Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2014

Lauren Barfoot

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2014-0385, written 28 Aug 2014. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report28 Aug 2014
Reference2014-0385
DeceasedLauren Barfoot
CoronerLorna Tagliavini
Coroner areaLondon Inner (South)
CategoryOther related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published4

The report

Text recovered by OCR from a scanned PDF. OCR is imperfect: check anything you rely on against the source PDF. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

ANNEX A

REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1)

NOTE: This form is to be used after an inquest.

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS
THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

1.

2. Mr Will Tuckley, Chief Executive of Bexley Social Services, Civic Offices, 2
Watling Street, Bexleyheath, Kent DA6 7AT
3. Mr Andy Marshall, Chief Executive of Ethelbert’s Children’s Services,

Director Cheesemans Farmhouse, Alland Grange Lane, Manston, Kent

4, Borough Commander Metropolitan Police Services for
Greenwich Borough, Greenwich Police Station, 31 Royal Hill, Greenwich
SE10 8RR
4 CORONER

| am Lorna Tagliavini Assistant Coroner, for the area of Inner London South
2 | CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS

| make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009
and regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013.

3 | INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

On 4" July 2012 an inquest was opened into the death of Lauren Barfoot aged 14 years.
The inquest concluded on 1 August 2014 after an inquest held on 31% July and 1°
August 2014. The conclusion of the inquest was: “Accidental death contributed to by
failures in the sharing of information and pooling and use of resources by those
in whose care Lauren was in at the time of her death.”

4 | CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

On 22" April 2012 Lauren became a “looked after child” pursuant to section 20 of the
Children’s Act 1989 and was placed in Micawber House (“the home”) by the London
Borough of Bexley Social Services, a home run by Ethelbert’s Children Services. From
the outset, Lauren was frequently missing from Micawber House although would most
often return the following day at the latest. On 22™ June 2012 Lauren went missing
from the home and was reported by the staff at the Home to the MPS, and treated as a
missing person by the Missing Person’s Unit (Greenwich Borough) from that date until
her discovery in the porch of her putative father’s home address in the Plumstead,
London SE18 area

5 | CORONER'S CONCERNS

During the course of the inquest, the evidence revealed maiters giving rise to concern.
In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken. In the
circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you.

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows. —

(1) There was a failure by the London Borough of Bexley Social Services to record
and make accessible, a comprehensive list of Lauren's friends, family and
acquaintances and their addresses and contact numbers, with whom contact
could be made in order to assist professionals in an effective search for Lauren.

(2

~

There was a failure by Ethelbert’s Children’s Services to relay full and detailed
information to the Missing Person’s Unit (Greenwich) as to the level of risk
classified as “high” in relation to Lauren’s misuse of solvent abuse and
vulnerability of sexual exploitation.

(3

=

There was a failure by the MPS Missing Person's Unit (Greenwich) to carry out
an effective search for Lauren as a consequence of the lack of information not
shared with the Unit by those responsible for looking after and searching for
Lauren, and therefore a missed opportunity for the Missing Person's Unit to
classify Lauren as a “high risk missing person”.

(4

=

There was a failure by The London Borough of Bexley to hold a timely “strategy
meeting” by those concerned in the care for Lauren after she had been missing
for several days in order to pool information and resources in order to catty out
an effective search for Lauren.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

in my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and | believe your
organisations have the power to take such action. For example:

(i) A full and regularly updated list of persons by both the London Borough of
Bexley Social Services and Ethelbert’s Children’s Services with whom a
“looked after” child is connected in order, to be able to make meaningful
searches after absconding/missing. This list to be kept centrally or is readily
accessible, whether electronically or in another format.

(ii) The sharing of details of any relevant risk assessment carried out in respect
of the missing child should be passed to the police in order they can make a
properly and fully informed decision as to the level of resources needed in
order to carry out an effective search.

(iii) The holding of a timely strategy meeting at which information can be pooled
and resources allocated and utilised effectively.

(iv) The means by which the Missing Persons Unit (Greenwich) is able to
access essential information in respect of a missing person, in order to carry
out n effective prioritisation of resources required for any search.

YOUR RESPONSE

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report,
namely by 23rd October 2074. |, the coroner, may extend the period.

Your response must contain details of action taken, or proposed to be taken, setting out
the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed.

