Friday, 22 March 2019

Vulnerable children deserve better - the parlous state of children’s social care in England

An unequivocal report from the Public Accounts Committee of the House of Commons pulls no punches.


The Committee’s Chair sums it up, concluding that:

“Government’s progress with reforming children’s services has been painfully slow and it has still not made clear what sustainable improvements it hopes to achieve. Children, many of them in desperate circumstances, deserve better.”

The report notes the following:

·     The Department for Education, which is responsible for children’s services in England, does not possess a comprehensive assessment of the sustainability or resource needs of children’s social care services
·     The sector is not financially sustainable with 91% of local authorities exceeding their budgets for spending on children's services in 2017-18
·     The Department for Education cannot explain the significant variation between local authorities in the activity and cost of children’s social care and it does not have an adequate understanding of demand pressures
·     The increasing use, and high cost, of residential care puts local authorities under extreme financial pressure
·     There is a lack of evidence on the effectiveness of early interventions in children’s social care
·     The Department has not set out what overall improvement it is seeking in children’s social care by 2022
·     There is little evidence of strong cross-government collaboration in improving children’s social care

Criticisms don’t come much more damning than those! The report chimes with so much of what we have been hearing from other sources over the years which, sadly, our government seems only to happy to ignore. Ministers' complacency has been staggering.

The Committee’s report should be a watershed. Now that MPs have joined the chorus calling for vulnerable children to receive the services they need and deserve, rather than some third rate inadequate and declining alternative, ministers must act and act decisively. It is simply not good enough trotting out the usual excuses about spending a pittance on so-called innovation and other distractions. Urgent action is required to properly fund children’s services now and in the future.
-->

Sunday, 6 January 2019

Some looked after teenagers face squalid accommodation

You don’t need to do more than read the very sobering article in the Observer today to know that local authorities in the UK are struggling to accommodate some looked-after children adequately. The article list numerous cases of authorities using very unsatisfactory Bedsits, Bed and Breakfast accommodation, caravans and even tents (!) to house teenagers.


Marked increases in the use of deeply unsatisfactory accommodation have occurred in the last few years.

It seems to me fairly obvious what the cause of this dire state of affairs is. Local authorities do not have adequate resources to do the job. Ever increasing numbers of children coming into care, on the one hand, and squeezed austerity budgets, on the other, mean only one thing – declining standards.

It is deeply shocking that an advanced country like Britain cannot look after its most vulnerable young people satisfactorily. Politicians who preside over this debacle should be ashamed.

Sunday, 30 December 2018

Understanding the impact of stress on error in child protection work should be a priority

In a post I made at the beginning of November, I said that there is a lot of evidence that stressed employees do not deliver good products and services.


I was therefore interested to read the other day that scientists at Columbia University have recently shown that during stressful times in operating theatres, surgeons make up to 66 percent more mistakes than at other times. 


I don’t expect that the methodology of the Columbia study - which involved the wearing of special clothing which monitored the electrical activity of a surgeon’s heart while operating - could be easily adapted to social workers and other child protection practitioners, working as they do in community settings. However, some research into the relationship between stress and error in child protection work would be a very good idea. And I think it should also look at the impact of both long-term and short-term stress.

Surely such a study is possible. There must be academics out there who could undertake it. And there must be sources of funding that could be found. Understanding the impact of stress on error in child protection work should be a priority.

Friday, 14 December 2018

Outsourcing

I am very pleased to see that Professor Ray Jones is publishing a book on the outsourcing of children’s services. He is, of course, a well-known critic of the increasing involvement of private companies in the delivery of children’s social care.

According to an article in Community Care, Jones argument in his new book is that accountability is being lost in the burgeoning number of moves to an “alternative delivery model” in such places as Richmond-and-Kingston, Doncaster, Slough, Sandwell and Worcestershire. According to Jones, Directors of Children’s Services, in areas where outsourcing occurs, will be increasingly faced with the loss of “information and intelligence” about what is happening in those services.

He is absolutely right. And fortuitously the launch of his book coincides with news of a major public sector outsourcing fiasco in which the British Army outsourced its recruitment to a large private sector company with extremely disappointing results. The Guardian says that government officials did not understand how complex the project was before signing the deal.

If recruiting soldiers is a very complicated business, how much more complex is protecting children from abuse and neglect? And how much more complicated will the outsourcing contracts have to be in order to ensure that the outsourcers deliver what is promised? If the Army can get outsourcing a relatively straightforward service so badly wrong, how much more likely is it that local authorities will get the outsourcing of a very complex professional service (like child protection) wrong? I suggest it is very likely.

Interestingly the business literature on outsourcing does not provide much support for the kind of outsourcing deals which the government is trying to foist on children’s services in England. In a seminal work on offshoring and outsourcing, Oshri, Kotlarsky, and Willcocks* argue that activities which constitute the basis or core of an organisation’s operation (which they call ‘order winners’) should alwaysbe kept in house. On the other hand ‘necessary evils’ such as administration, payroll or facilities management are usually good candidates for outsourcing. 

The government, in contrast, propounds policies for child protection outsourcing which involve core activities being transferred lock, stock and barrel to outsourcers. And the government provides no account of why outsourcers would be any better at delivering these core activities than local authorities. The reality is that local authorities are being pressurised into adopting strategies for which there is no evidence and no clear business rationale. That does not seem sensible to me.

If the government were proposing outsourcing only back-office services, I would have some sympathy. As it is I have to agree with Ray Jones – we should be “scared” about what is happening. Even if ministers do not listen to social work academics like Jones, or to business academics or other experts, one would hope that they would at least be chastened by what is happening to government outsourcing deals in defence and other spheres and heed the warnings. But I don't expect they will.

