, Police, Job Centre Plus, Westheath Youth Trust, young
people, representatives from the community and voluntary sector, local schools and colleges.
The Westheath Safeguarding Children Board brings together the key organisations working
with children, young people and families in the area that provide safeguarding services. It is
chaired independently of Westheath children’s centre.
Social Care and community based services
Westheath has a range of social care services for children. There are 119 foster carers, two
children’s homes managed by the local authority. There are also 18 different community
based services delivered by external providers. Child protection for these services is managed
by two duty and assessment teams and two children’s safeguarding teams. There are also
specialist support teams to support children with disabilities, young offenders, adopted and
fostered children, and looking after children leaving care. An out of hours service has been
commissioned out to support Westheath and a neighbouring Local Authority.
There is a range of other services, some commissioned by Westheath or provided by
voluntary groups including 21 children’s centres, youth centres, teenage pregnancy service,
and an adolescent mental health service.
Westheath manage 6 Youth Centres and there is a wide range of voluntary and community
led youth services in the area. The youth services are organised into 3 regional areas,
Wetlands, Oxham, and Newtown. Each of these areas have a management team and run
autonomously, although there is policy and guidance provided by Westheath Local Authority
Children’s Services. There are also 2 other youth services which are managed at Local
Authority level which are responsible for Outdoor Education and extracurricular activities
within schools.
Looked after children and child protection plans
At the time of the inspection there were 408 children who were looked after by Westheath
Local Authority. This is made up of 103 children less than five years of age, 198 children of
school age (5-16 years), and 107 young people over the age of 16. There are also 125
children with care leaver status.
Since the previous inspection in 2009 there has been an increase in the number of children
subject to a protection plan. In 2009 there were 242 children and this has now risen to 354.
This is made up of 184 females and 170 males. Of these, 42% are aged under five, 43% are

aged 5–11 and 15% are 12 years or older. The categories of the child protection plans were
neglect at 46%, emotional abuse at 31%, physical abuse at 15% and sexual abuse at 8%.
Children’s health services in Westheath
The Commissioning and planning of health services are carried out by Westheath Health
Authority. There is a major hospital managed by Westheath Foundation Health Trust which
provides acute hospital carel. Community-based services (such as clinics, mental health,
teenage pregnancy, etc.) are provided jointly by Westheath Community Healthcare and
Westheath Local Authority.
Universal services such as health visiting, school nursing and paediatric therapies are
delivered primarily by Westheath Community Healthcare and Westheath Foundation Health
Trust. The acute hospital providing Accident and Emergency (A&E) services for children is
Westheath Hospital, run by Westheath Foundation Trust which also provides maternity and
newborn services, paediatrics and community paediatrics. Children and families access
primary care services through one of 62 general practitioners (GP) practices, walk-in centres,
including the Daybreak Centre where salaried GPs are employed by Westheath Community
Healthcare, and the Urgent Treatment Centre at Westheath Hospital. Out of hours services
are provided by Westheath Out of Hours Service (WOHS). Westheath residents may also
access the minor injury units in the area. Services for children with learning difficulties and/or
disabilities and those who have complex health needs are provided by Westheath Community
Healthcare and Westheath Foundation Health Trust.
Looked after children health services are provided by Westheath Foundation Health Trust.
Health provision at Westland Young Offenders’ Institution (YOI) is currently provided through
the prison service. However, health assessments for looked after children who are serving a
sentence in the YOI are undertaken by the looked after children health team. Westheath also
has a Secure Training Centre and health support is provided by FirstSupport at this facility.”

