• contents
• keywords & contacts
• quick guide
• values
• contact us
• search

Contents

1. Roles and Responsibilities of the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO)
2. Key Changes to the IRO Functions Since April 2011
3. Role of the IRO in Relation to Children Subject to Care Proceedings
4. Roles and Responsibilities of the Local Authority
5. Dispute Resolution

1. Roles and Responsibilities of the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO)

The statutory duties of the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) require them to monitor the review of arrangements so that the plan for a Looked After Child continues to be appropriate and responsive to the child's individual needs.

As part of the monitoring function, the IRO also has a duty to identify any areas of poor practice, including general concerns around service delivery (not just around individual children). The IRO should immediately alert senior managers if any such areas are identified.

The IRO is responsible for ensuring that the wishes and feelings as well as the rights of the child and parents are being raised and considered throughout the review process.

The IRO is accountable for ensuring that a child's Looked After Review takes place within the statutory timescales and makes recommendations that it puts to the relevant decision maker within the responsible authority for decision. 

Where problems in care planning are identified through the review process, and in order to support their satisfactory resolution, the accountable IRO will need to be able to communicate directly with a manager who has the necessary level of seniority to seek resolution.

The IRO is responsible for determining the timescale in which identified problems should be resolved.

The IRO must consider whether it is appropriate to refer a case to CAFCASS if:

• In his/her opinion, the Local Authority  has failed in any significant respect to prepare the child’s Care Plan; review the child’s case or effectively implement any decision in consequence of a review; or are otherwise in breach of their duties to the child  in any material respect; and
• Having drawn this to the attention of persons of appropriate seniority in the Local Authority, the issues have not been addressed to the IRO’s satisfaction within a reasonable period of time.

2. Key Changes to the IRO Functions Since April 2011

Statutory Provision	Key Change	Rationale
Section 25A(1) 1989 Act	When a child first becomes looked after, a named individual must be appointed by the local authority as the IRO for the child.	The intention is that each looked after child should have a named IRO to provide continuity in the oversight of the case and to enable the IRO to develop a consistent relationship with the child.
Section 25B(1)(a) 1989 Act	IRO to monitor the local authority’s performance of its functions in relation to the child’s case.	This duty extends the IRO’s monitoring role, which was previously confined to the Local Authority’s functions in respect of the review. The intention is to give the IRO a more effective independent oversight of the child’s case and ensure that the child’s interests are protected.
Section 25B(1)(c) 1989 Act	IRO to ensure that the local authority give due consideration to any views expressed by the child.	This requirement is intended to reinforce the local authority’s duty under section 22(4) and (5) of the 1989 Act to ascertain and give due consideration to the wishes and feelings of the child when making any decision with respect to the child.
Regulation 36(2) of the Regulations	IROs have the authority to adjourn review meetings if they feel that the process would be unproductive.	This new flexibility is meant to prevent the meeting becoming a ‘tick box’, exercise. So, for example the IRO might use this flexibility because there is a lack of key documentation or because the child has not been consulted about the purpose of the review.
Regulation 36(1)(b) of the Regulations	IROs must speak in private with each child prior to each review so that the IRO personally establishes the child’s wishes and feelings about the issues to be covered at the care planning meeting.	This requirement is intended to ensure that the child is properly consulted on matters relating to his/her care and is given the time to contribute to the content of the meeting.
Section 25B (3) 1989 Act	Referral by an IRO of a case to CAFCASS should no longer be seen a last resort, but can be considered at any time.	The intention of this change is to reinforce the authority of the IRO to challenge poor practice around the child’s case.

3. Role of the IRO in Relation to Children Subject to Care Proceedings

The IRO will need to consider together with the Children’s Guardian what communication is necessary in order to promote the best possible care planning process for each child.

