Given that there are 10 or so different suppliers of ICS I would welcome views as to the strengths and weaknesses of different systems. It is perhaps easier to be negative but I feel that it would be really useful to try to ascertain different peoples opinions on different systems. It would help if you could identify whether you are a Manager or Practitioner.
I would also welcome views as to how safe you feel current databases are and the levels of effective 'communication' between them.
Please either respond on this thread or by sending me a private message - fullest confidentiality assured.
I went to a 'workshop' on teh benefits of ICS which will feed into the taskforce. The funny thing about it was we were not allowed to talk about negaitives, we had to use 'disbenefits!' - anyone heard of anything so ridiculous ? ?
How can they expect to get an understanding of the inpact of ICS if we are only allowed to talk about the benefits?
I have the outcomes from it if you would like them - email me and I'll send them you.
I work on the one Anite have come up with, can't comment on its similarities to or differences from others but...
...frankly it's rubbish and 'not fit for purpose', to use a phrase employed all too often by managers and in the wrong contexts.
1) I often refer back to Swift for basic info because it's quicker and easier to access - generally more user friendly (and I thought Swift was rubbish when it first came in).During the day ICS runs very slowly due to numbers of users. It's better at 6pm but still not great.
2) I am very worried about the new generation of social workers coming through now who are learning that the job is about ticking boxes on a screen. "Should I print the Core Assessment off ICS so that I can take it out and tick these boxes about whether mum smokes, etc?"
3) It feels as though information put on ICS disappears like socks in a washing machine. It does not allow for the natural revisiting of case notes, etc. and 'reflection' as you would on a paper file.
4) I could go on all day but quite simply it's dangerous IMHO.
Fod, I totally agree with you. I too use ANITE, however I am not as lucky as you in being able to use Swift.
I am a NQSW of 4 months and therefore am unable to make comparisons on methods of old!, however in my time working with Anite, i have found it to be a frustrating and complex system. I like to think that i am able to offer a fresh set of eyes on this system, however i become more concerned with what i am seeing every day i use it.
The system itself offers no flexibility or logical structure and it can be extremely difficult to navigate. All they seem to do is add layer upon layer of upgrades, which although some are helpful, it makes it more and more difficult to use and does not actuall fix the fundamental flaws of the system. I like to think that i am technologically minded, however I do struggle at times.
I totally mirror your concerns about it being dangerous, however our voices go unheard due to the amount of money and strategic embarrassment that would ensue if the admission that it is not suitable was made.
From a practice point of view i feel that Anite is going to have a negative effect on the development of the social work profession in the area that i work. We spend so much time inputting this and then duplicating that data somewhere else that the pressure to cover your back and keep to timescales that we may lose our objectivity and ability to question and explain what we are doing and more importantly.....why?
We have had significant issues with regard to the child protection areas, to the point where the child protection conference reports were in my eyes and that of my colleagues and the safeguarding board were significantly below par, these have now been ironed out but there are still issues that need to be addressed locally. This is mirrored in proceedings where the courts are not accepting ICS statements until they significantly improve.
Surely there must be a system out there that is working and if there is can you let me know so i can relocate.
Dont get me wrong, i love aspects of my job and am glad that I took the career step of qualifying, however there needs to be improvement and it is needed now before something goes wrong and the Social Worker is blamed for not flagging it up.
P.S. Contact Point Next
It would be interesting to hear if social workers in Dorset and Lewisham share the same degrees of optimism as reported by their respective Authrorities. Who are the suppliers to each Authority?
i'm familiar with framework -i. i haven't used any other system so can't compare unfortunately.
With respect 'kad1' there was not much point in responding was there!
I have to admit this and I know its really bad but I dont know what ICS is exactly, obviously I know its a recording system but is it like Framework I, (the best system I have ever used, or like CareFirst, the system Im using where I am now, not really very good at all but it'l do I guess, or is it the Green computer generated forms for Initial and Core Assessments or CP Conferences or LAC etc ete. I know that the courts will not allow the use of the "Green" forms for Chronologies. The Green forms do not let you cut and paste very well and you can protect or unprotect the document?
Frameworki -
it's rubbish. The workflows are complicated and there's constant glitches in the system. There is no system on ours for an adoption file. I went on training and thought it would be great. In practcie I spend a huge amount of time trying to get the stupid thing to work and hardly get out to see the kids.
There is a lot of repetitiveness in the forms. If you have a child under 1 or over 15 they dont fit in the boxes! (Dont mean we put children in boxes, oh, you know what I mean.....!)
Well, we use RAISE and it seems as bad as the others, we all complain and management accept is it a poor system but seem to be committed. Case recording is not in chronological order, since our latest upgrade, so trying to look at recent history of events is very very time confusing. Care Plans, well does anyone understand them? certainly not the parents. I used to record everything now it is just significant events, as it takes so long. I still maintain my 'book' though, which is my evidence and has even accepted by the courts.
While I acknowledge that a framework could improve social work focus and recording my experience is that ICS is cumbersome and diverts rather than improves focus. I would like to see more scope for progress to be noted rather than the current format of lengthy snapshots which are too often out-of-date as soon as work can be undertaken to address risks and needs.
If it could be simplified so that Risks and Needs are balanced with Protective Factors the balance of statutory power and enabling and empowering could be clearly recorded, using the legal frameworks and social work reflective skills. This would allow social workers to demonstrate professional skills, clearly identify trigger points for statutory interventions, and look back through a process which has clearly identified aims, working in partnerships with clearly delineated lines of responsibility, jointly and separately, with service users and partner agencies.
