skip to Main Content

Table of Contents

To download the Annual Report as a pdf, please click Safeguarding Children Partnership Board Annual Report 2020-21


We are pleased to present the annual report of the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Safeguarding Children’s Partnership Board for 2020-21. This is presented on behalf of the three statutory partners and the local multi-agency safeguarding arrangements.

The annual report outlines the key activities and achievements of the Board and its partners over the last year. You will see in the report that we have worked through our priorities through the year. The multi-agency safeguarding training has continued to develop and grow, front line practitioners’ voices have been captured through a series of consultation surveys and forums and quality assurance and scrutiny activity has taken place.  One of the key roles of the Board is to ensure that partners continue to work together effectively and this has been evidenced throughout the year. You will note that some of our priorities (child criminal exploitation) we share with our partner strategic boards (Community Safety Partnerships). We continue to work closely with other partnerships to ensure that the work is delivered jointly and consistently and there is no duplication or gaps.

Safeguarding is about people, their safety, wishes, aspirations and needs. The partnership has been active in identifying and learning lessons through the Child Safeguarding Practice Review subgroup. We have published one case review within the time period covered by this review. The learning from this review has been identified and disseminated through various activities including briefings, workshops and learning lessons training. The dissemination of the learning is explored in greater detail within the report.

Over the last 12 months the safeguarding landscape has been complex, presenting many new challenges in addition to those faced day-to-day. We want to assure people that throughout the Covid pandemic to date, the Board has continued to work closely with both statutory and wider partners to scrutinise how safeguarding issues are addressed, gain reassurance that they are dealt with appropriately and provide a forum for sharing best practice across the partnership. It has also ensured that safeguarding children remains a key focus for agencies across the County.

Finally, we would like to thank all members of the Board for their professionalism, commitment and support. We would also like to say thank you to all agencies and frontline staff for the incredible work that they do to keep children safe from abuse and neglect.

Wendi Ogle-WelbournCarol AndersonVicki Evans
Executive Director, People and CommunitiesChief NurseAssistant Chief Constable

About the Board

Working Together to Safeguard Children 2018, set in legislation that the three safeguarding partners (Local Authority, Chief Officer of Police and Clinical Commissioning Groups) must work together with relevant agencies to safeguard and protect the welfare of children in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough are one of only a few areas nationally that had chosen to establish multi-agency safeguarding arrangements which span two local authority boundaries. The membership of the board is made up of the following organisations/agencies:

What we do

The purpose of the multi-agency safeguarding arrangements are to support and enable local organisations and agencies to work together in a system where:

  • Children are safeguarded and their welfare promoted.
  • Partner organisations and agencies collaborate, share and co-own the vision for how to achieve improved outcomes for vulnerable children.
  • Organisations and agencies challenge appropriately and hold one another to account effectively.
  • There is early identification and analysis of new safeguarding issues and emerging threats.
  • Learning is promoted and embedded in a way that local services for children and families can become more reflective and implement changes to practice.
  • Information is shared effectively to facilitate accurate and timely decision making for children and families.

We do this by:

  • Proactively identify and respond to new and emerging safeguarding issues and develop multi-agency policies, procedures and work streams.
  • Communicate widely to persons and bodies of the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children, raising their awareness of how this can best be done and encouraging them to do so.
  • Oversee, evaluate and seek assurance on the effectiveness single/multi-agency safeguarding practice in order to drive improvement.
  • Undertake Child Safeguarding Practice Reviews to identify learning and improve practice.
  • Raise awareness and train the multi-agency workforce to promote a common, shared understanding of local need in order to and provide children with the help they need.

The local safeguarding arrangements have a number of Boards and subgroups that oversee the safeguarding partnership. The most senior Board is the Executive Safeguarding Partnership Board, which is made up of membership from the 3 statutory partners (LA, CCG and Police), public health, Healthwatch and the voluntary sector. The Executive Safeguarding Board considers both the children’s and adults safeguarding agenda. The Safeguarding Children Partnership Board sits directly below the Executive Safeguarding Partnership Board and has wider partnership membership (Appendix 1 details those agencies who are members of the Board). The diagram below details the current governance structure.


Diagram showing structure of Safeguarding Partnership Board
Diagram showing structure of Safeguarding Partnership Board

The Safeguarding Children Partnership Board has maintained its links with other groups and boards who impact on child and adult services this year. These are illustrated in Figure 1. This ensures that all aspects of safeguarding are taken into account by the other statutory boards and there is a co-ordinated and consistent approach. These links mean that safeguarding vulnerable people remains on the agenda across the statutory and strategic partnership and is a continuing consideration for all members.

Other statutory boards linked to the Safeguarding Partnership Board
Other statutory boards linked to the Safeguarding Partnership Board


Map of Cambridgeshire with Unitary and Districts labelled
Map of Cambridgeshire with Unitary and Districts labelled

Cambridgeshire covers an area 1,309 sq miles in the East of England bordering Lincolnshire to the north, Norfolk to the north-east, Suffolk to the east, Essex and Hertfordshire to the south, and Bedfordshire and Northamptonshire to the west. The county is divided between Cambridgeshire County Council and Peterborough City Council, which since 1998 has been a separate unitary authority. In the non-metropolitan county there are five district councils, Cambridge City Council, East Cambridgeshire District Council, Fenland District Council, Huntingdonshire District Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council.

Population of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough at a glance[1]

Total Population (2020 Estimate)
Male Population (2020 Estimate)
Female Population (2020 Estimate)
Aged 0 - 14 (2020 estimate)
Aged 15 - 24 (2020 Estimate)
Aged 25+ (2020 Estimate)
The county of Cambridgeshire’s ethnic composition is primarily White (90.3%). The next largest ethnicity group is Asian (5.9%) and Black (1.3%)The proportion of children and young people in Cambridgeshire is slightly lower than England, however the proportion of children and young people in Peterborough is higher than England[2] The ethnic composition of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough differs between areas. Peterborough is much more ethnically diverse, with a larger proportion of people from ‘Asian; Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi’ and ‘White Other’ ethnicities. There are more than 100 languages spoken in Peterborough with more than a third of children speaking English as their second language. In Cambridgeshire districts, Cambridge City is much more ethnically diverse than Fenland. Within Cambridge City 82.5% of residents identified as White compared to 97.2% of Fenland residents. According to the Census 2011 figures, there were 2,068 people identified with the ethnic background White: Gypsy or Irish Traveller. The traveller caravan count data provided by local authorities on the number of caravans and traveller sites, does not cover the number of occupants residing in these caravans or caravan sites. In January 2020, there were a total of 1,650 caravans on authorised (socially rented and private) and unauthorised sites. 35% of these were located in East Cambridgeshire and 34% were in Fenland[3]

Homeless population

At the end of March 2021 there were 961 households assessed as homeless or threatened with homelessness. 49% were from Peterborough and Huntingdonshire. Of the 961, 535 households were identified as having support needs.

