nths – contributors felt this has been handled well in main stat return changes where DfE have long lead times/consultations/Star Chamber sign-off process. Reported as more challenging for other collections where lead times are often significantly less. Themes Local authorities are concerned about the use of ‘process’ data as the primary tool for understanding their services, particularly by DfE/Ofsted • There is concern about the use of this data as the primary tool for understanding children’s social care. • CSC systems are complex, and it’s felt there is little evidence that ‘process’ type measures alone can accurately indicate the effectiveness of services. • Within CSC services, process data is one tool amongst many – audit, voice of child, reflective practice, partnership working, supervision etc. There are myriad sources of ‘soft’ information used by leaders to understand their services. • Because of this, there is some concern from LAs and beyond that analysis using just this data, may not provide accurate understanding by outside agencies. • This is compounded by mistrust in some LAs of DfE receiving data, particularly when unvalidated. • This is a recognised view from regulators etc. who stress their understanding that data is only used a starting point, but not the whole picture. The voice of the child is not clearly evident in the data we use to describe their journey through the social care system • Policy and guidance is clear – services should be child focused and the views of children should be represented and taken seriously. • Looking at casefiles or talking to social workers/leaders (and also regulators and policy makers) this is clearly evident. However, this focus is not often present in the way we collect, publish or talk about data. • Example give