As soon as the IRO has been appointed to a child subject to proceedings:

• The IRO should provide the local authority legal adviser the with the name of the IRO and with his/her contact details; and
• The Children’s Guardian should be advised of each review meeting and invited, where appropriate;
• The local authority legal adviser and the Children’s Guardian should receive a copy of each review record.

The IRO should ensure that s/he is in discussion with the Children’s Guardian at intervals, as is appropriate for each child’s case and that the topics of discussion include:

• The wishes and feelings of the child;
• The current Care Plan;
• Whether details of the Care Plan are subject to a formal dispute resolution process and if so details of this;
• Any complaints that have been received about the case; and
• Any issues raised in court in relation to the implementation of the current Care Plan.

4. Roles and Responsibilities of the Local Authority

If a Local Authority is looking after a child, it must appoint an Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) for that child’s case. The name of the IRO and his/her contact details must be recorded on the child’s case record.

The IRO must be appointed to the child’s case and meet the child before the first Looked After Review and, as a matter of good practice, should be appointed within the first five working days.

Sibling groups, whether or not placed together, should have the same IRO, except where conflict of interest between siblings makes this inappropriate or the size of the sibling group makes this unmanageable.

The child should be given notification of his/her IRO, along with details about how to make contact with him/her. This could be by email or text. If the child is only informed verbally, then the date that s/he was given this information must be placed on the case record.

The IRO should be allocated for the duration that the child is looked after and should continue as the IRO if a child returns to care of the same local authority at a later date, if reasonably practicable.

Where a mother and/or father and their child are looked after, the child should have a different IRO.

If the IRO leaves the employment of the local authority, or for any other reason stops being the IRO for a particular child, s/he should introduce the new IRO to the child in person.

Local authority decision-making in relation to children's care planning should be clear and transparent in order to confirm how a child's needs will be met. The local authority must follow a clear process to make decisions in a timeframe appropriate to the child's needs.

Social workers need to ensure that a completed copy of the review of arrangements, LAC Care Plan and any other significant documents are forwarded to the IRO three days in advance of the Looked After Review and that these documents evidence the decision making process. There are strict timescales for the production of minutes from reviews - for additional information see Section 12, Recording Looked After Reviews, Looked After Reviews Procedure.

Social workers and their managers are responsible for notifying the IRO/Safeguarding and Quality Assurance Unit about any significant changes to the child's Care Plan or placement in order for the IRO to decide whether they need to re-schedule a Looked After Review.

These changes include:

• Any proposed change of Care Plan, for example arising at short notice in the course of the proceedings following directions from the court;
• Where agreed decisions from the review are not carried out within the specified timescale;
• Major changes to the contact arrangements;
• Changes of allocated social worker;
• Any safeguarding concerns involving the child which may lead to enquiries being make under Section 7 of the 1989 Act (‘child protection enquiries’) and outcomes of child protection conferences or other meetings that are not attended by the IRO;
• Complaints from or on behalf of the child, parent or carer;
• Unexpected changes in the child’s placement provision which may significantly impact on placement stability or safeguarding arrangements;
• Significant changes in birth family circumstances for example births, marriages or deaths which may have a particular impact on the child;
• If the child is charged with any offence leading to referral to youth offending services, pending criminal proceedings and any convictions or sentences as a result of such proceedings;
• If the child is excluded from school;
• If the child has run away or is missing form an approved placement;
• Significant health, medical events, diagnoses, illnesses, hospitalisations or serious accidents; and
• Panel decisions in relation to permanency.

5. Dispute Resolution

Where the IRO has identified significant issue(s) during/or outside a Looked After Review, the IRO will consult with his or her line manager before referring to a social work manager who has the necessary level of seniority to seek resolution.

The IRO guidance states that the dispute resolution process should allow for no action prejudicial to the child (e.g. change of placement or de-accommodation) to be taken until a resolution has been reached. Depending on the outcome of this, it may be necessary to reconvene the child's Looked After Review to confirm any agreed changes to the Care Plan.

End