There were 595 households in temporary accommodation, 295 households in temporary accommodation had a combined total of 488 children.

There were 41 rough sleepers across Cambridgeshire and Peterborough in Autumn 2020[4], 39% of which were in Cambridge.

Prison Population

HMP Whitemoor is situated in Fenland, Cambridgeshire, and is a maximum security prison for men in Category A and B with an operational capacity of 459. An HMP scrutiny visit carried out in August 2020 found there to be 450 prisoners of which 15% were foreign nationals and 51% from BAME backgrounds.

HMP Littlehey is situated near Huntingdon and is a category C training prison specialising in holding 1,220 prisoners convicted of sexual offences. In July 2019, there were 1,211 male prisoners all aged 21 and over. 10.2% were foreign nationals and 69% were listed as White British.

HMP Peterborough is situated in Peterborough and is a dual-purpose prison, housing both male and female prisoners. It has an operational capacity of over 1,200 places (868 male, 396 female) including a 12-bed mother and baby unit. Recent HMP Peterborough Inspection reports carried out in September 2017 found there to be 367 women prisoners of which 4% were under 21 years of age, 18% were foreign nationals and 69% were listed as White British. There were 808 male prisoners of which 7.5% were under 21 years of age, 12.5% were foreign nationals and 61.6% were White British.

Safeguarding Children Data 2020-21

Peterborough data

Contacts to Children Social Care
Single Assessments
Early Help Assessments initiated
Section 47s completed
Children subject to a Child Protection Plan
Children in Care

Cambridgeshire Data

Contacts to Children Social Care
Single Assessments
Early Help Assessments initiated
Section 47s completed
Children subject to a Child Protection Plan
Children in Care

COVID 19 and the work of the partnership

Covid 19 has had a significant impact on society during the period of time covered by this annual report. From the outset, partners worked together collaboratively to ensure an effective response to the Covid 19 situation. Partners demonstrated a flexible approach to systems and processes that ensured that the needs of the ever-changing safeguarding landscape were met. At times, these discussions and decisions were challenging as resources were stretched and new ways of working needed to be established quickly. However, the initial responses and ongoing evolving processes evidence the value and strength of the partnership relationships and working practices.

It is recognised that lockdown resulted in a number of children and young people becoming increasingly vulnerable and potentially invisible as schools, health services, voluntary sector services and other agencies moved to a virtual world and resources were realigned to meet the needs of the pandemic. Lockdown contributed to a national increase in instances of child abuse, domestic violence and mental health concerns. Locally, we too saw the numbers rise in referrals and concerns in these areas and the Board played an important role in cascading messages around the need to recognise and report abuse. However, Covid 19 also saw people work together to help some of the most vulnerable people within our communities. There were significant increases in individuals taking up volunteering positions, many of which had no, or very limited, understanding of safeguarding. Within a few days of the Country entering into the first lockdown, the Partnership had developed bespoke guidance and virtual safeguarding training that was specifically tailored to new volunteers and safeguarding during Covid. A Covid Safeguarding Resource page was developed on the Partnership website that contained detailed information and resources on a range of safeguarding and Covid issues. This included information on scamming, online safety, domestic abuse, mental health and talking to children about Covid 19. The website page was launched on the 31st March 2020 and by the 31st March 2021, had been accessed in excess of 18,000 times. As the Partnership Board website is actively used across the partnership, it was used to host the professionals virtual test and trace training and virtual resources.

The Partnership Board played a key role in communicating information about the pandemic, including the need to recognise and report abuse, via its social media platforms. Throughout the year there was an active social media campaign across Twitter, Facebook and Instagram which had a reach of in excess 190,000. The Safeguarding Partnership Board was also an active member of countywide Covid-19 communications meetings, ensuring a consistency of messages and a joined up approach.

During lockdown, countylines activity adapted. A multi-agency Interim/recovery CCE delivery plan that addressed the evolving risks emerging in CCE was developed and completed. Work was also undertaken with the Healthy Schools Programme to help focus the messages / resources that were available to parents / young people through the Healthy Schools website. There was a clear emphasis on allaying fears for returning to school and messages around Exploitation. The Healthy Schools website is a platform that parents and carers are used to visiting so this approach helped to reinforce a consistent message.

During the Covid 19 pandemic, the Partnership Board has continued to facilitate partnership meetings and discussion groups focusing on the Board’s safeguarding priorities. Face to face meetings were discontinued due to governmental legislation and virtual meetings initiated.

The Partnership response to Covid 19 and safeguarding was discussed and agreed at all of the Executive Safeguarding Partnership Board meetings held throughout the year. In addition, Executive Safeguarding Board members met extraordinarily to discuss urgent issues that occurred throughout the year

The Partnership was aware of the need to continue to up-skill the workforce on safeguarding issues and as a result they developed virtual briefings. Locally, these are referred to as Sways (the software that is used for the briefings). In essence, these are a presentation but each slide has an audio that discusses the content of the slide. Generally, they last around 20 minutes per briefing. The virtual briefings are available on the Partnership Board website and can be accessed at any time. As a result, staff who are working night shifts, weekends or early shifts can all access the training at their convenience.

The first virtual briefing to be uploaded onto the Board’s website during April 2020 was on ‘Safeguarding for Community Volunteers’ closely followed by ‘Safeguarding from Online Abuse’, a recognised high-risk area of concern during lock down. The virtual briefings that followed focused on safeguarding during Covid and locally identified areas of safeguarding risk, as well as the Board’s priorities. However, as the popularity of the virtual briefings increased it was apparent that these were a hugely useful resource and further topics were added. Between April 2020 and March 2021, the virtual briefings had been viewed a total 10,753 times.

Safeguarding Children Partnership Board Priorities 2020/2021

Priority One: To understand what the neglect landscape looks like across the county and embed the neglect strategies and tools across the partnership to achieve better outcomes for children and their families

Neglect remains the most common form of child abuse across the UK. Partners across Cambridgeshire and Peterborough aim to ensure that there is early recognition of neglect cases and that from early help to statutory intervention there should be appropriate, consistent and timely responses across all agencies.