COPIES and PUBLICATION

| have sen to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested
Persons mother), the London Borough of Bexley, Ethelbert's

Children’s Services, the MPS and the Bexley Local Safeguarding Board as Lauren was
under 18.

lam also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response.

The Chief Coroner may publish either or both in a complete or redacted or summary
form. He may send a copy of this report to any person who he believes may find it useful
or of interest. You may make representations to me, the coroner, at the time of your
response, about the release or the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner.

DATE SIGNED BY “LN Tagliavini «+ ,

28 August 2014 ANU

Responses

4 responses published against this report on judiciary.uk. A response is a body's written reply to the coroner's concerns; publication is at the discretion of the Chief Coroner's office, so an absent response does not mean nobody replied.

Response from Bexley Borough Council (PDF)
LB of Bexley 23/10/2014 14:26:49 PAGE 3/004 Fax Server
TO:Ms Lorna Tagliavini COMPANY:Coroner Inner South District

Chief Executive's Office

Civic Offices x Ss
2 Wailing Street, Bexleyheath, Kent, DA6 7AT SS

020 8303 7777 SSG
www.bexley.gav.uk BANS
mir Direct Diat [i

yr 01554/2012 Date 23 October 2014

The person dealing with this matter is Will Tuckley

Ms Lorna Tagliavini

Coroner for Inner South District Greater London
Southwark Coroners Court

1 Tennis Street

Southwark

London SE1 1YD

Dear Ms Tagliavini
Re: Inquest concluded on 1 August 2014, into the death of Lauren Barfoot (aged 14)

Bexley's Children’s Services take its responsibility to looked after children very
seriously and have ensured that lessons have been learnt and implemented in social
work practice following this case. Bexley children’s social care services were
inspected by the external regulator Ofsted, under the Single Inspection Framework,
during March 2014. The Inspection independently reviewed practice regarding looked
after children who went missing and the following is an extract from the Ofsted report
published in May 2014:

‘When looked after children go missing an established triage system is used to
determine the action to be taken including whether a child protection enquiry is
necessary. Robust systems are in place to track and identify individual looked after
children who go missing and those who are at risk of sexual exploitation. These
children are regularly considered at multi-agency meetings and suitable contingency
plans are agreed. Sensitive interviews are undertaken with looked after children
when they return to their placements.’

In response to the regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths and the
recommended actions to be taken:

(i) A full and regularly updated list of persons by both the London
Borough of Bexley Social Services and Ethelbert’s Children’s
Services with whom a “looked after” child is connected in order to
be able to make meaningful searches after absconding/missing. This
list to be kept centrally or is readily accessible, whether
electronically or in another format

Bexley Children’s Social Care sends a letter and proforma document
recording the associations of young people to all residential providers.
Previously, Bexley relied on the residential providers own protocois in
respect of missing children. It was identified that these varied across the
country. The letter and proforma also sets out expectations regarding
having an up to date list available. By Bexley giving providers the process
and pro-forma documents, we can be confident that when a child goes
missing they are aware of our expectations in collecting information on

aN
C)

Listening to you, working for you Showers es Hone

persons the young person is connected to. All information will now be
returned to, and held centrally by, Bexley’s Placements Service.

{ii) The sharing of details of any relevant risk assessment carried out In
respect of the missing child should be passed to the police in order
they can make a properly and fully informed decision as to the level
of resources needed in order to carry out an effective search

A tisk assessment report is required in preparation for any strategy
meetings for missing looked after children. A strategy meeting is held
within three days of a child going missing. The social worker will provide
a risk assessment report to the meeting in accordance with the Bexley
Practice Guidance pro-forma for assessing risk. The meeting is chaired by
the Independent Reviewing Officer for the child. The tisk assessment
report requires comprehensive information about all possible contacts and
locations where the child may be found, including any information known
about risks presenting to the young person. The risk assessment report
will be passed to the police at the strategy meeting in order that they can
assess the level of risk and resources required so that they can carry out
an effective search for the missing young person. Subsequent strategy
meetings are held at 5 days and weekly thereafter.

(iti) The holding of a timely strategy meeting at which information can be
pooled and resources allocated and utilised effectively

Strategy meetings for missing looked after children are held within the
timescales set out in the “Children who go missing from Home or Care
Practice Guidance" implemented in May 2013. The holding of the strategy
meetings are overseen by the manager for the “looked after" Independent
Reviewing Officer service. The timeliness of ‘missing’ strategy meetings is
tracked in monthly performance reports and meetings, to ensure good
practice is maintained.