Westheath LSCB - requirements
Currently Section 11 Audits are managed in Westheath by two full time staff for the Westheath
LSCB. Although based in Westheath Local Authority offices, they are independent of the LA. The
manager, Hayley Green, provides child protection support for all organisations working with young
people in the area. In her job description, she is responsible for providing support, running
workshops, helping to develop child protection policy with the partner agencies, although little of
this happens at the moment. The LSCB also manage Serious Case Reviews and other child protection
audits that affect working with young people. Again, Hayley is responsible for managing this process.
A review of the work of the LSCB has concluded that there are real pressures of the way the LSCB
works which could lead to weaknesses in child protection. It is also thought that they may well be
better ways of managing Serious Case Reviews and the other various audits (e.g. education and
health bodies have their own audit tools) that need to be carried out.
Currently, Hayley and her assistant, Kevin, use a number of Word and Excel documents to explain
the process of a Section 11 audit and then capture the data from the various agencies that are
required to complete it. Each partner organisation must carry out a Section 11 self-assessment every
two years.
They collect together information from all organisations working with children in the region. Based
upon national guidelines, Westfield have created a template for each organisation to fill in to
demonstrate that they a compliant with current UK legislation for child protection.
The LSCB maintains a list of agencies which are required to be audited, along with a date against of
the agencies showing when the last audit took place and when the next one is due. This is currently
stored in an Excel spreadsheet with the information overwritten each time a new audit takes place.
Eeach organisation fills in the Section 11 Audit spreadsheet as best they can and returns it back to
Hayley. They will also include any evidence (such as their own local Child Protection policies)
wherever possible. The spreadsheet is sent to Hayley by email. There is no personal data relating to
young people included in the return, although it does include data about people working with young
people.
Typically, after completing a Section 11 audit, the organisation will not have all of the relevant
information to hand at the time of returning the Audit or they record some areas of the audit as
grading themselves unsatisfactory or needing improvement. If this is the case, then there will be
actions placed upon that organisation to provide the missing information or provide the evidence of
improvement the areas concerned. It is really the organisation’s duty to manage this, but Hayley and
Kevin spend a good deal of time following up the actions with each organisation. Organisations are
very poor at following up Audits. Hayley maintains a Word document of nearly 100 pages which is
constantly being updated as each action is added or completed. This is seen to be inefficient use of
resources.
Although there is a requirement for organisations to be audited every two years, it is thought that a
better model would be monitoring on a rolling process, with organisations adding data as it becomes
available. This will need some careful thought.

Appendix 1 - Analysis of the Problem – Interviews with
key staff
The consultants had started interviews and focus groups to identify key issues but this has not been
completed as Reform Systems Ltd have been unable to complete the project due to other
commitments.
Interviews
The following show extracts from a number of interviews that have taken place with a number of
key people in Westheath.
HAYLEY GREEN (LSCB MANAGER)
I am so glad that you have come. I am desperate for support to do my job.
My job is to support organisations working with young people to make sure that they are following
child protection policy and procedures. I am keen to give them help in forming their own policies,
identifying dangers and risk, running workshops and seminars. But those things are not happening at
the moment as I am overwhelmed with just keeping up with collecting the self-assessment audits
from these organisations.
Currently all I do is chase other people to provide me with the right information, get people to
complete the audits, chase up any actions that arise from the audit. I should be working with
organisations to follow up on actions and provide good advice and guidance, but I haven’t got time
for that.
Nearly all of my working day is taken up sending out the audit spreadsheet to organisations when
they need it, and then chasing them to get the correct information. In fact, I am now spending two
or three evenings each week sending out emails and reminders of what the organisations need to
do. I think my husband is getting fed up with me bringing work home.
To help me manage things I keep another spreadsheet of the last date each organisation was
audited. This works to some extent, but I often miss the dates because I am far too busy just getting
the audits back which I have already sent out. I also miss organisations which new or changed
contact information.
I have an 85 page Word document that I update after each audit is received. I use it to record any
actions from the organisations I work with, which they have identified in their self-assessment audit.
This might be finding the correct piece of evidence to demonstrate that they are compliant with our
child protection policies, or maybe updating with some details missing at the time of the audit.
Whatever it is, it is my job to get the information. It should be their responsibility, but if I don’t chase
people it won’t happen.
I would really like to spend time working with the organisations to help them improve child
protection and integrate it into the way the organisations are working. Instead, all I do is chase
people for information to try to keep on top of the audits.
I keep asking for help with this, maybe having a database which I can use, but I feel these requests
fall on deaf ears. I don’t think Sir Cyril trusts computers. He is a kind old man, but I am not sure is
fully up with the 20th century, let alone the 21st.
Also, the local authority IT people say that they might be able to do something for me in 3 years’
time which is far too long away to help me. I suspect that they are very busy just managing their
current systems. Just to help children services, they have 5 separate systems they use, none of which