Child Neglect training was refreshed and updated to ensure that it contained up to the most recent national guidance, statistics and research. During Covid the training sessions were delivered virtually. The demand was so great that extra sessions had to be put on to accommodate the number of professionals requesting to undertake the training. This response was far greater than any of the previous years when face to face training for Child Neglect was available and ensured that practitioners working evening and weekend shifts also had access to training.

The section 11 self-assessment audit that took place in 2019- 2020 found that there was a lack of use of safeguarding assessment tools by agencies and professionals and this was escalated to the Executive Board in 2020. In response, a task and finish group met in November 2020 to look at how tools could be embedded across the partnership. It was agreed that a single countywide neglect tool should be developed. This would ensure a consistency of approach across the county and partners. Following consultation, it was agreed that the Graded Care Profile (GCP) was the child neglect assessment tool to be used across the partnership. Virtual Training workshops took place during February 2021 and the GCP Assessment Tool was officially re-launched in March 2021. As the training was so successful, information and narrative from the virtual training has been developed into an online briefing (SWAY) and is available on the Board’s website for all professionals. Clear reference to the completion of the Child Neglect Assessment Tool features within the online safeguarding referral form with a direct link to the tool on the Board’s website. The Board will be undertaking assurance work in 2021/2022 to ensure that the Tool is being used by agencies and is making a difference to children and young people.

Child Neglect continues to be discussed as part of the Quality Effectiveness Group single agency performance monitoring to scrutinise how agencies are embedding the assessment tools and support of child neglect into practice.

Priority Two: To understand what the sexual abuse landscape looks like across the county and embed the child sexual abuse strategy and tools across the partnership to achieve better outcomes for children and their families

The last four decades have been witness to a changing landscape of language and framings for Child Sexual Abuse (CSA). The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Safeguarding Children Partnership Board recognises the need for cases of CSA to be acknowledged and addressed and as such it is one of the core objectives of its work.

The section 11 self-assessment audit that took place in 2019-2020 and the findings from the supporting professional’s survey, suggested some professionals from a range of agencies, did not feel confident in working with CSA. In response a CSA task and finish group was established to develop a new CSA strategy. A suite of virtual training resources including: virtual training on an introduction to CSA, the SARC and sexually harmful behaviour; a resource pack on Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) and online briefings (Sways) on online abuse, sexual violence and online harms (Child Criminal Exploitation and Child Sexual Abuse). The Board have also developed a local sexual behaviours tool to assist people in thinking about whether sexual behaviour is a concern or part of normal child development. To inform the development of this work the Partnership Board conducted 3 surveys on CSA aimed at children, parents and professionals. The purpose of the surveys were to ascertain what they know and understand about CSA, if they knew how to report it. We received a fantastic response to the surveys with 324 children, 125 parents and 362 professionals responding to the surveys. The information that we gained from the surveys were used as the basis for the development of the strategy, tools and training. The suite of CSA resources are to be launched later in 2021 which is outside the timeframe covered by this report. The impact of the surveys, tools and training will be contained in the 2021/22 annual report.

Child Sexual Abuse continues to be discussed at the QEG as part of the single agency performance monitoring to see how agencies are embedding the assessment and support of CSA into practice.

Priority Three: To agree a multi-agency approach to identifying, assessing and responding to cases of child criminal exploitation. To develop an effective approach to identifying at risk groups and preventing them from being exploited

Child Exploitation (CE) is increasingly being recognised as a major factor behind crime in communities in the UK; it also victimises vulnerable young people and leaves them at risk of harm. The oversight of practice around exploitation of children and young people is governed by the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Safeguarding Partnership Board and Countywide Community Safety Partnership. The multi-agency partnerships work closely together to ensure that young people are supported and perpetrators are brought to justice. Multi-agency information sharing has allowed us to create a series of localised problem-solving groups, known as ‘mapping’, to specifically concentrate on environmental issues and ensure that robust plans are in place for both victims and perpetrators of child exploitation.

The mapping has significantly contributed to our understanding of serious street-based violence involving children and has allowed us to be proactive when creating interventions. he mapping has been used to support the objectives set out by the wider partnership.

This has seen early identification of “hotspot” areas that has allowed us to work with a range of key partners, which in turn has led to a reduction in violent crime within the mapped areas. The experience we now have has changed the way we structure our mapping, with a tactical meeting dealing with the detail raised and a Strategic meeting taking away those issues that need wider partnership input. The “mapping“ is managed through the Missing and Child Exploitation (MACE) meetings and any key issues arising are escalated through to the Strategic Group for inclusion onto the Delivery Plan. The CE Strategic group work to this Delivery Plan, which has contributions from all key stakeholders. This plan drives the activity at the meeting, making it more focussed and relevant. We have now shared this best practice with other local authority areas, and we are seeking to develop a “problem solving” training package to ensure Managers within the partnership are able to effectively contribute.

A key area of development this year has been the involvement of local areas at Community Safety Partnership (CSP) level. We now have a structured meeting process in place which has led to better information sharing and understanding of local issues. This meeting supports the objectives of the wider CCE Strategic group. Throughout this period, we have worked extensively with partners to ensure we have meaningful data captured which can be shared with all partners. We are currently reviewing the use of vulnerability trackers to ensure that all partners are sharing and working to the same data.

Child Exploitation training has continued throughout Covid and home working. It has become a six weekly virtual session and has allowed us to accommodate a larger number of learners than was possible when classroom based. We have developed the training to allow the learner to view video and audio content at a point convenient to them, which allows them to control their own environment based on personal home working conditions. This has received incredibly positive feedback when seeking evaluation.

The section 11 self-assessment audit that took place in 2019-2020 found that although the strategic leads of agencies felt that Child Criminal Exploitation was firmly embedded within practice, professionals surveyed reported that they were not aware of the CCE risk assessment tool. The lack of knowledge and limited use of assessment tools by practitioners was escalated to the Executive Board. In response the Board has taken those findings back to the CCE Strategic Board and developed a suite of CCE virtual training and resources. This includes Sways on online harms (CSE and CSA) and online abuse and virtual training on an introduction to CCE. Clear reference to the completion of the CCE Risk Assessment Tool features within the online safeguarding referral form with a direct link to the tool on the Board’s website.

Child Criminal Exploitation training during Covid became virtual and the demand was so great that extra sessions had to be put on to accommodate the number of professionals requesting to undertake the training.

Child Criminal Exploitation continues to be discussed at the QEG as part of the single agency performance monitoring to see how agencies are embedding the assessment and support of CCE into practice.