(iv) Relates to the Greenwich Police Missing Person’s Unit
| hope the information contained in this letter assures the Coroner that Bexley's
Children’s Services has responded appropriately to the concerns raised in the
Inquest.

Yours sincerely

Will Tuckley
Chief Executive
Response from Ethelbert Childrens Services (PDF)
Ethelbert Childrens Services

we ppnetes: Bviery nites

Hay;
e& Tran 39 0%
Head Oifice

Cheesemans Faimhouse

Atland Grange Lone.

Marston, Kent.

C12 $82

pee Nes BA 62 HM Assistant Coroner Ms Tagliavini
1 Tennis Street
London
SE1 1YD

Dear Madam

Inquest Touching upon the death of Lauren Barfoot
Heard 31 July - 1 August 2014

Further in the above matter we acknowledge receipt of the Regulation 28 Report
that you kindly sent to Ethelbert Children’s Services,

Having reviewed the same we attach for your kind attention copies of the following

oN INVESTORS
IN PEOPLE documents:-
¢ List of actions related to the collation and sharing of information re the
gu placed child

1S0 9001
REGISTERED F1RM

e Vulnerability Assessment

ocr ¢ Met Police Missing Person Reporting Form
“ene Once you have had an opportunity to review the action list we trust that you will
. find the steps that we have implemented, address concerns in respect of the
Cityae collation of information as to the risk assessment of a child and contact details
Guilds which can be shared with other agencies.

The missing persons reporting form is a document that the Metropolitan Police now
issue and require us to complete on the arrival of a child. We understand that this is
retained centrally by them and Is cross referenced by them when reports are
recelved that the child has gone missing. In addition at the time of reporting that a
child is missing, a telephone call would be made by the care manager providing
the current circumstances and any additional details in relation to clothing, times
and other relevant information. This information will enable the Police to undertake
a full assessment.

We continue to explore the possibility of sending an updated missing person form
by email, to the police as outlined in action list, although to date our conversations
with the Met have not proved successful.

On a separate note and for the sake of completeness we would advise that there is
a slightly different system in place within Kent Police (and potentially in other police
force areas). In Kent we complete a vulnerability assessment on each child at ihe

Ri

Page 1 of 2

Exceeding Outcomes

Website: www.efhelbertonline.co.uk E-mail: headoffice « ethelberthomes.co.uk Out of Hours: 01843 820030

Piente note: Gey Infor nation providert in this ‘etter bout a clest aay be cycled unites indcaled othenwase

ye

Ethelbert Childrens Services

nels Every Cites i
~ Fy

time of placement which Is passed to the Police and each child is then given a
unique reference number (PID number). It is cross referenced to at the time of any
subsequent missing person reports being made. Regrettably they currently do not
have a facility for receiving information by email. A copy of the vulnerabllity
assessment is attached.

Yours faithfully

Ethelbert Childrens Services

Enc.
e List of Actions
¢ Vulnerability Assessment Form
« Met Police Missing Person Reporting Form

Please Note: A hard copy of this letter and_atiachments have also been sent
Recorded Delivery for the Atin. of SJ - Coroners Officer

Website: www.eihelbertoniine,co.uk Email: headoffice@ethelbert.net Out of Hours: 01843 820030
Please note: Any information provided in tnis letter about a client may be disclosed untess indicoted otnenvise
Response from Ethelbert Childrens Services1 (PDF)
Ethelbert Childrens Services

we ppnetes: Bviery nites

Hay;
e& Tran 39 0%
Head Oifice

Cheesemans Faimhouse

Atland Grange Lone.

Marston, Kent.

C12 $82

pee Nes BA 62 HM Assistant Coroner Ms Tagliavini
1 Tennis Street
London
SE1 1YD

Dear Madam

Inquest Touching upon the death of Lauren Barfoot
Heard 31 July - 1 August 2014

Further in the above matter we acknowledge receipt of the Regulation 28 Report
that you kindly sent to Ethelbert Children’s Services,

Having reviewed the same we attach for your kind attention copies of the following

oN INVESTORS
IN PEOPLE documents:-
¢ List of actions related to the collation and sharing of information re the
gu placed child

1S0 9001
REGISTERED F1RM

e Vulnerability Assessment

ocr ¢ Met Police Missing Person Reporting Form
“ene Once you have had an opportunity to review the action list we trust that you will
. find the steps that we have implemented, address concerns in respect of the
Cityae collation of information as to the risk assessment of a child and contact details
Guilds which can be shared with other agencies.