are integrated. So to capture the data I need, organisations are having to search out information all
over the place. I know for a fact that some people have created their own databases and don’t use
the LA systems unless they have to. This means they are continually copying information from one
place to another. If I had the technical skills, I would do the same.
Is there some way that we can have the audits filled in online, along with recording any actions? That
would allow me to focus on my real job rather than chasing spreadsheets and pieces of paper.
SIR CYRIL BROWN (CHAIR OF LSCB)
I am the independent chairman of the Westheath LSCB. I have 40 years of experience working in the
various local government roles, with over 20 years work in child care. I was head of children’s
services in another local authority for about 6 years. I have recently retired and was asked to take on
this role as I have some spare time on my hands.
As a board, we have a very important role in making sure that children are properly protected and
that everyone is following the policies correctly. If things go wrong, we then have a job to do of
finding out why and how things have happened and what we can do to improve things in the future.
If a child under our care is found to be harmed, then we carry out something called a ‘Serious Case
Review’ which explores everything about the case and comes up with recommendations and actions.
This is normally chaired by a senior person, such as myself. It is a statutory requirement that we. As
an LSCB, take these actions forward and implement any recommendations. So it is vitally important
that we have a way of recording this information and have processes in place to follow up with all of
the partner organisations involved. Getting some kind of tool to help with this would be really
helpful.
If I am honest, people might describe me as very ‘old school’. I prefer to see things written down on
pieces of paper. That way you have a proper record of what has gone on. I don’t fully trust these
modern technologies. I have been told that we can put our data in something called ‘the cloud’
which sounds very odd to me. I have heard all sorts of horror stories of information leaking out to
the wrong people, so I am not sure about using computers to record this sort of information.
Hayley is a really good person and I have an excellent working relationship with her. Her care for
doing a good job and attention to detail is excellent. I am concerned that she is overworked and
really quite stressed and I am not sure what we can do to help. We have added some support for her
by employing an assistant, but that still isn’t enough. The trouble is that our budget will not stretch
to any further support in terms of employing more staff. The LSCB has a very small budget. I am told
that there is some funding that we can use from the Local Authority, set aside for IT projects like
this. Whether we can get access to the funding is a different matter.
Whatever we do, we need to make sure that organisations are being audited, that we capture the
right information and actions and Hayley can provide the right level of support. I would also like us
to consider how we manage the actions that come out of serious case reviews. It is very important
that we do not drop the ball on these.
PETE JOHNSON (ASSISTANT HEAD OF CHILDREN’S SERVICES – WESTHEATH)
I have been in my role now for nearly two years.
When I arrived, the place seemed something of a mess. Westheath had recently failed an inspection
for Children’s Services, particularly on following the correct processes and our monitoring of the
various organisations working with children. I have spent the last 18 months getting the place into