*Ilan Oshri, Julia Kotlarsky, Professor Leslie P. Willcocks The Handbook of Global Outsourcing and Offshoring Palgrave Macmillan, 2011 https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=hYQzxD9MSR0C&dq=order+winners,+necessary+evils&source=gbs_navlinks_s

Tuesday, 4 December 2018

Health Visitors are essential for effective child protection

 An article in Care Appointments reports on a poll of 1,200 Health Visitors in England which reveals an over-stretched service and concerns that tragedies could occur because vulnerable children may not be identified until it is too late.

It was found that less qualified, non-registered practitioners were being used in some areas to conduct child health and development checks, so that Health Visitors could concentrate on working with children already identified as vulnerable. Another undesirable practice of providing early contacts over the phone had also arisen. Forty-three percent of the respondents to the survey reported being so stretched that they feared a tragedy could occur. 

The survey puts into dramatic focus the effects of the continuing cuts to public health budgets in England, resulting in the loss of about 25% of the health visiting workforce during the past three years, with another round of cuts due in 2019/20. 

Health visiting, which is conducted by qualified nurses and midwives who have also gained an additional health visiting qualification, has a long and distinguished tradition in Britain, dating back to the late nineteenth century. Child health and development checks, carried out by Health Visitors, play a vital role in child safeguarding and protection, often providing the kind of early warning which otherwise would not be available. Not infrequently the Health Visitor is the only professional in regular contact with families with small children.

Not funding health visiting properly is a false economy. It is self-evident that early intervention, before serious neglect or abuse occurs, is preferable to late intervention. And the more we understand about the impact of early abuse and neglect on a child’s subsequent development, the more we understand that not providing effective health support and advice services to young families - and health monitoring of children during the early years - is as foolish as it is penny-pinching. 

Tuesday, 13 November 2018

Northamptonshire Children’s Services – in deep trouble

The BBC reports that the inspectorate, Ofsted, has condemned Northamptonshire’s children’s services as a "potential risk" and describes children’s social workers at the effectively bankrupt council as "overwhelmed" and "drowning". Services are said to have "significantly declined" since 2016.


You don’t need to be a genius to know why services in Northamptonshire are in deep trouble. The council has run out of cash and is seeking ways of further reducing spending on services which have already been cut to the bone. Nobody can provide good services to looked after children or conduct thorough enquiries into child protection concerns if there aren’t the resources to do the job. 

The BBC article mentions social work caseloads of between 30 and 50 children per social worker. If that is correct, it is far too high. Ten to fifteen cases is more the mark.

Ofsted inspectors must know that resources are the problem. Councillors and senior managers in Northamptonshire must know that too. Government ministers must know that – surely they must know that!

Carrying on trying to provide adequate services with inadequate budgets will result in only one thing: children unnecessarily put at risk or deprived of adequate care. 

Central government now needs to stump up the cash to provide proper children’s services in Northamptonshire, pending whatever reorganisation of the council eventually emerges. Wait-and-see is not an option. Vulnerable children and young people in Northamptonshire need action now.

Thursday, 8 November 2018

The Crisis in Children’s Services in England

Hard on the heels of recent discussions concerning the working conditions of children’s social workers in Britain, comes more confirmation of the dire state of children’s services in the age of austerity.

The Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) has released its sixth annual report of Safeguarding Pressures research covering the financial year 2017/18. It concludes (page 119) that over the ten year period covered by the six phases of the research, there were:
  • More initial contacts with children and families  - up by 78% 
  • More referrals - up by 22%
  • More Section 47 enquiries (investigations into concerns of significant harm to children) - up by an eye-watering 159%
  • More children being made the subjects of child protection plans - up by 87%
  • More children who are looked after by the local authority - up by 24% 
The report notes that “These increases are higher than the growth in child population alone could account for and increases in 2017/18 have been greater than the previous year.” (page 119)

Commenting on the funding position the report notes:

“Local authorities have protected and invested in children’s services despite devastating cuts to their budgets using reserves or diverting funds from other services, yet we hear that worse impacts may yet be to come. This situation is simply not tenable with many respondents and other sources stating that services can no longer be protected going forward. The tipping point has been reached.” (page 120)

As part of its coverage of these findings on 6thNovember 2018, the BBC Radio 4’s PM programme had interviews with LSE professors Eileen Munro and Martin Knapp. 

Munro said that  children’s services have had 'gigantic' funding cuts, and have more to come, and face rising caseloads. She went on to say that that in order to do good work social workers have to be able to spend time with families and they need to have time to think about what they do. That was not possible if they were overworked and under-funded.

Knapp said that there was strong research evidence that early intervention services (which have been hit hardest by spending cuts) result in considerable economic payoffs, which in the long run reduce the costs of late intervention, such as taking a child into care. However, he saw no signs that the government was willing to accept this argument and that cuts to preventative services were seen by ministers as being an easy option. The BBC interviewer, Evan Davis, summarising Knapp’s comments, described what was happening as “bonkers budgeting”. 

Interestingly no government minister was available to appear on the show.

The ADCS and people like Professors Munro and Knapp are not hysterics. They are not serial purveyors of doom or professional shroud waivers. What they say is based on hard facts and sensible analysis. And what they are saying is that there is now a crisis in children’s services. Government cannot just go on and on cutting and cutting resources while demand for services increases unremittingly. The ‘tipping point’ (to use the phrase used in the ADCS report) has been reached.

But there is no evidence that government is taking this seriously. Ministers seem to be carrying on with business as usual while the pressure cooker that is children’s services in England reaches the point of explosion. Rather than uttering platitudes and pretending that there is no crisis, ministers need to act decisively and quickly to prevent disaster.