Learning from Child Safeguarding Practice Reviews

The new structure for child reviews involving Rapid Reviews and CSPRs has successfully been embedded into practice. The CSPR group have developed a template for the completion of Rapid Reviews and have maintained continual contact with the National Panel in terms of submitting reviews to deadline and answering their questions. Given that the new legislation of the Child and Social Work Act 2017 and the guidance of Working Together 2018 has only recently been implemented there are still some child reviews that are following the old structure of Serious Case Reviews. All case reviews have action plans to ensure that the learning is taken forward. These are monitored on a bimonthly basis by the partnership.

Rapid reviews

Number of CSPRs ongoing from 2019/20

Number of referrals for CSPR between April 2020 – March 2021

CSPRs completed within timeframe of this annual report

Ongoing SARs for 2021/22

Criteria met

Criteria not met







5 CSPRs had commenced prior to April 2020 and were ongoing. 4 new referrals were commenced between April 2020 and March 2021. 1 CSPR was signed off by the Board that had commenced prior to this financial year, and briefings were produced.

Learning from the rapid review has focussed on

  • Professional curiosity
  • Child Sexual Abuse
  • Mental ill health
  • Moving between Local Authorities.


Within the timeframe covered by this annual report, 1 case review was published. This review was undertaken on a baby who we shall call Oliver, to respect his anonymity. The review concerned the serious injuries sustained by a baby under one year old as a result of being attacked by family pet dogs. Oliver subsequently died of these injuries.

Learning from the review includes

  • Adherence to the Safeguarding Pre-birth Protocol, undertaking a full pre-birth assessment and support from the unborn panel will ensure that there is a coherent multi-agency approach to supporting and protecting the unborn and newly born child.
  • Within the partnership there is shared responsibility for safeguarding and the completion of actions, where there is apparent drift, failure to complete this should be appropriately challenged and addressed.
  • Professionals should take every opportunity to explore the risks of domestic abuse in a relationship, considering how coercion can be applied. Safe, open conversations about previous domestic abuse should not be avoided.
  • Where there are concerns regarding previous domestic abuse, consideration should be given to how much the current partner is aware of and whether consideration of disclosure under Clare’s Law is appropriate.

The key message from this review is ‘never leave a baby or young child unsupervised with a dog, even for a moment, no matter how well you know that dog’. One of the key actions arising from this case review was the development of a “dangerous dog” guidance and resource pack.

At the conclusion of a case review, a series of workshops are held to ensure that the learning is disseminated across the partnership. A series of written briefings are also produced that focus on the implications for practice.

The section 11 self-assessment audit that took place in 2019-2020 found that although the strategic leads of agencies felt that they effectively disseminated the findings from case reviews to their workforce, professionals surveyed reported that they were not always aware of the lessons learned from case reviews. This was identified within the recommendations of the section 11 report as an area to focus on. In response the Board has developed 7 minute briefings on case reviews available on the website. The lessons learned both nationally and locally feature within discussions at the Training Subgroup for implementation into wider workforce practice. Additionally, the cases and the learning are written into the virtual briefings and online training and are promoted at termly safeguarding workshops. The impact of these measures have been evidenced through subsequent surveys which have shown an increase in practitioner’s awareness of lessons from case reviews.

During 2021 a ‘Database of Learning’ has also been set up recording details and findings from all of the children case reviews (both SCRS and CSPRS) and Safeguarding Adult Reviews across the county. This allows us to further scrutinise themes and trends arising from case reviews.

Learning from child deaths

Over the last year, the deaths of 34 children were reported to the CDOP across Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, this is seven less than 2019/2020. 25 in Cambridgeshire and 8 in Peterborough. 49% of these children were babies under one year old compared to the national average in the UK which is 63%. Four deaths (out of 34 reported) were suicides. The number of cases reviewed were 40 – some of these were reported to CDOP as early as 2018.

One of the purposes of the child death review process is to identify ‘modifiable’ factors for each child that dies. That is any factor which, on review, might have prevented that death and might prevent future deaths. During 2020-2021 there were 11 child deaths where a modifiable factor was identified by the panel. 29 deaths were unmodifiable. 23% of cases reviewed were completed within 6 months, 63% of cases reviewed this year were completed within 12 months and 15% were over 12 months old when review took place. One of the reasons for the delay is the current backlog locally for Coronial Inquests. The DfE acknowledges that reviewing child deaths is an extremely complex task and these figures are not used as a performance measure.

Contributions from the Statutory Safeguarding Partners

Local Authority Children Services

As for all those working with children, young people and their families, 2020/21 has been a year like no other. Children and young people have experienced a significant impact as a result of the pandemic, with many losing access to class-based learning and experiencing huge disruption in their important peer relationships for lengthy periods.

Parents and carers also experienced increased stress as a result of uncertainty about employment, and through isolation from informal as well as more formal sources of support.

It is likely that we will continue to see the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic for some time to come, despite the best efforts of all concerned – schools, health services, voluntary and community services – to ensure that we do all we can to minimise the impact of the pandemic.

Despite the challenge of pandemic and repeated period of lockdown, children’s services have continued to grow and develop. Achievements in 2020/21 included:

  • The redesign of parenting programmes across both local authorities, developing hybrid models that have been effective in supporting families through the pandemic while making the programmes more accessible;
  • The implementation of the Early Help Module in Cambridgeshire, enabling practitioners to easily see whether other services are supporting a child or family and resulting in better take up of early help assessments;
  • The full implementation of the Family Safeguarding model of practice in Cambridgeshire;
  • The continued delivery of the SAFE team, supported with funding from the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner, working with young people at greatest risk of exploitation;
  • Reviewing processes within the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub, resulting in a more targeted approach to requesting and receiving information from partners and also implemented an electronic referral form;
  • Participating in a national review of responses to young people at risk of trafficking and exploitation, which identified our processes within the MASH and the Missing, Exploited and Trafficked hub as being examples of best practice [and which were also later praised by Ofsted in the focused visit to Peterborough in June 2021];
  • Developing and implementing focused training for our staff on Child Sexual Abuse, following practice reviews in this area;
  • Following rapid reviews into the tragic suicides of three young people in earlier years, we have implemented regular practice workshops with colleagues from CPFT to reflect on the learning in respect of young people with complex mental health needs.

It is hard to think of a period that has relied more heavily on the extraordinary commitment of staff and managers in our services and in partner agencies. Despite the enormous challenges, that commitment and dedication has resulted in real achievements across services for vulnerable children, young people and their families.

Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group

The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough CCG’s Safeguarding Teams merged into one team in 2020-2021 under a Head of Safeguarding People to help embed the Safeguarding “Think Family” approach. The role of the Safeguarding People Team is to provide support to the health system and provide ongoing monitoring and assurance of safeguarding practice to ensure all providers of health care services have competent and well-trained staff who can safeguard vulnerable people.

