Today the BBC reports that research by the Local Government Association finds sixty percent of English local authorities are reporting problems of retaining child protection staff. This represents an increase of 50% compared to last year. Public and press anger at social workers following the Baby Peter tragedy are said to be an important factor.
No surprise there. The effects of stoking up the blame culture are entirely predictable. A year ago ministers, the leader of the opposition and, of course, some newspapers were remiss in not exercising greater restraint in this regard. The effects will be long-lasting and profound.
Wednesday, 11 November 2009
Wednesday, 28 October 2009
The role of the Independent Safeguarding Authority
When I started this blog I promised myself that I would not become sucked into wider safeguarding issues. But the mess that seems to be emerging around the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) is more than adequate justification for a short diversion.
This week the ISA's chair, Sir Roger Singleton, has been widely reported as having predicted that registration with the ISA will become usual not only for those who work with children and vulnerable adults, but also for those who don't. The argument seems to be that plumbers, electricians, hoteliers and even undertakers will see that being able to declare their organisations free from undesirable employees confers a commercial advantage. ISA checks may become a bit like ISO 9000, the Kite Mark or Investors in People.
This is so far from what was originally envisaged by Bichard that it is breathtaking. And the argument can be pushed even further. If hotels gain competitive advantage from employing only ISA-checked employees, then why not have hotels which only allow ISA-checked guests? They would be really safe for families with children, or would they?
The truth of the matter is that criminal records and related checks are fairly crude defences against child abuse. The nursery worker recently sentenced for abusing and taking obscene photographs of children had a previously clean record. And sophisticated child abusers can always find ways to deceive complex bureaucracies.
So widespread checking can only encourage a false sense of security. It will not make children any safer and it is likely to consume time and resources that are best devoted to other things. And it will upset and alienate the general public from the cause of safeguarding children. Philip Johnston in the Daily Telegraph writes this week that the ISA is turning the entire adult population into a collection of suspects. Sadly he may be right. The best way to safeguard and protect children is by educating, engaging and motivating people; not by alienating them.
This week the ISA's chair, Sir Roger Singleton, has been widely reported as having predicted that registration with the ISA will become usual not only for those who work with children and vulnerable adults, but also for those who don't. The argument seems to be that plumbers, electricians, hoteliers and even undertakers will see that being able to declare their organisations free from undesirable employees confers a commercial advantage. ISA checks may become a bit like ISO 9000, the Kite Mark or Investors in People.
This is so far from what was originally envisaged by Bichard that it is breathtaking. And the argument can be pushed even further. If hotels gain competitive advantage from employing only ISA-checked employees, then why not have hotels which only allow ISA-checked guests? They would be really safe for families with children, or would they?
The truth of the matter is that criminal records and related checks are fairly crude defences against child abuse. The nursery worker recently sentenced for abusing and taking obscene photographs of children had a previously clean record. And sophisticated child abusers can always find ways to deceive complex bureaucracies.
So widespread checking can only encourage a false sense of security. It will not make children any safer and it is likely to consume time and resources that are best devoted to other things. And it will upset and alienate the general public from the cause of safeguarding children. Philip Johnston in the Daily Telegraph writes this week that the ISA is turning the entire adult population into a collection of suspects. Sadly he may be right. The best way to safeguard and protect children is by educating, engaging and motivating people; not by alienating them.
Friday, 23 October 2009
Cornwall
The OFSTED report on Cornwall Children's Services is pretty depressing stuff. I was struck from reading it by how much focused on process rather than on outcome. And there was too much about "leadership" and "performance management" for my taste and not enough about the actual quality of the service. It confirms my view that inspections are blunt instruments. They tend to light upon things which are important to the inspectors, but which may be less important to those receiving the services.
There are some really worrying things in the Cornwall inspection report: insufficient capacity and large caseloads for example. But I get fed up with inspections which make bland and self-righteous recommendations such as "Ensure children’s social care team managers have the appropriate skills and expertise and consistently follow guidance, procedures and protocols". Such inspections fail to look behind the issues to find their causes. In my experience a pretty common reason for not following procedures is that it isn't possible to get the job done if you do. And there are two explanations for that: too few resources and too many procedures.
