Bairns' Hoose Pathfinder Phase – Research Report

9. Interviews in the Bairns’ Hoose

This chapter explores progress towards Standard 6, which focuses on supporting CYP during their joint investigative interview by using a trauma-informed approach to ensure the child feels safe, listened to, respected, and informed.

Progress

At the time of the StART1 submissions (February 2024), Standard 6 was one of the highest scored Standards, with most partnerships already using the Scottish Child Interview Model (SCIM) and having implemented the Age of Criminal Responsibility protocol. Similarly, Standard 6 was the highest scoring Standard overall in the StART2 submissions (August 2025).

As of StART2, all partnerships had introduced SCIM and had both police and social workers trained in the model. The extent of implementation varied between partnerships, with between three-quarters and all joint investigative interviews conducted using SCIM. By implementing this model, partnerships had established protocols ensuring that the best interests of CYP were kept at the heart of the interview process, CYP participated in the minimum number of interviews necessary for the investigation, and interviews were audio and video recorded to minimise repetition. The interviews were planned in advance to tailor the interview protocol to the child’s needs and circumstances, ensuring interviews were trauma informed.

“[…] even the level of planning, the child centred nature, how personalised the interview plans are, how much we prepare for each individual child to come in and what we do for that child when they're in here. […] I just think it is what we want it to be, which is, a child comes here, and they feel like they're the most important person in the room at that point in time. It's their interview, the support is for them.”

In addition to implementing SCIM, all Pathfinders indicated in their StART2 submissions that they had Age of Criminal Responsibility (ACR) protocol in place and one Pathfinder had successfully conducted two ACR investigative interviews. In all Pathfinders where a Bairns’ Hoose site had been opened, it was standard practice for joint investigative interviews and ACR interviews to take place in the Bairns’ Hoose or a spoke site, unless CYP requested otherwise. By conducting interviews in a Bairns’ Hoose site, Pathfinders ensured that CYP felt comfortable and safe in the interview space and families had a comfortable, private waiting space.

Challenges

Staffing and lack of capacity

Although all partnerships had introduced SCIM, staffing was a challenge, particularly in the geographically spread and island partnership areas. In four partnerships, a relatively small number of interviewers trained in the model meant teams were left vulnerable if any interviewers left or were off sick. Additionally, due to limited staffing, some social work and police interviewers conducted interviews on top of their day jobs or other duties. This limited their capacity to conduct interviews, particularly in geographically large partnership areas that required interviewers to travel long distances to conduct interviews.

Capacity improved once partnerships were able to establish dedicated SCIM teams, but a significant input of resources was required to train full teams of social work and police interviewers. Completing SCIM training took over six months, with 45 days of training. Training also sometimes involved travel and residential stays, particularly for interviewers from islands and rural areas. In these cases, partnerships relied on staff interested in becoming a SCIM interviewer to be willing to be away from home for weeks of training. This also raised further resource challenges in covering their normal duties while they were completing training.

Beyond establishing the initial SCIM team, the time commitment and travel associated with training also meant interviewers who left could not be quickly or easily replaced. This was raised as a particular challenge for police who were described as tending to regularly change job roles rather than staying in the same position long-term. As a result, new police interviewers need to be trained in SCIM, and there could be a delay between when the person was hired and when they were able to access training.

“In the police there will be a turnover in staff […]. We move roles quite regularly. […] So, that is always problematic within the police.”

In one police division, there was a view that it had taken longer to adopt SCIM due to the cultural shift required and a perception that it slowed down the police interview processes. Highlighting the benefits of the model for the police and how it could enhance processes (for example removing or reducing the need for follow up interviews), helped to combat this. There was also a sense that it took time for justice partners to see their role in promoting wellbeing and reducing re-traumatisation of CYP, as opposed to focusing solely on gathering evidence.

Aligning policy and practice

A final challenge that arose in one partnership was communicating realistic and achievable interview goals with the SCIM team. The strategic leaders’ expectations of the number of SCIM interviews that could be conducted by the SCIM team did not reflect interviewers’ capacity in practice. This communication gap might also have been a result of strategic leaders being physically distant from practitioners on the ground in geographically spread partnerships.

“It ends up there's a disconnect between what strategic leaders are saying and what the practice feels like. And we need to be really careful about that because, if we want people on the ground to buy-in to this vision of Bairns’ Hoose, then, we need to be listening to what they're saying and we need to be very careful that what we are telling them is realistic and achievable.”