The Safeguarding People Team provide bespoke advice, guidance and training as required along with regular safeguarding supervision to each health care provider. The support available is provided across the health system; including acute care, the ambulance service, primary care, community care, nursing homes and across all age groups; children and adults.

We also support our internal CCG workforce with safeguarding decision making. To fulfil our statutory safeguarding responsibilities within the CCG, the Safeguarding Team is comprised of professionals who have different specialisms and expertise.

Throughout 2020-2021 the CCG increased their support to health providers mindful of the pandemic, the pressures on the system and subsequent potential increased risk to protect vulnerable children and adults from harm. Whilst the methods of support may have altered, the amount increased and the CCG thought creatively about how this support could continue. Regular communications were sent out and support was provided virtually. A regular resilience meeting was set up with health providers to provide an opportunity for a systemwide response to managing safeguarding in a pandemic which Safeguarding Health Provider Leads attended chaired by the CCG Safeguarding People Team Lead. The team continued to provide advice to our providers whilst, as commissioners, balancing this with continued assurance with compliance to Safeguarding across the system at a time of increased risk, working closely with CQC, Ofsted, Local Authorities and the Safeguarding Partnership Boards.

During the last 12 months support has been provided to our health providers to progress the aligned model for the Multi-agency Safeguarding Hub to support best practice and information sharing between Health and Partner Agencies, this will support with system wide risk.

There has been a conscious shift to move away from a quality monitoring model to a quality improvement model with an enabling focus.

The Safeguarding People Team will continue to lead on the development of a system wide Safeguarding Officer Apprenticeship which we hope will be agreed in 2021/2022.

Cambridgeshire Constabulary

Cambridgeshire Constabulary continues its active membership of the Safeguarding Children Partnership Board. Over the past 12 months we have been represented at Executive and Board level by Assistant Chief Constable Vicky Evans, Detective Chief Superintendent Mark Greenhalgh (Head of Crime and Vulnerability) and Detective Superintendent John Massey (Head of Protecting Vulnerable People Department). The constabulary is also represented at all the key subgroups to the board where we continue to engage with all our partners on the board’s priorities, seeking to support, challenge and learn from all our colleagues in our shared goal of continual improvement.

There have undoubtedly been enormous challenges over the past twelve months but it has been the close working relationship and continual interaction with our partners that has ensured we have seen some notable successes in securing the best possible outcomes for the most vulnerable children across Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.

There has been an unprecedented focus on the police response to Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG), well-publicised reports of peer on peer abuse within educational establishments and a rise in Child Sexual Abuse allegations and a continuation of the persisting risk of criminal and sexual exploitation emanating from County Lines drug supply. Support from our partners has been pivotal in our formulation of strategies to counter these challenges together.

We have created new Vulnerability Focus Desks and Early Intervention Domestic Abuse Desks to greatly enhance our response to those at risk and employed Young Person Early Intervention Officers to engage with children at risk of exploitation and divert them from a cycle of harm, abuse and criminality. We continue to work with great support from local authority partners and the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner in devising bids for vital central government funding and have recently secured funding for three Domestic Abuse, Child to Parent Violence, and Stalking Perpetrator Programmes that will go live across the county this autumn. Further partnership engagement has been seen within Perpetrator Panels and the DA Scrutiny Group and Rape Scrutiny Panels; these fora provide invaluable opportunities for feedback, transparency, practical direction and shared expertise and an overall ‘critical friend’ input to help maintain our focus and performance.

One particular highlight of our partnership co-operation came in our collective success in being selected to become one of only 2 areas in the country to have a Specialist DA Court with Mentoring Status. This will upskill staff and ensure Cambridgeshire and Peterborough can offer the best possible service to those who have been victims of domestic assaults, while crucially, also reducing the long-term harm caused to children exposed to such behaviours in the home. Another highlight came in the form of a joint training event delivered by the County Lines Pathfinder Team in March this year to Police, Health, YOS, Education and Social Care colleagues. This was hugely helpful in providing front line staff with vital skills in identifying the signs of criminal and sexual exploitation and initiating the first steps to disrupt this activity; it also helped strengthen working and professional relations and helped onward contact and information sharing.

As we look ahead to the next twelve months, we are acutely aware of the challenges to come – particularly as we face some of the consequential effects of the Covid lockdown periods. However, we are confident that through our partnership structures and oversight we have both the unified purpose and the coordinated relationships within the Board to meet these challenges successfully.

Scrutiny and quality assurance

Requirement for independent scrutiny

Working Together to Safeguard Children 2018 confirms that the three statutory safeguarding partners in relation to a local authority area are defined in the Children and Social Work Act 2017 as:

  • Local Authority
  • Clinical Commissioning Group
  • Chief Officer of Police.

The three statutory partners have a shared and equal duty to make arrangements to work together to safeguard and promote the welfare of all children in a local area.

Working Together 2018 stipulates that the partnership has a duty to show there is independent scrutiny to provide assurance in judging the effectiveness of multi-agency arrangements to safeguard and promote the welfare of all children in a local area, including arrangements to identify and review serious child safeguarding cases. This independent scrutiny can form part of a wider system which includes the independent inspectorates, single assessment of the individual safeguarding partners and the Joint Targeted Area Inspections. There is no longer a requirement to have an independent Chair.

Whilst the decision on how best to implement a robust system of independent scrutiny is to be made locally, safeguarding partners should ensure that the scrutiny is objective, acts as a constructive critical friend and promotes reflection to drive continuous improvement.

The independent scrutiny should consider how effectively the arrangements are working for children and families as well as for practitioners, how effectively the safeguarding partners are providing strong leadership and agree with the safeguarding partners how this will be reported.

Local scrutiny arrangements

Currently the scrutiny function of the partnership is discharged through an independent scrutineer who provides a scrutiny assurance report at each Executive Safeguarding Board meeting (Quarterly).

In addition to the scrutiny undertaken by the scrutineer, there is a significant range of scrutiny functions that are currently in place that offer additional scrutiny of the safeguarding and partnership arrangements. A number of these functions are undertaken by the Independent Safeguarding Partnership service (Business Unit).

The table below evidences the additional robust scrutiny of the partnership arrangements across both adults and children’s outside of the scrutineer’s role.


What we scrutinise


Single agency operational practice

Quality of single agency and multi-agency practice

Decision making

Professional challenge/ escalation


Single agency quality assurance activity.

Peer to peer reviews.

Single agency inspections.

Serious incidents.

