UNCRC Implementation Embedding in Public Services Group minutes: 24 February 2025

Attendees and apologies

• Lyndsey Saki, Scottish Government (Chair) – LS  
• Gita Sharkey, Scottish Government – GS 
• Aqeel Ahmed, Scottish Government – AA 
• Ezhilarasi Mahadevan, Scottish Government (Minutes) – EM 
• Luiza Leite, Scottish Government – LL 
• Maxine Jolly, Education Scotland – MJ 
• Denise Rooney, Scottish Qualifications Authority – DR 
• Joanna Smith, NHS Education for Scotland (NES) – JS 
• Alyson Lambart, Police Scotland – AL 
• Abbie Montgomery-Fox, Children’s Hearing Scotland – AMF  
• Darren Little, Dumfries and Galloway Council – DL  
• Felicia Szloboda, The Improvement Service – FS  
• Nick Targontsidis, NHS Education for Scotland (NES) – NT  
• Rebecca Spillane, The Improvement Service – RS 
• Steve Black, Right There (on behalf of Coalition of Care and Support Providers in Scotland (CCPS)) – SB  
• Maria Doyle, Scottish Alliance for Children’s Rights (Together Scotland) – MD 
• Sarah Rodger, Perth and Kinross Council (PKC) – SR 
• Katelin O’Neill, Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA) – KN 

Apologies 

• Alison Sutherland, Social Work Scotland 
• Juliet Harris, Together Scotland  
• Laura Conachan, Children’s Hearings Scotland 
• Laura Crossan, Police Scotland 
• Gerry McMurtrie, UNICEF UK
• Megan Williams, Coalition of Care and Support Providers in Scotland (CCPS)  
• Morag Macpherson, UNICEF  
• Nick Fellows, COSLA
• Eloise Di Gianni, Observatory for Children’s Human Rights Scotland
• Fatoumata Drammeh, UNICEF UK  

Items and actions

Minutes and actions from previous meeting 

LS acknowledged delays in sending the previous set of minutes, welcoming feedback and concerns to be shared via email as soon as possible.

Update on support to public authorities    

LS highlighted a webinar on transitions for disabled young people, hosted by NHS Education for Scotland with the Improvement Service. NT shared that although it wasn’t recorded, resources are available on Turas Learn. LS highlighted that anyone can sign up for free training on children’s rights and Getting it Right for every child (GIRFEC) on Turas Learn.

RS provided an update on a recent webinar on children’s rights and homelessness, which focused on local authority actions and future legislation. A related paper is available, and the webinar will be shared on YouTube shortly.

LS also provided the following key updates:

UNCRC Innovation Fund projects are complete, with reports to be shared soon.

The Children’s rights skills and knowledge framework is progressing, with PDFs and training plans launching shortly* (*updated post-meeting: the framework has now been launched)

Support for public authorities listed in the UNCRC Act continues via NHS Education for Scotland, the Improvement Service, and the Embedding team in the Scottish Government’s (SG’s) Children’s Rights Unit.

AA updated the group on the Regulation and Improvement Working Group(RIWG) which includes scrutiny bodies such as inspectorates and regulators. The group is developing a framework on children’s rights in regulation and promoting child participation in inspections.

SG runs a peer network to support the 14 non-executive public bodies (NEPBs) listed in the UNCRC Act.  A recent meeting covered children’s rights and wellbeing impact assessments (CRWIAs) and the next one will focus on child friendly communication.

LS raised some recent correspondence with MJ about an outdated graphic resource linking GIRFEC, and the UNCRC. MJ noted its popularity in schools and local authorities but raised concerns that it could suggest that rights come with responsibilities and that rights are not interdependent. Highland Council is considering updating it.

LS asked whether the resource is still in use, especially beyond education, and whether a new version is needed. MJ clarified it was excluded from UNCRC guidance due to potential misinterpretation, but noted continued demand for clear, visual tools like infographics to show policy connections.

JS said the new GIRFEC e-learning modules now include children’s rights. During development, her team discussed the resource with the Scottish Government GIRFEC team, who acknowledged its value. JS supported an update and suggested integrating a revised version into the module.

LS highlighted growing interest from education and health sectors and stressed the need to connect policies like GIRFEC and the Promise with the UNCRC, referencing Improvement Service materials.

LS thanked everyone and suggested further discussions, proposing a small group involving the GIRFEC team, MJ, JS, RS, and NT.

Action 1: EM to set up a meeting for this smaller group

RS shared that the first UNCRC local government conference will take place on 4 March 2025. It will feature presentations from Aberdeenshire (on self-assessment), East Renfrewshire (on youth participation), and North Lanarkshire (on awareness-raising of children’s rights). Resources will be shared after the event.

Insights from attendees on early implementation 

Members were invited to share their insights on early UNCRC implementation. The following discussion points were captured across the group:

NT highlighted progress in health boards’ integration of children’s rights in procurement but stressed the need for clearer reporting guidance. RS discussed challenges with reporting across services and stressed the importance of governance and youth engagement. LS acknowledged reporting challenges and recognised the need for discussions on how the reports will be reviewed and how best practice and lessons learned will be shared.

NT and LS agreed on the need to include adult services in joint reporting, given children’s interactions with them and transitions to adult services.

FS highlighted that reporting should increase accountability. She cited the children’s rights approach in Wales as a model. LS welcomed these points, noting that UNCRC Act implementation work in Scotland has built on this model and that a discussion on child rights reports was planned under item 6.