This emphasis on professionalism would also shift the media emphasis from expectations that social workers are responsible for other people's behaviour. Prescriptive formatted computer pathways fudge focus as they are too detailed and therefore too often ask for irrelevant detail. Every case is different but they all entail addressing risks and meeting unmet needs.
I'm new to this country as well to the county I'm working for. In regards to ICS, over all I find it inappropriate for the work I do. I am a Social Worker in a Disabled Children's Team. It is a struggle to fill in the forms because they aren't appropriate in many ways for the children I work for. There are things that aren't revelent and much that isn't concidered in regards to this population of children. The forms are tooo long and like others feel tied to the computer when I should be out visiting the young people and their families. I find the work repatitive and there isn't the ability to allow for any form of creativitivy to allow me to document as a professional. I along with others, feel that our training, being treated as professionals and allowing to use our experience and knowledge on ICS extemely weak. I don't have a clue as to whomever was involved in the design of ICS but is very clear that they don't have to use the system but are not Social Workers or Family and Child Workers. From what I have read from others in this dialoge it isn't even being used the same through out the country. Wasn't this part of why we are all supposedly using ICS?
My Authority uses CareFirst 6 and trying to complete any of the reports, case recordings etc is a nightmare! For a Case recording that may be just to record that a phone was made but no one was in an a voice message was left would take about ten minutes to input and print out 3 sheets of paper.
Case Conference Reports are horrendous, I don't know where to begin. The boxes to type in a tiny (we will end up with eyesight problems) they don't allow you to to type in enough words so the only option is to type 'please see attached sheet.' A lot of the questions don't make any sense or are repetative. All the dates of the case recordings done on the family are shown as a print out on the conference report so you may have 5 A4 sheets listing dates of day to day recordings!! The reports also don't have a child protection plan on them - great thinking! - so we have to cut and paste from our old reports and attach it as an additional sheet. The format is appalling and as now a report has to be written on each child you may have a 25 page report plus additional sheets of paper for each child.
My colleague went to conference on 5 children in a family and had a 25 page report on each child plus an additional 10 pages. That's 175 pages to read at the start of a conference as we can't send reports out in advance. Which is another stupid thing, the report asks 'have you shared the report with other professionals' and gives a yes or no tick box. It would be good to enter 'no because we are not allowed to under our procedures.'
The old style report was about 15 pages, was straight forward, read like a story, outlined the risk, had a risk analysis and child protection plan and recommendation from the social worker. These ones need scrapping, fast.
Hi. I'm a senior practitioner with a strong view that ICS is unsafe.
Information gets lost and people struggle to navigate the screens. There are no clear hazards or risk links and risk assessment tools are poor being based on health and safety models and not recognising isues in protection of vulnerable people.
Updating the system is problematic and (for example) addresses are often out of date because the system does not recognise new builds or out of area places. there is no immediate manual overide for these circumstances. Other information inputing has similar difficulties meaning the record is not accurate - sometimes dangerously so.
I also believe there is a health and safety issue for workers with the small font and poor layout. this is a simple and obvious defect which should never have been allowed past first base. There are many good models for layouts and webbased pages - why is ICS so lamentable as to induce ill health. workers are suffering eyestrain, headaches and difficulty reading reports on or off screen.
As a positve, early communication problems from the underlying existing database are much reduced although some real stubborn cases refuse to mend. On the whole things are pulling through better.
As workers become more familiar with the system problems reduce. I worry this masks real core issues tho. Workers develop workarounds - unsafe at times - and an accurate picture does not seem to get through to the developers. Several cushioning layers od feedback do not actually help resolve matters. Whenever possible developers should speak to frontline workers (go find them do not accept the compliant chosen presented to you) . If a local authority seems reluctant to let you go out there, be concerned.
ICS is here to stay and I wish I could be more positive but a real overhaul is needed. I know this starts from DCSF but LA executives need to rethink too. Developers need to question more and not accept mangers perspective over the ground swell of user opinion. On a recent Liquid Logic day -very useful by the way - almost everyone was a manager, many a couple of levels above or to the side of frontline working. More of these days with more real practitioners would be very helpful. It also highlighted that a number of issues are local and more dialogue is needed so we can address this and not be stuck in a local rut because senior managers are hiding their role in the problems workers face..
DK: My Authority uses CareFirst 6 and trying to complete any of the reports, case recordings etc is a nightmare! For a Case recording that may be just to record that a phone was made but no one was in an a voice message was left would take about ten minutes to input and print out 3 sheets of paper. Case Conference Reports are horrendous, I don't know where to begin. The boxes to type in a tiny (we will end up with eyesight problems) they don't allow you to to type in enough words so the only option is to type 'please see attached sheet.' A lot of the questions don't make any sense or are repetative. All the dates of the case recordings done on the family are shown as a print out on the conference report so you may have 5 A4 sheets listing dates of day to day recordings!! The reports also don't have a child protection plan on them - great thinking! - so we have to cut and paste from our old reports and attach it as an additional sheet. The format is appalling and as now a report has to be written on each child you may have a 25 page report plus additional sheets of paper for each child. My colleague went to conference on 5 children in a family and had a 25 page report on each child plus an additional 10 pages. That's 175 pages to read at the start of a conference as we can't send reports out in advance. Which is another stupid thing, the report asks 'have you shared the report with other professionals' and gives a yes or no tick box. It would be good to enter 'no because we are not allowed to under our procedures.' The old style report was about 15 pages, was straight forward, read like a story, outlined the risk, had a risk analysis and child protection plan and recommendation from the social worker. These ones need scrapping, fast.
dk, what do you mean you can't share the conference report with professionals beforehand?! are you serious? for what possible reason does your auhority give for implementing this rule? i'm shocked i really am