Performance management information.

Partnership working and multi-agency practice

Single agency and multi-agency practice

Decision making

Professional challenge/ escalation


Independent scrutiny of Case reviews through independent chair of the case review groups.

Head of Service for Safeguarding Partnership Boards chairs some of the case review panel meetings.

Independent authors for case reviews.

JTAI and other inspections.

S11 self-assessment and adult equivalent – this includes agency challenge sessions.

Regular QA assurance activity undertaken by business unit staff, including audits, dip samples and case reviews.

Consultation and development forums provides a mechanism for front line engagement. They are held 4x a year, each one addresses one of the business priorities.

Qualitative performance reporting through the Quality & Effectiveness Groups on a quarterly basis.

Surveys and consultations with children and young people, parents and professionals.

Multi-agency workforce development feedback and impact process.

The Head of Service for the Safeguarding Partnership Boards chairs the following meetings;

  • Quality & Effectiveness Groups (adults and children)
  • Exploitation Strategic Group
  • Exploitation Delivery Group (CSP’s)
  • Various task and finish groups.

The Training & Development Subgroup is Chaired by a member of the Independent safeguarding partnership service (business unit)

Validation of single agency training

Head of Service for Safeguarding Partnership Boards has independent oversight of the partnership budget.

Head of Service Safeguarding Partnership Boards and other members of the Independent Safeguarding Partnership Service (Business Unit) are members of various boards/meetings where they scrutinise practice.


Quality Effectiveness Group (QEG)

This group is responsible for monitoring the individual and collective effectiveness of the safeguarding practice carried out by the agencies represented on the Children’s Safeguarding Partnership Board. The group has a strong quality assurance function including undertaking audits, dip samples, self-assessments focus groups and surveys. The annual themed audit programme includes both single and multi-agency audits and are linked to the Board’s priorities. QEG advises and supports the Board in achieving the highest safeguarding standards and promoting safeguarding across Peterborough and Cambridgeshire through evaluation and continuous improvement. During the twelve months covered by this report, the following audit activity has taken place:

The impact of Covid 19 had a huge effect on agencies during the time period covered by this report. Due to national lockdown restrictions, a number of services ceased to offer face to face appointments, people were asked to stay at home and the vulnerable members of our society became less visible. The impact of Covid 19 on safeguarding issues and agencies service delivery was a standard agenda item and considered at every QEG meeting. This was with a view to assuring partners around safeguarding practice during this difficult period and supporting a systems led approach to the issues being faced across all partners.

Single Agency Performance Commentary completed by partners for each of the Board’s priorities with each priority being reviewed at QEG twice a year. Includes what has worked well, areas for improvement and what the agency has done to contribute to those improvements, where multi-agency support is needed and issues to be escalated to the Executive Board. This process has worked well and its impact is evidenced through the numerous changes in processes and policies and additional training courses being offered as a result of the scrutiny at QEG.

Multi-Agency Training Impact on Professional Practice Report is completed annually and presented at QEG and the Training Subgroup (see training section below for evidence of impact). The Partnership Board also continues to endorse single agency safeguarding training to ensure that training provided to the wider safeguarding workforce is robust, fit for purpose and contains consistent messaging. In the past 12 months a total of 9 courses have been validated for the Police, Early Years Peterborough, Early Help Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust.

The Annual Training Needs Survey is undertaken to ascertain what safeguarding training is currently available within agencies, understand how well Safeguarding Board priorities are being incorporated into agency training programmes and identify any potential gaps there may be in safeguarding children’s training that need to be met. As a result of this survey, additional training has been developed.

Section 11 Audit. This audit is undertaken, in line with the Children Act 2004, every two years, to ascertain if agencies across the partnership are effectively safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children and young people in accordance with their section 11 statutory responsibilities. For this audit year, the tool was redesigned to include the Board’s priorities.

Findings showed that there had been improvement in the specific areas of; escalating concerns, embedding safeguarding policies and practices, information sharing and the lived experience of the child, as a result of the Board’s and agencies work on these areas. This work included; creation and promotion of the lived experience of the child guidance and training pack and promotion of policies and procedures at the termly workshops. It also included reviewing and renaming the escalation policy to “resolving professional differences”. The work we had undertaken around escalation was recognised as ‘good practice’ within the national triennial analysis of SCRs 2014-2017.

The main area identified for improvement focused on professionals understanding and use of safeguarding assessment tools. The concerns surrounding use of safeguarding tools was escalated the Executive Safeguarding Partnership Board and a multi-agency group was established to resolve this issue. The impact of this work will be included in the 2021/22 annual report.

To inform the work being undertaken around CSA 3 surveys were carried out. 1 was aimed at young people, 1 was aimed at parents/carers and the final survey was for practitioners. 324 young people, 125 parents/carer’s and 362 professionals responded to the surveys. The surveys found that there is still a lack of awareness for both children and parents on some of the identified risk areas of child sexual abuse. Children are less aware than parents that sexual abuse can happen online and only a quarter of the children surveyed knew that sexual abuse is often perpetrated by those people whom they know. Additionally, in respect of the professionals’ responses it was clear that the increased focus from the Partnership Board and its partners, on the area of child sexual abuse had improved practitioner’s confidence, knowledge and awareness. The 2020 survey recorded that 97% survey practitioners felt confident in reporting child sexual abuse and 84% had received training on the subject. The findings from the survey were presented at the CSA task and finish group, QEG and the Child Criminal Exploitation group and have informed areas of work for the Board and its partners to focus on. The findings have also been sent to the Centre of Expertise on CSA to help inform their research. A separate report was sent to the local SARC to inform them of the findings in relation to children, parents and professionals understanding and experience of the SARC.

Independent Scrutineer’s Report and Findings

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough’s agreed (Nov 2020) methodology that has been used for this scrutiny report is best known nationally as ‘Six Steps for Independent Scrutiny: Safeguarding children arrangements’. This has been adapted from the publication of the same name by Pearce, J (2019) Institute of Applied Social Research, Luton, University of Bedfordshire.

The six themes to be explored to provide assurance of partnership safeguarding activity are covered below:

1. The three core partner leads are actively involved in strategic planning and implementation.

The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Safeguarding Executive Partnership Board have agreed the following priorities for the Safeguarding Children Partnership Board from October 2019 – December 2021. This plan is child focused.

Four priorities have been identified as areas that require further development through learning arising from case reviews and quality assurance activity. This includes identified agreed desired outcomes in line with national guidelines and recent research findings and includes contextual safeguarding.