The missing persons reporting form is a document that the Metropolitan Police now
issue and require us to complete on the arrival of a child. We understand that this is
retained centrally by them and Is cross referenced by them when reports are
recelved that the child has gone missing. In addition at the time of reporting that a
child is missing, a telephone call would be made by the care manager providing
the current circumstances and any additional details in relation to clothing, times
and other relevant information. This information will enable the Police to undertake
a full assessment.

We continue to explore the possibility of sending an updated missing person form
by email, to the police as outlined in action list, although to date our conversations
with the Met have not proved successful.

On a separate note and for the sake of completeness we would advise that there is
a slightly different system in place within Kent Police (and potentially in other police
force areas). In Kent we complete a vulnerability assessment on each child at ihe

Ri

Page 1 of 2

Exceeding Outcomes

Website: www.efhelbertonline.co.uk E-mail: headoffice « ethelberthomes.co.uk Out of Hours: 01843 820030

Piente note: Gey Infor nation providert in this ‘etter bout a clest aay be cycled unites indcaled othenwase

ye

Ethelbert Childrens Services

nels Every Cites i
~ Fy

time of placement which Is passed to the Police and each child is then given a
unique reference number (PID number). It is cross referenced to at the time of any
subsequent missing person reports being made. Regrettably they currently do not
have a facility for receiving information by email. A copy of the vulnerabllity
assessment is attached.

Yours faithfully

Ethelbert Childrens Services

Enc.
e List of Actions
¢ Vulnerability Assessment Form
« Met Police Missing Person Reporting Form

Please Note: A hard copy of this letter and_atiachments have also been sent
Recorded Delivery for the Atin. of SJ - Coroners Officer

Website: www.eihelbertoniine,co.uk Email: headoffice@ethelbert.net Out of Hours: 01843 820030
Please note: Any information provided in tnis letter about a client may be disclosed untess indicoted otnenvise
Response from Metropolitan Police (PDF)
is TOTAL POLICING

Territorial Policing

RG - Greenwich Borough
RG - Greenwich Police Station

Assistant Coroner Tagliavini Plumstead Police Station
200 Plumstead High Street
Southwark Coroners Court London
1 Tennis Street SE18 1JY
SE11YD Telephone: 0208 284 9400
www.met.police.uk
Your ref:
23 October 2014

Dear Assistant Coroner Tagliavini,

Thank you for writing to me with a copy of your report in relation to the death of Lauren
Barfoot. You have asked that | write to you detailing the response from Greenwich Police. |
have included the relevant quotation from your report below.

“There was a failure by the MPS Missing Persons Unit (Greenwich) to carry out an effective
search for Lauren as a consequence of the lack of information not shared with the Unit by
those responsible for looking after and searching for Lauren, and therefore a missed
opportunity for the Missing Person's Unit to classify Lauren as a “high risk missing person”.

Action identified by the Assistant Coroner which should be taken in relation to this matter.
“The means by which the Missing Persons Unit (Greenwich) is able to access essential

information in respect of a missing person, in order to carry out an effective prioritisation of
resources required for any search’.

| enclose a report detailing our actions, addressing the specific issues of information sharing
and risk assessment, but also our broader response to the serious case review that followed
Lauren's death. | have caused our response to be reviewed in light of the inquest to ensure
that those measures introduced following the serious case review account for the issues
taised in your report and are fully embedded in current practice.

If you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours Sincerely

Detective Chief Superintendent
Greenwich Borough Commander - Greenwich Borough Police

Related reports

Other reports by Lorna Tagliavini

See all →

More reports categorised “Other related deaths”

See all →

Track Lorna Tagliavini

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Lorna Tagliavini, and how often a new one appears.

What would an alert for this have sent me? Search the full text

Free to try — the preview shows the real matches and how many arrived in the last 12 months. Your first email alert is free.

These reports are published by the Chief Coroner's office at judiciary.uk and are © Crown copyright. The text here is reproduced from the published PDF so it can be searched. If something on this page is wrong, or you are a person named in it and want it reviewed, email drcjar@gmail.com and we will act promptly.