News

Willing...but able?

Posted: 17 June 2004 | Subscribe Online


 

BOB HUDSON is honorary professor of partnership studies at the Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham. He has written and researched on partnership issues for the past 20 years, and is a specialist adviser to the House of Commons education and skills select committee on partnership issues.

The government's reforms on children's services began as a response to the Victoria Climbi' tragedy but now involve policy and service responses that go well beyond the field of child protection. Good as far as it goes, but needing to go further was a key message coming out of the last national conference held by the Integrated Care Network (ICN).

Article continues below the advertisement



The green paper consultation indicated that the range of core partners needed to be wider. In particular, there were concerns that the voluntary and community sector, schools, police and probation seemed too peripheral. The government's response has been to widen the number of "relevant partners" that will be under a new duty to co-operate to improve outcomes for children, and an extension of the number of agencies able to pool their budgets to achieve this.

The conference supported this need for a wide breadth of outlook. The contributions analysed the dimensions of a whole system; the nature of children's trusts and the Serving Children Well model and other policies; and several examples of partnership working in practice from Essex, Liverpool, Telford and London.

Working across a whole system implies making connections between what goes on at operational and external levels. This can be difficult, for often there is inconsistency within and between these two levels, which can hinder progress.

The operational agenda constitutes a huge challenge, including the creation of multi-disciplinary teams, co-location, extended schools, local safeguarding children's boards, a lead professional, a common assessment framework and ground-breaking systems of information sharing. Some places are already making inroads into this tough agenda. Several made presentations at the conference: Telford, with its links between education and social care; Liverpool, with its children's community index and single point of access and referral; Portsmouth and North Lincolnshire, with their use of key outcomes to drive development.

But few delegates doubted the complexity of these challenges, and the difficulties in addressing them. The broad goal in relation to front-line working is to have multi-disciplinary teams in places where many children spend much of their time, such as Sure Start children's centres and schools. In such settings, it is expected that information will be shared freely and assessments jointly undertaken. Although few question the desirability of these sorts of arrangements, in themselves they are no guarantee of effective teamwork.

Several assumptions underpin the operational level proposals, and it is important to unpick them and consider the extent to which they can be taken as read. First, the extent to which there is clarity regarding the role and scope of each agency and profession. Second, the extent to which there is agreement about the nature of the tasks faced, and the most appropriate way of addressing them. And finally, the extent to which one profession or agency positively regards the contribution from another agency or profession.

None of these assumptions can be taken for granted, especially in a field spanning social care, education and health where, typically, relationships have been under-developed. Co-ordinated working patterns will be problematic where there is confusion or disagreement about the contribution each partner brings to the relationship. Moreover, social policy and professional practice is littered with competing ideas about social problems and how they should be resolved. It is important that any differences are addressed, otherwise the basis for progress will be flawed.

Friendly environment.

Even if goodwill and commitment is evident at operational level, an effective whole-systems approach also needs a friendly external environment. First, there needs to be an appropriate degree of compatibility between front-line partnerships and their parent bodies in social care, health, education and elsewhere. This is not always evident across the core partners - indeed the green paper itself acknowledged that "an underlying cause of local fragmentation is conflicting messages and incentives at national level".

The most evident difficulties relate to the main ways in which NHS and education bodies are judged. In the case of the former it is targets geared to adults in the acute sector - notably waiting lists, waiting times and delayed discharges. With the latter it is academic attainment through national tests and examinations. Getting health and education agencies to give a higher priority to a whole-systems approach rooted in preventive work does not lie easily with this situation. It implies the need for central government to give greater performance management priority to evidence of good partnership working. Much is riding here on the extent to which the pending Integrated Inspection Framework can reconcile these and other tensions.
Article continues below the advertisement



A second external factor is the extent to which operational arrangements are underpinned by an orderly and predictable flow of resources. This is not just a matter of finances, but also staffing and information flows. However, partnership working is motivated by access to new financial resources. Notwithstanding the chancellor's generosity in his recent budget, the reforms do not come with much more money, so success depends on the possibility of doing things differently with existing funding.

Pooled budgets.

Education secretary Charles Clarke has referred to "the benefits of getting one funding stream as opposed to many". This could mean two things. First, the widespread use of pooled budgets among the statutory bodies with the aim of squeezing extra value for money out of expenditures. Second, some rationalisation of the monies going into several pots, such as the Children's Fund, Sure Start, extended schools, Connexions partnerships and others.

A final external factor involves the extent to which the separate partners retain a commitment to their own established ways of doing things, as opposed to the new culture that will be required of a whole-system imperative. This is a difficult thing to pin down, but already there is some evidence of turf wars breaking out as the implications of the changes unfold. Within the core partnership, for example, there is jousting between social services directors and chief education officers over who will get the new director of children's services positions, while in education there are reservations about the impact on the drive to improve school standards.

The extent to which these problems can be addressed will depend partly on the willingness of key partners at local level to put children, young people and their families at the centre of events - in effect, to behave altruistically rather than self-interestedly. But it will also depend on the extent to which new integrating mechanisms can bring about radical change. There are four mechanisms proposed: a duty of partnerships to require co-operation between councils and other public and non-public sector bodies; the creation and roll-out of children's trusts; the appointment of directors of children's services; and - already in place - the creation of a children's minister.

It is, of course, too early to determine how far these changes will have the desired effect. But what was clear from the conference was a widespread willingness to make a decisive break with the past. Every Child Matters had a generally warm response, and, post-bill, that goodwill still seems to be around. As ever, the tricky bit is the implementation process that lies ahead.


Abstract: This article reports on the proceedings and papers discussed at an event on the children's services reforms held under the auspices of the Integrated Care Network. It is suggested that the wide nature of the desired outcomes underpinning the Every Child Matters reforms requires a whole-systems response that goes beyond traditional forms of ad hoc co-ordination. Although there is much support for the changes, implementation will be difficult.

Further information:

  • Presentations and papers relating to the ICN event are available on the website: www.integratedcare network.gov.uk
  • Details of all official publications relating to Every Child Matters can be found on the DfES website: www.dfes.gov.uk/ everychildmatters/downloads.cfm
  • Details of the Serving Children Well model are on the website of the Local Government Association: www.lga.gov.uk  The author can be contacted on:  bob@bobhudsonconsulting.com

Contact the author:

The author can be contacted on: bob@bobhudsonconsulting.com



Spread the word:   bookmark it! diggit! reddit!



Products and Services
  • RSS Feeds
  • Conferences
  • Jobs By Email
  • News
  • Blogss
  • Videos
  • Magazine Subscriptions
  • Podcasts