The priorities plan (business plan) has been examined and is extremely well written, it includes describing what the priority is, then what will be done to achieve the priority and then what success will look like.

In terms of the neglect priority, activity that has taken place against this priority during the last 12 months includes actions to make changes to the neglect assessment tool. There is more work by the partnership to do and be completed against this priority.

The activity to achieve delivery against the CSA priority is ongoing and the partnership have set up a well engaged and knowledgeable task and finish group. The activity against the CCE priority is equally impressive. The safeguarding partnership have invested in a mostly dedicated role to tackle CCE and this is clearly reaping benefits as demonstrated for example by various mapping exercises.

Another major piece of work delivered within the last 12 months is a review of the ‘Effective Support for Children and Families (Thresholds) Document.’ This document, although led by the DCS, had input and engagement by health, police and school colleagues throughout both the LA areas, to improve and strengthen current arrangements. This was particularly important in the Cambridgeshire LA area.

An additional priority consideration is to include emotional health and wellbeing in adolescents. The learning from adolescent suicides would suggest this is a needed local priority.

The three statutory partners have members on the Safeguarding Children Partnership Board and on all of the sub-groups and any task and finish groups. I have reviewed who the regular attendees are for each of the individual meetings; it is felt that this is at the right level to be able to inform and influence both within the partnership but also feed information back into their individual agencies.

The three statutory partners can be assured that the safeguarding children partnership works effectively alongside the Safeguarding Adults Board. This works extremely well and how the two safeguarding boards work together is innovative. There is only one safeguarding partnership team to support the two boards (Children and Adult) and only one Executive Board.

The partnership works well with the countywide community safety partnership (CSP). There is always work to be done with this particular partnership to prevent duplication or competing priorities, this is in particular a case with the individual CSPs around the county. The partnership have good representation on the health and wellbeing board and the LCJB, CFJB and the MAPPA and YOS management board. The challenge is to ensure that as well as representing their individual organisations, they also represent the safeguarding partnership.

2. The wider safeguarding partners (including relevant agencies) are actively involved in safeguarding children.

The safeguarding children partnership have included a wide list of relevant agencies including schools and all health providers in the two LA areas. They are appropriately informed of, and engaged with, the safeguarding children partnership arrangements and safeguarding children priorities. This is demonstrated and evidenced well by the membership and contribution to the work of the partnership, in particular the sub-groups and task and finish groups.

Another well evidenced example is the attendance at children board meetings. I attended those meetings which were extremely well chaired, each agency and individual were enabled to, and did adequately contribute to, discussions and decision making.

3. Children, young people and families are aware of and involved with plans for safeguarding children.

Children and young people are consulted, provide input, and influence the development, implementation and review of the safeguarding plan, related activities and priorities.

A number of agencies have extensive engagement with children, young people and their families, it would be of great assistance to the safeguarding partnership if agencies could share with them relevant engagement and feedback from children and their families on a regular basis.

4. Appropriate quality assurance procedures are in place for data collection, audit and information sharing.

There are mechanisms in place for the three statutory partners to collect and analyse relevant data pertaining to safeguarding children. This happens through the Quality Effectiveness Sub-Group (QEG). The QEG operates well with the data it has and has an extremely good Multi-Agency audit programme.

Evidence of scrutiny which is mainstreamed into partnership activity already. The partnership are also scrutinised by professional bodies, for example CQC, Ofsted and HMICFRS, their findings should also be shared with the partnership for any necessary multi-agency actions.

The data, in particular from the multi-agency audits, is used all of the time to provide an assessment of gaps in data, identification of priorities and future safeguarding activity. A good example of this is the Voice of the Child/Lived Experience audits and the subsequent suite of guidance that was produced following this.

The partnership have a very healthy Section 11 programme which also involves an innovative practitioners survey to accompany it.

5. There is a process for identifying and investigating learning from local and national case reviews.

The Child Safeguarding Practice Review (CSPR) sub-group is chaired well by the independent chair who is very experienced and able. The strategic partners can be assured that the chair applies on their behalf a high level of independent scrutiny.

The CSPR group showed that it carries out all of its statutory responsibilities, but appeared to have an extensive agenda, it has though made some good progress on case reviews and iterations to its processes during the year. A good example of this was an amended process, that at its heart made a point, that it is the three statutory partners who make the necessary decisions on reviews. This process was passed unanimously at the meeting.

The CSPR sub-group have on occasions highlighted learning from national reviews. The Children Safeguarding Board and Child Death Overview Panel recently jointly agreed a refreshed safer sleeping campaign which also fitted in with the National Panel’s SUDI report ‘Out of Routine’.

Safeguarding partners are aware of the criteria and process for referral of cases for consideration and the newly agreed process strengthens this understanding.

It must be highlighted that the high volume of case reviews has caused resource issues, not only within the partnership safeguarding team but in all of the individual agencies. The resource issue must be borne in mind when methodology for each CSPR is agreed.

As already mentioned above there is an individual priority for the partnership to include learning from reviews carried out. This shows the emphasis and importance the partnership has to learn from tragic and serious safeguarding events.

6. There is an active program of multi-agency safeguarding children training

The multi-agency training provision has been examined and is extremely thorough and wide reaching. During the initial lockdown all safeguarding board training was paused due to the regulations. The Partnership was aware of the need to continue to up-skill the workforce on safeguarding issues and as a result they developed virtual briefings. Locally these are referred to as SWAYs (the software that is used for the briefings). In essence these are a presentation but each slide has an audio that discusses the content of the slide. Initially SWAYs were produced on safeguarding issues that were prominent during the lockdown (online abuse for adults, online abuse for children, safeguarding for community volunteers).

The SWAYs are a huge success for the Partnership Board. Whilst the face to face training provision has always been well attended it would never have reached the number of people who have accessed the SWAYs. It is to the credit of the Partnership that whilst other areas in the region stopped all training delivery, locally, we evolved and adapted to the lockdown environment.

The content of all of the safeguarding training continues to be regularly reviewed and updated to ensure that it reflects both local and national developments, legislation and guidance.

Single agency training continues to be supported. Children’s and adult’s toolkits are available on the partnership website for use by agencies. The Toolbox consists of a set of slides with the latest Safeguarding Partnership Board’s; strategies, policies, procedures, practitioner guidance’s and assessment tools. These slides can be used in single agency training and ensures a consistency of messaging. There are also website links to free e-learning, training and further support. The Partnership Board continues to validate single agency safeguarding training.


I can confirm with confidence and assurance, that the Multi-agency Safeguarding Arrangements for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Safeguarding Children Partnership are compliant with Working Together, 2018. The arrangements ensure that children in both of these Local Authority Areas are safeguarded and their welfare promoted.

