Annexes and Resources
Respondents were asked Is the information provided in the Annexes appropriate.
They also had the opportunity to suggest potential improvements.
|Did not answer||3||14.29%|
As the responses above suggest, the annexes were an area that required further clarification, the responses mainly focussed on suggested improvements to the cases studies (e.g. "Consider reviewing and amending case studies."), although there were some comments relating to the resources section.
Annex A: Case Studies
All of the case studies in the document were rewritten or amended. Based on consultation comments the reworking of the case studies included:
- The process of the child making the request, through to the child and parents being informed of the outcome, being clearly explained, with greater clarity on the stages at which parents are notified.
- Subheadings have been added to make all the case studies' purposes clearer.
- A clear distinction between the assessments of capacity and consideration of wellbeing.
- Including an examples where it is found that a child cannot exercise a requested right. 2 examples have been added, 1 which includes reference to the Tribunal and another where an application of Independent Adjudication is made.
- The case study outside Annex A in Chapter 3 ('Eilidh') has also been rewritten to make it more closely aligned to a decision related to a right.
Annex B: Resources
The resources section was described in one response as " robust", however there were still opportunities to make further improvements based on consultation requests; this included adding the following resources:
- Link to the Centre for excellence for looked after children in Scotland ( CELCIS) website.
- Link to the Who Cares? Scotland website.
- Link to the Scottish Independent Advocacy Alliance publications webpage.
In addition to this signposts have been added, as appropriate, to further information in the Supporting Children's Learning Code of Practice (2017, third edition), throughout the document.