FAQs

Under the Children Act 2004, if a local authority in England knows or suspects that a child has been abused or neglected, the local authority must notify the Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel if (a) the child dies or is seriously harmed in the local authority’s area and abuse is known or suspected, or (b) while normally resident in the local authority’s area, the child dies or is seriously harmed outside England.

The responsibility to notify rests with the local authority of where the serious incident took place. All three safeguarding partners should agree which incidents should be notified in their local area.

No, a rapid review cannot be undertaken without the prior submission of a Serious Incident Notification.

Once a Serious Incident Notification has been submitted, a rapid review is required unless it is subsequently determined that the case does not meet the criteria for a Serious Incident Notification.

The responsibility to undertake the rapid review rests with the local authority of where the serious incident took place. We would expect that the notifying local authority to collaborate with the residing local authority.

A rapid review should be completed within 15 days, assembling the key facts quickly, engaging relevant agencies, and identifying any immediate safeguarding actions and potential learning.

The local authority should notify the Secretary of State for Education and Ofsted of the death of a care leaver up to and including the age of 24. This should be notified via the Child Safeguarding Online Notification System. The death of a care leaver does not automatically require a rapid review or LCSPR. However, safeguarding partners must consider whether the criteria for a serious incident have been met. If the criteria for a rapid review or LCSPR is not met but local partners think that learning can be gained from the death of a looked after child or care leaver, they may wish to undertake their own internal multi-agency learning.

Yes, Safeguarding partners may submit a rapid review which has significant information pending, for example, toxicology results, criminal charges, or a long-term prognosis. In most circumstances, a rapid review can still be completed because it is the multi-agency working which is the key focus.

Safeguarding partners must consider whether the case meets the criteria in Working Together, namely suspected abuse or neglect and serious harm and whether a review will identify learning with the potential to improve multi‑agency safeguarding practice.

The Panel expects clear analysis, evidence of multiagency collaboration, identification of systemic issues, and well reasoned recommendations that support sector wide learning. The content of a rapid review should be proportionate to the required timeframe and focused on what can be achieved within that period. Where there is potential for further learning that cannot be fully explored through the rapid review process, the review should recommend commissioning a Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review (LCSPR) as the appropriate mechanism for deeper analysis agency collaboration, identification of systemic issues, and well reasoned recommendations that support sector wide learning. All reviews should include consideration of the child’s voice and lived experience, including intersectional attributes such as race and disability, and conclude with a robust action plan which has clear measures, timing and attribution.

Rapid reviews often take place alongside criminal investigations, coronial processes, family court proceedings or Prevent processes. The aim is not to wait for these processes to conclude, but to proceed with reviews while respecting legal constraints and protecting evidential integrity.

Safeguarding partnerships must publish LCSPR unless doing so would harm a child or vulnerable adult. Reports should be written in a way that protects identities while supporting sector learning. A decision not to publish the full LCSPR, or to publish anonymously on the NSPCC repository, should be submitted to the Panel for consideration in advance. Irrespective of whether reports are published, plans should be put in place to share learning. If in doubt, the Panel can advise on how other partnerships have managed to share learning in similar circumstances.

The Panel does not maintain a list of independent authors who conduct LCSPRs, it does however maintain a list of reviewers who can assist with national child safeguarding reviews.