Facilitators

Partnerships took steps to facilitate the rollout of SCIM. These included taking a ‘cross-border’ approach to interview referrals, where interviewers could interview CYP in neighbouring local authorities or partnerships. This eased waiting times and kept them more consistent by preventing backlogs in particular local authorities that could result in CYP receiving different standards of service based on where they lived.

Another factor in the successful implementation of SCIM was the dedication and commitment of the interview teams. As noted above, training was a significant time investment, often requiring weeks away from home. Interviewers went to great lengths to provide CYP with trauma-informed interviews, sometimes travelling long distances to conduct interviews in remote and rural locations, or travelling to different partnership areas to ensure a child has the same interviewers for subsequent interviews, even if the family had moved somewhere new. Interviewers also conducted interviews in addition to daily responsibilities when dealing with limited staffing.

“For interviewers as well, in not just doing the SCIM work itself, but the training and having to be away from your family etc. for weeks at a time. It was a really difficult thing for people [...]. It's really demanding and it's a real testament to how well folk have worked that we're doing the number of SCIM interviews that we are, as a proportion of the whole.”

Engagement with SCRA and COPFS

An important purpose of the Bairns’ Hoose is to record and conduct interviews to a quality standard that allows the interviews to be used in children’s hearing processes and criminal trials, potentially reducing the amount of evidence that the child needs to give or, in some cases, removing the need for that child to give evidence altogether (Chapter 10).

One approach described as improving the use of recorded joint investigative interviews in court was to facilitate engagement with the Scottish Children's Reporter Administration (SCRA) and Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS), as described below. This engagement both supported Reporters’ understanding of SCIM protocol, and allowed SCRA and COPFS to provide feedback on how to improve interviews. Inviting SCRA to visit one Bairns’ Hoose in person was found to be a particularly effective way of communicating the purpose of SCIM and the positive impact this approach has on CYP’s experience of giving evidence.

“Having had Reporters go down for a look and hear what it's all about, it's really important for them to do that because it puts the work they do in some sort of context around SCIM interviews that are taking place. […] And it's more about the philosophy behind SCIM interviews as well. I mean, [I was a] social worker back in the day and have undertaken many joint interviews, whether that be in the back of police cars, police stations, social work offices, family homes. And it's really good that there's now the specialist resource […] and children and young people can be supported in a much more cohesive and therapeutic way.”

Another effective approach was for partnerships to hold sessions with COPFS and SCRA at their respective agencies to discuss the SCIM, the interview process, and the opportunities for the use of good quality interviews in lieu of examination in chief and the potential to combine that with other special measures to support CYP giving evidence including evidence by commissioner hearings.

Opening a dialogue with SCRA and COPFS also enabled justice stakeholders, listed below, to provide feedback to interviewers, helping them improve the quality of evidence presented in court. For example, in one partnership, a Justice Subgroup including SCRA, COPFS, and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) was set up to evaluate SCIM interviews. In another, SCRA and COPFS carried out evaluations of joint investigative interviews. Having direct lines of communication also enabled partners to address misunderstandings that could have prevented the use of interview recordings in court. For example, one partnership was able to clarify a misunderstanding around whether questions were suggestive by explaining that prompts drew on disclosures already made by the child or young person.

“I had a couple of written feedbacks on interviews that they'd used and mainly that was really helpful, but also it demonstrated that they perhaps didn't understand the full SCIM model. So, they were talking about some of our questions being suggestive, but I think that was mainly around the prompts and I don't think they understood how we developed those prompts, which was, you know, from disclosures that children had actually made. So, it looked as though maybe we were introducing things. So yeah, so it's a, it's an ongoing kind of communication and education process both ways.”

Support from the national joint investigative interview team

The national joint investigative interview team provided expert advice on demand whenever interviewers needed external opinions on an unusual situation. For example, one partnership explained that the national team had provided them with support for interviewing younger children with additional needs. The national team also provided this partnership with support to keep the length of continued interviews to a minimum, which they had identified as a problem. The national training body also provided useful professional development opportunities and online forums to share good practice from other local authorities.

“I found the forums really helpful. Online forums where people have come together to look at good practice and things that are working throughout Scotland. And it's just been quite interesting to hear about, because I guess that's the bit for me is ‘what can we learn from people who are doing something similar in other local authorities?’ Sometimes I think it's easy to become a bit insular.”