Dr Russell Wate QPM

Multi-Agency Safeguarding Training

Safeguarding Partnership Board’s Response to Multi-Agency Training During the Covid 19 Pandemic

Due to government restrictions during the pandemic, most staff from organisations were either required to work from home, or re-deployed into new roles to help combat the pandemic and support local communities. Face to face training had to be suspended and alternatives to learning sought. An urgent response was needed to provide volunteers, who would be visiting shielding members of the public and their families, with safeguarding training.

A Covid 19 Information page on the Safeguarding Partnership Board website was set up within a week of the first lockdown period. The page contained information on Covid 19, local safeguarding arrangements, links to useful agency resources, presentations on basic safeguarding children and safeguarding adults at risk in a Covid context, leaflets, briefings and video links and a link to CPSPB online training. Bespoke virtual safeguarding training for community volunteers was developed and available within 72 hours of going into lockdown. Feedback from volunteers and working professionals found the information ‘invaluable’ and ‘informative’ to support their knowledge of safeguarding and what to do if they had safeguarding concerns.

Virtual Briefings (Sways)

The Partnership was aware of the need to continue to up-skill the workforce on safeguarding issues and as a result they developed virtual briefings. Locally, these are referred to as Sways (the software that is used for the briefings). In essence, these are a presentation but each slide has an audio that discusses the content of the slide. Generally, they last around 20 minutes per briefing. The virtual briefings are available on the Partnership Board website and can be accessed at any time. As a result, staff who are working night shifts, weekends or early shifts can all access the training at their convenience.

The first virtual briefing to be uploaded onto the board’s website during April 2020 was on ‘Safeguarding for Community Volunteers’ closely followed by ‘Safeguarding from Online Abuse’, a recognised high-risk area of concern during lock down. The virtual briefings that followed focused on safeguarding during Covid and locally identified areas of safeguarding risk as well as the Board’s priorities. However, as the popularity of the virtual briefings increased it was apparent that these were a hugely useful resource and further topics were added. For those professionals who complete the SWAY there is a downloadable certificate as proof of completion. The majority of professionals gave the SWAYs a 4 to 5 star exceptional rating and described them as, ‘informative and really useful’. They have been very well received by agencies and have been used and adapted within our local partners’ resources and utilised by other safeguarding boards across the Country.

Between April 2020 and March 2021, the virtual briefings had been viewed a total 10,753 times.

Virtual Training Webinars

Virtual Training Webinars developed from existing face to face training materials and condensed into 60 or 90 minute sessions were facilitated from September 2020 by members of the Independent Safeguarding Partnership Service.

As with the briefings, the webinars focused on safeguarding risks and the Board’s priorities. As part of a rolling programme, the webinars focused on Child Neglect, Child Sexual Abuse (CSA), Child Criminal Exploitation, Sexual Assault Referral Centre (SARC) and Termly workshops on the latest safeguarding messages.

18 webinar sessions took place during September 2020 to March 2021, where 573 people attended. Initially groups of a maximum of 20 rising to 40 professionals were allowed to access the training online. However, the demand for the training has been so great that up to 100 places on each course are now available.

As the sessions progressed, a feedback form was developed and 100% of professionals reported that they felt that the safeguarding virtual training content met their training needs and 99% of professionals stated that they felt that the delivery of the training was right for them. Professionals’ comments included:

  • “Really helpful and useful subject and great to be able to access training, my first online training”
  • “Very well delivered – lots of information and links to further reading”
  • “It was clear accessible and kept me engaged”
  • “Helpful to talk in chat / really good and involved participants”.

The Child Sexual Abuse and the Sexual Assault Referral Centre webinars which took place during November 2020 were recorded and uploaded onto the Safeguarding Partnership Board’s YouTube channel and added to the Safeguarding Partnership Boards website. These video clips are openly available to professionals.

Whilst the face to face training provision has always been well attended it would never have reached the number of people who have accessed the Virtual Briefings and webinars. It is to the credit of the Partnership that whilst other areas in the region stopped all training delivery, locally we evolved and adapted to the lockdown environment.

Website & Social Media

Over the past year we have had 275,602 page views and 71,987 users to the website.

On average, a user spent an average 2 minutes per session on the website, and the bounce rate has remained close to 40% which would indicate users find what they are looking for quickly.

Apart from the home page, the Multi-agency training page was the most visited page on the site, followed by ‘Reporting a concern’ and our virtual Sway briefings pages.

52% of visitors reached our site via entering keywords into search engines. 66% accessed the site via a desktop device (i.e. Laptop) and 30% accessed the site via a mobile.

Feedback from visitors includes:

  • Its really easy to use, very clear and content is good.
  • Easy to manoeuvre around the website
  • Breadth of training resources available and are easily accessible
  • the clarity, layout and range of information available far exceeded what was expected.

Our social media presence

The CPSPB uses Twitter, Facebook and Instagram for all sorts of communications from the latest safeguarding news, to events that the Safeguarding Partnership Board are hosting.

During the last year the CPSPB has continued to strengthen its profile on social media. On Twitter, we posted 328 tweets, had 111,383 impressions, were retweeted 292 times, had 1540 reactions and 1,007 followers. On Facebook and Instagram, we put out 400 posts, had a reach[5] of 80,112, with 683 reactions, 57 comments, 768 shares and 458 followers on Facebook and 124 on Instagram.

If you haven’t yet followed us, please do!

Appendix 1 – List of agencies represented on the Safeguarding Children Partnership Board

  • Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Local Authorities including
    • Children Social Care
    • Public Health
    • Elected Members
    • YOS
  • Clinical Commissioning Group
  • Cambridgeshire Constabulary
  • Education
    • Primary School
    • Secondary School
    • Further Education
  • East of England Ambulance Service
  • Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Foundation Trust
  • Cambridgeshire Community Services
  • Royal Papworth Hospital
  • North West Anglia Hospitals
  • Cambridge University Hospital
  • Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner
  • Ely Diocese
  • Cambridgeshire Fire and Rescue
  • Cambridge District Council
  • Cross Keys Homes – representing Housing
  • National Probation Service
  • Healthwatch
  • Department for Work and Pensions
  • Voluntary sector representatives




[4] The annual rough sleeping snapshot takes place on a single date chosen by the local authority between 1 October and 30 November

[5] The number of people who saw any content from your Page or about your Page, including posts, stories, ads, social information from people who interact with your Page and more. Reach is different from impressions, which may include multiple views of your posts by the same people.

Back To Top
Translate »
Skip to content