MJ stressed the need to broaden children’s rights reporting to include transport and housing (updated post-meeting: it may be helpful to note that The Scottish rousing regulator is a listed authority with a duty to report under the UNCRC Act and Transport Scotland are an executive agency, whose actions will be captured in Children’s Rights Scheme reports, where they are relevant to the commitments included in this scheme).

RS noted difficulties in tracking rights’ realisation and monitoring children’s data. She highlighted ongoing work on child rights budgeting with local authorities amidst financial cuts.

LS noted that more advice or guidance may be required on embedding children's rights in partnership work, with record-keeping being flagged as an area for consideration.

MJ noted work to embed rights in the curriculum. LS recognised the importance of embedding children’s rights in education reform.

LS suggested reviewing the non-exhaustive list of children whose rights are most at risk, as included in the UNCRC Act Part 2 statutory guidance . It would be helpful to sense check the list with different sectors. This group could potentially review it to ensure it reflects current evidence and planning needs.

JS supported this, noting that risks vary. RS found the list useful as a starting point for identifying at-risk groups, sharing Aberdeenshire's nuanced approach that considers local circumstances and service areas. LS expressed interest in learning more about local mapping efforts, suggesting sharing information (subject to GDPR duties being met) to better understand and improve future work.

Discussion on updated terms of reference and membership 

The updated Terms of Reference (ToRs) were shared with members ahead of the meeting. An intelligence-gathering element was added to help identify implementation insights and support needs, with a continued focus on sharing good practices across organisations.

LS proposed amending the membership to keep the group focused on public authorities and to encourage open discussion of challenges. This would involve removing UNICEF and the Observatory. Together will represent their members and support private, voluntary, and independent organisations to understand their duties under the UNCRC Act.

The draft ToRs included a list of suggested new members and LS welcomed feedback on these suggestions. MJ asked whether unions would be approached to join the group, recognising their value in reflecting members’ experiences. If this is not the appropriate forum for unions, who have a duty to represent members’ interests rather than contribute to wider discussions on UNCRC implementation, there may be alternative engagement methods.

Action 2: Members to send feedback on the Terms of Reference by email.

Discussion on use of children’s rights reports 

AA explained that listed authorities are required to submit children’s rights reports as soon as practicable after the end of the reporting period, on March 31, 2026. A copy of these reports must be sent to Scottish Ministers and we think it’s likely that we’ll see submissions from September or October 2026. A child friendly version must also be produced.

We hope that the reports will support learning and best practice, identify gaps in capability for listed authorities, and offer insights into early UNCRC Act implementation. The first set of reports will likely inform whether further guidance or resources are needed.

AA had shared a paper with options for how the first child rights reports could be reviewed. This paper was drafted in 2023, and AA suggested an update may be needed. He invited feedback on the paper and the option, which was previously agreed, for SG to review samples of reports and feedback to listed authorities on emerging themes.

NT expressed concern with the previously agreed approach, as not all reports would be reviewed. AA acknowledged this and said options for reviewing reports are being explored.

LS noted resource limits but acknowledged that for reports to be as impactful as possible, it may be valuable to listed authorities to have specific feedback. AA clarified individual feedback would likely not be possible but may evolve over time. AA proposed involving academics for analysis.

DL questioned whether cohort analysis would offer individual feedback, stressing the importance of accountability. He suggested peer reviews, similar to child poverty reports.

FS stressed the need for clear guidance to help authorities focus report content and avoid incoherent activity lists, highlighting the importance of balancing detail and accessibility, especially for child friendly versions. FS also echoed DL’s point that a feedback mechanism would help to enhance the quality of reports.

AA noted the guidance is flexible to suit different contexts. NT suggested involving Together, Young Scot, and the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland to align reports with children and young people’s priorities. MJ stressed the need for a feedback loop to enhance the voice of children and young people. Reports should include both qualitative and quantitative metrics to show impact.

DR highlighted the importance of embedding children’s rights throughout organisations and ensuring accessibility. Reports should show impact, not just list actions. DR and MJ called for clearer guidance on measuring impact, and AA welcomed further suggestions and resources.

LS noted the guidance outlines duties but allows flexibility, as each authority is different. LS suggested five principles of a children’s human rights approach could offer an optional framework, with support and examples provided.

AA emphasised a non-prescriptive approach, encouraging organisations to tailor reports to their contexts. He also proposed assessing reports against the Theory of change for making children’s rights real in Scotland focusing on long-term goals. This could complement the five principles of a children’s human rights approach.

AA requested feedback on whether the cohort analysis approach would be the most effective.

NT supported peer review for insights that academic oversight might miss. AA agreed, suggesting existing networks could facilitate it.

AA also introduced an exercise to consider what attendees felt the key purpose of reports might be, such as identifying trends and accountability to children and young people. SG will consider the results and comments, to inform future discussions on child rights reports.

Action 3: AA to update options paper on child rights report analysis

AOB 

DL noted that the 3-year national funding for the Rights Respecting Schools Award ends in March, though Dumfries & Galloway will continue funding at a local level. Schools with gold awards show strong impact, but there is concern that some local authorities may prioritise other needs.

LS acknowledged that this may mean some local authorities are no longer able to continue with the programme. However, she noted that the transition arrangement following the three year funding provides a more sustainable funding model than what was in place previously. UNICEF UK are working with local authorities to support them to continue with the programme, at significantly reduced cost.

The next meeting is scheduled to take place on Monday 9 June 2025.