some kind of order. I am a great believer of getting the process right and making sure people then
follow it correctly.
I don’t mind saying that I have upset a lot of people, but that is part of the job. I found some really
bad cases of people doing things in an ad hoc and, at times, dangerous way. Some practices were
shocking. I had to have some quite difficult discussions with a number of staff, or people providing
children’s services. The number of times I have heard someone say “but you are ruining our work. I
am doing this for the good of the children”. In reality, if you don’t get your processes right, then you
are always in danger of harming the child. Anyway, people are coming round to my way of thinking.
They are even starting to use the forms I have created to help them to do their job better.
I have had some chats with Hayley about her needs. I also did talk to Sir Cyril. I see that her job is
very busy, but that might be that she isn’t working efficiently. What really concerns me is that this
will be yet another system for people to use. I am also worried about some of the suggestions of
holding the data using cloud services. I know that the IT people are busy and there is always a delay
in getting things sorted (I was quoted a 2-3 year timeline for a system I have commissioned) but I
would have thought that it is better that we use them than get an external company to build this
software (if it is needed at all)
The important thing from my perspective is that I have sight of everything that happens. I know that
the LSCB is meant to be independent to Westheath Local Authority, but it is our money that is used
to support the service and I want to be able to see all that is going on.
SOLA ROTIMI (MANAGER OLD STREET YOUTH CENTRE)
I am the manager of the Youth Centre in Old Street here in Westheath. I have been here for 7 years
and have seen many changes in the way children’s services are managed by Westheath. Although I
manage this centre, I am part of a team of 4 centres run across the region. We each do our own
thing, but we all follow the same processes, particularly when it comes to child protection. You can’t
be too careful with that can you?
Hayley is great at helping us to manage it effectively. We fill in her audits every two years. It is
sometimes difficult to collect all of the information, so she will chase us after we have submitted the
audit.
She is also really good at helping us form our policies correctly. She has run workshops in the past
which were really good. I have noticed that she is much harder to get hold of now. I often get emails
from her at midnight. I have to admit, the audit isn’t top of my list of things to do, so having Hayley
chase me is great. If she doesn’t chase me, then it is something that I could easily overlook. My guess
is that I am not the only centre or organisation that has problems getting their returns done
properly. I then can never remember what actions I had after the audit has been submitted. If there
was a way of recording that, then that would be really helpful.
So my understanding is that this new system will capture all of the audit information online and
evidence and allow us to communicate better with Hayley. This is a great idea. I can’t understand
why this hasn’t been done already. In this day and age, I would expect to be able to use my IPad to
fill in the audit. Although, good luck with getting the IT centre to do anything. They seem completely
hopeless to me. Obsessed with using old technology and taking for ever to do a bad job.
Tell you what, I have a couple of lads who are really into writing software. Maybe they can give a
hand in building this database. It might not be the best piece of software they produce, but any help
would be better than no help wouldn’t it?

KARAN PATEL (YOUTH HEALTH SERVICES – WESTHEATH COMMUNITY
HEALTHCARE)
I am currently the manager of Youth Health Services in Westheath. We are Westheath Community
Healthcare are very keen to use technology well. We have been investing in systems to support all of
our staff. I am not sure that I would like this repeated, but from our point of view we see Westheath
Local Authority as very old fashioned.
What upsets with the current way of capturing the audit is that it is very laborious. I am sure they
can find a better way of doing this. We are already very busy and we know that our child protection
procedures are good, probably better than those are Westheath LA.
I am all for making sure that children and young people are kept safe. There is an obligation on us all
to do the right things in the right way. That, to me, is all about the young person in front of you and
making the right decision then, not whether you have filled in Form XYZ in triplicate.
I find the Local Authority’s bureaucracy and continuous need for forming filling to be way over the
top. Not just for this system, but everything they do. The reality is that I have a job to do, which is
provide good care for the young people who live in this area. Filling in yet another spreadsheet just
takes me away from doing my job. Is there any way that we could capture the information from our
existing systems? All the information is there somewhere, just needs a little bit of coordination. I
would certainly welcome getting a list of actions I need to consider from each audit. Also, it would be
useful if we had some way of monitoring actions that arise from Serious Case Reviews. Now that is
important and worth investing in.
But don’t get the people at Westheath LA to write the software. We will be here in 10 years’ time
still waiting to get it.
DCI LUCY PETERS (LOWER VALLEY POLICE- CHILD PROTECTION)
I work for the area police force. We are responsible for an area covering Westheath and four other
local authorities.
Westheath are not bad compared to some Local Authorities. They used to be really poor, but they
have got their act together and are quite good at getting things out on time and their forms are
useable. I have one Local Authority who wants information recorded on paper. The effort in
collecting, photocopying and sending information for a Section 11 audit is huge. At least with
Westheath we can send it to Hayley by email.
I sit on the Westheath LSCB, chaired by Sir Cyril. As a police force, we are keen to help Westheath
with their child protection, particularly what happens when we get involved in cases. I know Hayley
wants to develop better multiagency working but at the moment she seems very busy. Getting her
along to anything is almost impossible.
We are very keen to support all of the Local Authorities in our area. The problem we have is that
each one of them is asking for the same or similar information, but each in different ways using
different forms. This means that we are wasting resources.
If we could fill in our information for all of the Local Authorities in our area just once and send it to
all of them at the same time would be really helpful. I suppose that this would mean Local
Authorities working together, which is always a challenge.

