Nick Axford and Michael Little are researchers at the Dartington Social Research Unit. The Unit belongs to the Warren House Group, which works in Europe and the US to improve social care for children and families through a combination of scientific research and innovative development, dissemination, training and design strategies. www.whg.org.uk

Many councils are busy developing local preventive strategies. To support the process, the Children, Young People and Families Directorate commissioned an overview of the literature on effective prevention strategies from Dartington Social Research Unit. Refocusing Children’s Services Towards Prevention: Lessons from the Literature has been recently published by the Department for Education and Skills as Research Report 510 (see below).

The heart of the report is about refocusing towards prevention. There is no place here for arguments about prevention versus intervention; both are essential elements to effective children’s services. But the new culture requires a shift in emphasis to focus on prevention, rather than tackling entrenched, chronic problems.

Why does the new legislation require us to refocus on prevention? The primary goal from this exercise is demonstrably improved outcomes for children. But there are other benefits also highlighted in the review. These include:

• Integration of children’s services, with improved inter-agency working and an optimal balance between statutory and voluntary provision.
• Greater efficiency in terms of cost and time, in particular, ensuring that resources are not sucked into a continual fire fighting exercise to support children whose social and psychological needs have become entrenched.
• Improving user involvement, aligning children’s services with the natural tendencies of children and families when they seek to solve their own problems.
• Clarity about which services can best meet the needs of different groups of children.

Of course, there have been many new prevention activities sponsored by central government in recent years: Sure Start, Children’s Fund projects and the Youth Justice Board initiatives in particular spring to mind. One of the challenges for directors of children’s services as they develop local preventive strategies will be to integrate this centrally sponsored activity into their local provision.

What does the review tell us about methods for shifting resources towards prevention and preparing a clear prevention strategy? First, the importance of building and using a local evidence base is clear. The technology here is shifting fast. Local authorities have to have a clear idea of what it is that they are trying to prevent before they can get on with the job.

Second, prevention means doing something different. An effective prevention strategy requires the design, implementation and evaluation of new services. And since refocusing implies a shifting of resources, de-commissioning ineffective services is as important as commissioning effective prevention services.

Third, the traditional routes of fiscal control and re-organisation are likely to be as important to the future of children’s services as they have been to its past. Until a truly needs-led provision is achieved, shifting the direction of the money will largely determine the shifting of provision.

Fourth, careful thought needs to be given to making preventive initiatives part of mainstream provision, so spreading their reach and reducing the stigma associated with using them. Since innovative projects too often "fizzle out", invariably for want of resources, adopting strategies for rolling out proven interventions is also a must.

Of course, refocusing activity is not without risks. To mitigate these, the report suggests bearing in mind that:

• "Early intervention" does not necessarily mean early in a child’s life.
• Good prevention should not be thought of as "light" - it is often intensive and rigorous.
• Refocusing that takes place without considering the views of staff and users may be counterproductive.
• Services should guard against "net-widening", whereby children with few or no needs are drawn into remedial services unnecessarily.

The Children Bill is one of the first steps on a long road to reform that will take many years to complete. Local preventive strategies will provide the road map. Ensuring that they remain an up-to-date and accurate record of the terrain is vital. The DfES overview is one part of the broadening array of evidence that should support local authorities along the way.

About the report

The evidence in the report is supported by a "how to" guide, a best practice model for developing an effective prevention strategy that is currently in use in several English local authorities.

There are also numerous examples of effective re-focusing work from around the world. Connections are made to other current pre-occupations of children’s services, for example ISA, common language and ensuring that prevention does not become a by-word for ineffective child protection.

There is little excuse for local authorities to make children’s strategy on a whim, without reference to local evidence. Much can be gleaned from the mountain of local information that resides in the silos of the departments that make up children’s services. The census can help. The report shows how to find, connect and use this information. It also illustrates how Dartington has developed a technology for auditing the needs of all children in a local authority, building on its existing practice tools.

The report and an executive summary can be downloaded from the DfES website at www.dfes.gov.uk/research

Abstract

As we digest the implications of the Children Bill, a parallel process designed to support broader reforms to children’s services is also under way. To have any hope of successfully implementing the new legislation, each director of children’s services will have to design a good local preventive strategy. This article looks at the benefits of refocusing towards prevention and how to do it while mitigating the associated risks.

Further reading

1 M Little, K Mount, Prevention and Early Intervention with Children in Need, Aldershot, Ashgate, 1999

2 M Rutter, H Giller, A Hagell, Anti-Social Behaviour by Young People, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998

3 Prevention Research Center at Penn State University, US: www.prevention.psu.edu