News

Joined-up working between education, health and social services can mean different things to different people. As Debbie Jones, head of children's services at Durham Council, says: "It has to be more than just sharing an office, kettle and paperclips."

Following health secretary Alan Milburn's address to the national social services conference last week, the political emphasis on "joined-up working" is going to increase dramatically.

In Cardiff, Milburn announced that the days of the "old, monolithic" social services department are numbered. In their place, he set out a vision of "new local partnerships" where agencies - statutory, voluntary and private - work together across traditional boundaries to deliver services.

One of the keys to his vision is the creation of specialist children's trusts to plan, commission, finance and - where it makes sense - deliver children's services. While not yet compulsory, Milburn left no doubt that the pace of change will be swift. Children's trusts are likely to be piloted early next year, with the government looking for organisations to express interest in running them before Christmas.

Many agree with Milburn that change is necessary. "There is too much duplication at the moment," says Liz Garrett, head of policy at Barnardo's. "It results in service users having to be assessed again and again by different professionals from different departments."

Garrett says that for joint working and partnership to take place there must be more information sharing and trust between professionals.

Milburn sees trusts as being one of the vehicles for doing this. However, Jones says that for them to work they must make a significant difference and not be a case of "the emperor's new clothes".

While many understand why Milburn is heading this way, they are not convinced that creating a new model is the right approach.

Camden Council is in the final stages of planning a pilot project, in which professionals from all agencies working with children will be involved in developing and planning services at a strategic level.

"I don't think there's any need to call something a trust and create a new organisation when we already have an integrated and co-ordinated approach at a local authority level and strong relationships with other parties," says Jane Held, director of social services at Camden.

Held says something radical is needed to obtain better outcomes for children, and believes Camden can do that without a new governance model.

But Camden's approach may not be appropriate for all councils, particularly where health services are configured differently, she adds.

Steve Hodges, director of children's services at charity NCH, says the organisation is interested in looking at how it could contribute to children's trusts, but warns that they will not be a panacea. "Trusts are very ill-defined at the moment. It would be dangerous to see trusts as a solution to all the known problems of children's services," he explains.

Hodges says that trusts are likely to be a stepping-stone in a far more radical process of change for children's services.

During his Cardiff speech, Milburn made it clear there is no set model that trusts will have to subscribe to - if it integrates services and addresses local issues then the government is prepared to back it. He also said trusts wouldn't have to be overarching bodies, but could be tailored to the needs of a specific group of service users, such as children with mental health difficulties.

However, all the authorities and voluntary groups Community Care spoke to saw this as duplicating integrated work already being done under Health Act flexibilities, Connexions and Quality Protects.

Chris Pratt, executive director for children and young people's services at Trafford Council in Greater Manchester, says he is concerned about splitting off specific groups from general children's services. "If you had a trust for vulnerable children you would target particular families and could miss some because you're not assessing and screening all children," he says.

Specialist trusts could also create funding issues that wouldn't sit well with joined-up working and management, says Garrett. "If you set up specialist trusts you may need specialist resources and that would be a shame. It could also mean that groups have to travel long distances to access services," she adds.

However, trusts won't have to deliver services. Milburn outlined plans for commissioning trusts, which would be based in councils but have the power to commission services for the voluntary and private sectors and be entitled to commission health care.


"I like the idea of an overarching commissioning and performance management body at a strategic level," says Jones. "I'm open as to whether you then have separate trusts for the delivery of the services or as part of the overarching model," she adds.

Trafford is finalising plans to set up a not-for-profit company with all agencies represented, which will plan, deliver and manage children's services. Professionals will be seconded from council departments to work in multi-disciplinary teams in four geographical areas. It is due to start next April.

"We might transfer the assets, resources and contracts to the company," says Pratt. "But we want it to focus on delivering services and not be bogged down by bureaucracy."

Brighton and Hove, Peterborough and Buckinghamshire Councils see trusts as an opportunity to improve services. Brighton and Buckinghamshire have already expressed their interest to the Department of Health.

Barbara Trevanian, assistant director of children's partnerships at Peterborough, says the council has set up a multi-agency joint development group for disabled children and is working to "pull together" more mainstream services such as Sure Start, Children's Fund and early years services. "Whether it's through real multi-disciplinary teams or virtual ones, we aim to get one assessment of a child and family and draw on the combined resources of agencies to develop the best possible packages," Trevanian adds.

Surrey is another local authority to develop joint working teams on a project-specific basis, particularly with vulnerable children and young offenders. While not ruling out the potential of children's trusts, Ashley Ayre, the council's head of children services, says it will not be bidding in the first wave because of concerns over the structure of trusts.

How trusts will link with schools and what their legal responsibilities will have to be addressed. "They could need things that are already provided by LEAs, social services and the NHS. These problems are not insurmountable, but they need looking at," says Ayre.

Case studies

How councils are developing joined-up children's services.

Camden

Consists of four elements. To be piloted soon.

• All agencies will be involved with planning and development at strategic level.
• Developing multi-agency approach for universal services and multi-agency support for vulnerable children.
• Borough-wide early years services are to be based on Sure Start model. Also looking at similar models for primary and secondary school children.
• Reconfigure specialist services to fit into above.

Trafford

Due to start April 2003. Four multi-disciplinary outreach teams, seconded from health, social services and education departments.

• Set up a not-for-profit company that will take charge of delivering children's services.
• Referral and assessment tracking by professionals.
• Outreach teams providing services.
• Service provision in children's homes, family centres, schools and colleges.
• Help to integrate through business financial and management support.

Buckinghamshire

County-wide model for integrated services for looked-after children.

• Multi-agency assessment, plan development and procedures for children.
• Panel of core members hold regular meetings to consider cases and monitor progress.
• Improved assessment times, educational outcomes for looked-after children and joint working procedures.
• Joint training programmes for schools, governors, carers and social workers.