DAVE JONES (IT MANAGER – WESTHEATH LOCAL AUTHORITY)
I have been managing the IT systems at Westheath for over 10 years now. I started as a programmer
at Westheath 22 years ago and have worked my way up through the ranks. I reckon I have the best
understanding of all of our systems than anyone. I have worked on all of our systems at some point
and now I have to manage them.
There have been some mistakes in the past. Westheath invested a lot of money in two different
systems which do similar things. They were commissioned from separate budgets by different
groups of people at more or less, the same time. The trouble is that they don’t talk to each other and
getting them to do so will take further investment. As we have no spare cash at the moment, that is
on the back burner. It is now my job to manage this as best we can. We are very conscious that staff
are entering information multiple times to make things work. Not ideal.
It is important to understand though, that all of the systems we produce have been built to very
good technical principles. I am proud of the quality of the work we do on the limited budget I have. I
don’t think people fully appreciate the effort my staff put in to keeping the show running.
One particular problem I have is how do we manage the requests for new applications for the
various parts of Westheath? It is all very well people saying that they want to use this IPad, or that
Android device, but it takes time to build these things. At the moment, I have a work load that will
keep us going for about the next five years. We really can’t deal with anything else with our current
resources.
I understand the requirements for this suggest system to help with Section 11 Audits. It might be
that we can help with providing some data from our systems. We do have APIs for some of our more
recent developments. Whether that is useful, I don’t know.
I am keen though, to have some control as to how the system is built and used. It is important that
we do not make the same mistakes we have in the past. Not to mention, the issues of data security
which are paramount in developing these types of systems.

Appendix 2 - List of Services required to carry out
Section11 Audit in Westheath
(This list is not complete, however gives indication of types of organisations)
 Children’s social care
 Adult’s social care
 Public health
 Housing
 Sport, culture and leisure
 Licensing authorities
 Youth services including Child and Adolescent support services
 Psychological services (inc Educational Psychiatry) senior parenting practitioner work
 Inclusion / Home Education
 Early years and childcare
 Westheath Action for Families
 NHS England, Local area team
 Westheath Clinical Commissioning Group
 Westheath Community Healthcare
 Westheath Foundation trust
 Westheath NHS and Social Care Partnership trust
 London South NHS Foundation Trust
 Ambulance Service NHS Foundation trust
 Lower Valley Police services
 British Transport Police
 HMYOI Westland
 Westland Secure Training Centre
 HM Marshland Prison
 Westheath Youth Trust
 CVS
 Probation Service
 Westheath Youth Offending Team
 Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service
 Fire and Rescue Service
 Schools
 Nursery Care Provision
 Youth clubs and societies

Appendix 3 – Section 11 Self Assessment Audit
template
{NAME} LOCAL SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN BOARD
SECTION 11 SELF ASSESSMENT TOOL
May 2012
A biennial assessment of all LSCB member agencies and organisations in relation to their duties under Sec 11
Children Act 2004 is undertaken by the LSCB. This is a self-assessment tool that aims to assess the effectiveness of
the arrangements for safeguarding children at a strategic level. Each agency or organisation must ensure that any
statements made within the tool are backed by evidence. It is anticipated that assessment of compliance with
arrangements at operational service level will have been undertaken to support statements in this self-assessment.
Wherever possible, evidence of impact on improving outcomes for children should be identified.
The tool assesses each agency / organisation against 8 standards based on the requirements of Sec 11 CA ’04 as set
down in the ‘Statutory Guidance on Making Arrangements to Safeguard & Promote the Welfare of Children under
Sec 11 Children Act 2004’ (pages 13-17) . Throughout the self-assessment, consideration must be given to
evidencing improved outcomes for children young people and their families as a result of the arrangements.
If your organisation covers more than one LSCB area, please ensure that any arrangements, practice or issues
specific to your borough are highlighted.
STANDARD 1 – Senior management have commitment to the importance of safeguarding and
promoting children’s welfare
How effective is the commitment of senior management to safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children
within your agency / organisation?
Compliance checklist – policies & procedures,
organisational arrangements
Describe / identify how your organisation meets this standard.
[How do you know? – include evidence of improved outcomes]
1.1 Named person at senior level responsible for
safeguarding and championing role clearly in
job description
1.2 Corporate plans include reference to
safeguarding and staff involved
1.3 Senior managers demonstrate good
understanding of safeguarding
1.4 Annual monitoring in place and is
communicated to staff and action plans to
address issues developed
Are any actions required to improve effectiveness? How will you do
this?
Who will lead? Timescale?

