Advocates have criticised what they describe as a "business as usual" approach within New South Wales child protection, where reports are routinely closed without investigation, warning the practice exposes systemic failures and worsens the over-representation of First Nations children in out-of-home care (OOHC).

A recent investigation by NSW Ombudsman Paul Miller found the Department of Communities and Justice (DCJ) has long closed at-risk-of-significant-harm (ROSH) reports because it lacks the resources to conduct investigations and risk assessments.

Many of these reports come from mandatory reporters — including teachers, police, health workers and childcare workers — who are legally required to notify authorities when they believe a child is at risk.

As such, the DCJ is failing to meet its statutory duties under the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act (the Act) the investigation concluded.

Real consequences for the most vulnerable

AbSec, the peak body for Indigenous children and young people in NSW, said the DCJ shortcomings have serious consequences for First Nations families.

CEO John Leha said the Ombudsman's findings show a system unable to deliver even basic protections and warned, "children are being left in unsafe situations because the system cannot respond".

He added, "When reports of significant harm are closed without assessment, these are families that are not having the early support they need", and argued the DCJ should not be responsible for monitoring itself.

"We urgently need a trusted, independent body to set and enforce standards, monitor and report on performance, and that is empowered to investigate complaints from families who do not fear complaining to the same organisation — the DCJ — which removes their children."

Reports closed due to 'no capacity'

Mr Miller noted 65 per cent of screened ROSH reports each year are closed with the label "no capacity to allocate [to a caseworker]" — an increase from 60 per cent from 2022-23 — while others are shut due to "competing priorities".

Despite earlier reviews, "the high-level numbers are not improving", he said, adding, "We still see individual cases where ROSH reports were closed citing a lack of capacity, and there are later, sometimes tragic, outcomes".

The investigation found the DCJ had "tolerated a culture where the closure of ROSH reports on the stated basis of 'no capacity' or 'competing priorities' has become normalised as 'business as usual'".

While some closures may comply with legislation, "our survey of staff indicates that this does not apply to the majority of closures," it added.

Mr Miller noted, "There is an apparent lack of any routine post-closure scrutiny of closure decisions, which reinforces a cultural norm that closing ROSH reports with labels such as 'no capacity to allocate' whenever a report does not result in a face-to-face assessment is an acceptable and even a preferred basis for closing reports."

Mr Leha argued internal reforms and accountability measures are not working.

"These are systemic failures in how risk is identified, assessed and responded to," he said. "When risk identification and decision-making are shaped by tools and practices that disadvantage Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, it deepens over-representation rather than preventing harm."

Recommendations

The Ombudsman recommended a comprehensive review and reform of ROSH policies, practices and tools, alongside training for staff to improve decision-making under the Act.

He also urged the department to "abolish the policy, and instruct staff to cease the practice of closing ROSH reports merely on the basis of the passage of an arbitrary timeframe".

In response, AbSec called for the "immediate establishment" of a Child Safety and Wellbeing Commission in NSW to offer independent oversight of child safety decisions, especially in the wake of Mr Miller's "clear and indisputable" findings.

"NSW lacks an effective, independent mechanism to ensure children are safe, before harm escalates," Mr Leha said, arguing the DCJ is unable to resolve its internal problems on its own, leading to more children being placed at risk.

"Without an independent Child Safety and Wellbeing Commission, these failures will continue, risks will remain hidden, and our children will keep falling through the cracks."