There are some really worrying things in the Cornwall inspection report: insufficient capacity and large caseloads for example. But I get fed up with inspections which make bland and self-righteous recommendations such as "Ensure children’s social care team managers have the appropriate skills and expertise and consistently follow guidance, procedures and protocols". Such inspections fail to look behind the issues to find their causes. In my experience a pretty common reason for not following procedures is that it isn't possible to get the job done if you do. And there are two explanations for that: too few resources and too many procedures.
ADCS Criticism of OFSTED
Kim Bromley-Derry, president of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services, has fired a warning shot across the bows of OFSTED with talk of “time consuming and rigid” inspections which undermine the quality of practice.
Some may think that this is knee-jerk self-protection, but I think Kim has a point. I don’t believe that quality services come about as a result of inspection regimes; you can't inspect quality in. And I don’t believe that inspection by a body which is both relatively inexperienced in the field of child protection, and which seems to to be in awe of ministers, is any guarantee of good standards.
We need to think very carefully about what OFSTED is for. It’s not there to point the finger and to label work as “inadequate” or “awful”. The only point in its existence is to improve the quality of services. Instead of league tables and dispiriting pejorative judgments, why not carry out some thematic research into increasing safety and promoting quality in child protection?
Some may think that this is knee-jerk self-protection, but I think Kim has a point. I don’t believe that quality services come about as a result of inspection regimes; you can't inspect quality in. And I don’t believe that inspection by a body which is both relatively inexperienced in the field of child protection, and which seems to to be in awe of ministers, is any guarantee of good standards.
We need to think very carefully about what OFSTED is for. It’s not there to point the finger and to label work as “inadequate” or “awful”. The only point in its existence is to improve the quality of services. Instead of league tables and dispiriting pejorative judgments, why not carry out some thematic research into increasing safety and promoting quality in child protection?
Thursday, 22 October 2009
The Children's Commissioner for England Row
Who should be the new Children's Commissioner?
A lot of people are getting hot under the collar about the choice and about the appointment process. My own view is that I believe that the Children's Commissioner should be user, not producer, focused. We need a Children's Commissioner who can truly understand and represent the interests of children; and articulate the needs of every child and young person in England, especially those who are most disadvantaged, such as abused and neglected children.
We might ask ourselves whether a person who had excelled in a career providing local authority services is best qualified to fulfill the role. My instinct says "no". The kind of person I would most like to see as Children's Commissioner is a person who has excelled in listening to children and young people and giving them a voice; not a bureaucrat or an administrator but an advocate and a campaigner.
A lot of people are getting hot under the collar about the choice and about the appointment process. My own view is that I believe that the Children's Commissioner should be user, not producer, focused. We need a Children's Commissioner who can truly understand and represent the interests of children; and articulate the needs of every child and young person in England, especially those who are most disadvantaged, such as abused and neglected children.
We might ask ourselves whether a person who had excelled in a career providing local authority services is best qualified to fulfill the role. My instinct says "no". The kind of person I would most like to see as Children's Commissioner is a person who has excelled in listening to children and young people and giving them a voice; not a bureaucrat or an administrator but an advocate and a campaigner.
Tuesday, 20 October 2009
More care proceedings
There are reports today that the number of care applications for the three months to September 2009 was up by nearly 50% on the same period last year. In June 2009 the highest number of cases since records were kept by the Children and Family Courts Advisory Support Service was reached.
Clearly such a massive increase in expensive legal proceedings, and the subsequent costs of caring for looked-after children, will place a heavy load on local authorities which may not be sustainable. There is now a real prospect of a melt-down in services, with rising volumes of work, staff shortages and a demoralised workforce.
There is no evidence of an appropriate response to this crisis from DCSF. Ministers are not usually slow to comment on a whole range of issues but seem strangely silent on this one.
Clearly such a massive increase in expensive legal proceedings, and the subsequent costs of caring for looked-after children, will place a heavy load on local authorities which may not be sustainable. There is now a real prospect of a melt-down in services, with rising volumes of work, staff shortages and a demoralised workforce.
There is no evidence of an appropriate response to this crisis from DCSF. Ministers are not usually slow to comment on a whole range of issues but seem strangely silent on this one.
OFSTED Report on SCRs
Eventually I found the report which is the subject of the last post - report number 090101. It does NOT contain a clear statement of methodology NOR a clear definition of the evaluative terms "good", "adequate", "inadequate". There is no discussion of how the SCRs promoted organisational learning. As I thought, they are assessing means not ends. On the positive side there is some analysis of the characteristics of the cases on which the reports are based, but the overall conclusions are unsurprising and uninspiring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