STANDARD 2 – There is a clear statement of the agency’s responsibility towards children and
this is available to all staff
How clearly are the agency’s responsibilities towards children communicated to all staff?
Compliance checklist – policies & procedures,
organisational arrangements
Describe / identify how your organisation meets this standard.
[How do you know? – include evidence of improved outcomes]
2.1 All staff are aware of safeguarding policies and
procedures
2.2 Effective complaints system in place, which is in
line with current statutory guidance, for
children, staff & other people to make
complaint about non-compliance to agency’s
procedures.
2.3 Child friendly complaints information
2.4 Organisation demonstrates how
recommendations / outcomes on practice are
communicated to staff
2.5 Commissioning arrangements include
monitoring of sec 11 responsibilities
2.6 Organisation can demonstrate policies and
procedures have positive impact on outcomes
for children
Are any actions required to improve effectiveness? How will you do
this?
Who will lead? Timescale?
STANDARD 3 – There is a clear line of accountability within the organisation for work on
safeguarding and promoting welfare
How clear is the line of accountability within the organisation for work on safeguarding & promoting welfare?
Compliance checklist – policies & procedures,
organisational arrangements
Describe / identify how your organisation meets this standard.
[How do you know? – include evidence of improved outcomes]
3.1 Named person has ultimate accountability for
safeguarding arrangements
3.2 There are clear lines of accountability from staff
through organisation to named person & flow
chart of accountability is displayed and
available to staff
3.3 Anyone who comes into contact with children
or their families has their responsibility towards
children’s welfare explicitly stated in job
description.
3.4 Staff are aware who has overall responsibility
for agency contribution, and are clear of own
responsibilities.
3.5 Effective supervision and monitoring is available
to all staff.
Are any actions required to improve effectiveness? How will you do this? Who will lead? Timescale?

STANDARD 4 – Service development takes into account the need to safeguard and promote
welfare and is informed, where appropriate, by the views of children & families
How effectively does service development take into account need to safeguard? How is it effectively informed by
views of children & families? How can you demonstrate improved outcomes?
Compliance checklist – policies & procedures,
organisational arrangements
Describe / identify how your organisation meets this standard.
[How do you know? – include evidence of improved outcomes]
4.1 Service development has taken into account the
need to safeguard and promote the welfare of
children
4.2 Children & their families are actively involved in
design, development & delivery of services &
their involvement is demonstrated.
4.3 Different methods of communication are
available to children to express their views
4.4 Children & young people are involved in the
development of equal opportunity policies
4.5 There is a responsive process in place to act on
identified unmet need
4.6 Improved outcomes for children matched to
agency / LSCB business plans are demonstrated
as a result of service development
Are any actions required to improve effectiveness? How will you do
this?
Who will lead? Timescale?
STANDARD 5 – There is effective training on safeguarding & promoting the welfare of children
for all staff working with or, depending on the agency’s primary functions, in contact with
children & families
How effective is training on safeguarding & promoting welfare of children for all staff & volunteers working with or
in contact with children & their families? Can you demonstrate improved outcomes as a result?
Compliance checklist – policies & procedures,
organisational arrangements
Describe / identify how your organisation meets this standard.
[How do you know? – include evidence of improved outcomes]
5.1 A clear induction process is in place for all staff
that addresses safeguarding & is delivered in a
timely way
5.2 Staff receive appropriate safeguarding training
& individual training plans are in place
5.3 Organisation can evidence training undertaken
by staff through a database
5.4 Training enhances staff awareness of diversity
issues
5.5 Organisation can demonstrate impact of
training on practice & improved outcomes
Are any actions required to improve effectiveness? How will you do this? Who will lead? Timescale?

STANDARD 6 – Safer recruitment procedures including vetting procedures and those for
managing allegations are in place
How robust are organisation’s recruitment, vetting and managing allegations procedures?
Compliance checklist – policies & procedures,
organisational arrangements
Describe / identify how your organisation meets this standard.
[How do you know? – include evidence of improved outcomes]
6.1 Organisation has safer recruitment & selection
procedures in place in line with statutory guidance
6.2 Organisation can demonstrate that agencies
commissioned to provide services have safer
recruitment in place
6.3 Safer recruitment training is in place for managers
involved in recruitment
6.4 Organisation has managing allegations procedures in
place
6.5 A senior manager has been identified for the
managing allegations process & knows who the LADO
is and when to contact them
6.6 Support is available for staff who are subject to
allegation
6.7 Audit processes are in place to monitor safer
recruitment & managing allegations
Are any actions required to improve effectiveness? How will you do this? Who will lead? Timescale?
STANDARD 7 – There is effective inter-agency working to safeguard & promote the welfare of
children
How effective is inter-agency working by your organisation? How do you demonstrate improved outcomes as a result?
Compliance checklist – policies & procedures,
organisational arrangements
Describe / identify how your organisation meets this standard.
[How do you know? – include evidence of improved outcomes]
7.1 Multi-agency working is actively promoted
7.2 Early Assessment tools are utilised to improve
outcomes and are monitored for effectiveness of
improved outcomes
7.3 Agency contributes to the team around the child
approach
7.4 Organisation uses LSCB inter-agency protocols for
specific needs
7.5 Organisation ensures effective contribution to Sec 47
investigations and CP Plans
7.6 Participation in multiagency planning at multi-
agency meetings is monitored and non-attendance
addressed
7.7 Outcomes identified though assessment of children
are monitored to demonstrate improvement at all
levels of intervention
7.8 Children & their families are consulted on regarding
the effectiveness of inter-agency working.
Are any actions required to improve effectiveness? How will you do this? Who will lead? Timescale?

STANDARD 8 – There is effective Information Sharing
How effective are the organisations arrangements for information sharing governance?
Compliance checklist – policies & procedures,
organisational arrangements
Describe / identify how your organisation meets this standard.
[How do you know? – include evidence of improved outcomes]
8.1 Organisation has a clear policy on appropriate
information sharing to ensure children are
safeguarded and their welfare promoted
8.2 Organisation can evidence how this impacts on
outcomes for children
8.3 Training addresses need for effective information
sharing and encourages staff to use professional
judgement
8.4 Staff know where to seek advice on information
sharing & have confidence in their professional
judgement
Are any actions required to improve effectiveness? How will you do this? Who will lead? Timescale?
Authorisation
This audit was completed by
Name:
Position:
Signed:
Date:
LSCB representative
Name:
Position:
Signed:
Date:
Receipt: to be returned to agency as acknowledgement
Name:
Position:
Signed:
Date:

Appendix 4 – Section 11 Organisation evaluation report
(completed after LSCB evaluation)
{Name} Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB)
Independent Overview of Section 11 Assessment
1. Summary Include a short paragraph to include the overview of findings, including level of participation
from agencies, setting the scene for the report.
2. Introduction Include the rationale for undertaking the assessment, who co-ordinated the assessment and
other documents used to inform the final report.
3. Key Findings on agency compliance
4. Conclusions and recommendations
Conclusions
1
2
3
4
Recommendations
1
2
3
4
Are there any
actions required
to improved
effectiveness
How will
you do this?
Lead Person Timescale
for
completion
Progress to
date
Action
completed
RAG
e.g. information
lifted from within
section 11 return