I think you're right snorky - it seems to be if something goes wrong - introduce a database! Do people have faith that it will be any better than previous systems?

I am FOR electronic databases!

I work in children's social care and I know the current frustrations around admin e.g. duplicating forms amongst siblings, duplicating ID reference numbers and dates of birth on the top of every single piece of paper you touch etc. The current paper based system isn't perfect either.

I know that electronic databases will ultimately lead to better outcomes for children in comparison to sticking with paper files and bespoke Microsoft word templates (especially when considering that paper files have to be kept for 75 years).

Electronic databases are a great tool for case management. However, as with any database (electronic or paper based), the design should be seen as the most important factor if it is to be usable by practitioners and not computer whiz kids. Read on, I'm sure you will agree.

I have seen many of the ICS products available. Unfortunately most of them have been very slow, clunky and unintuitive to a point where as a user I am disappointed and frustrated. Some typical experiences I have had that make electronic databases look bad include: -

* Having to wait more than 30 seconds for a page of information to load

* duplication! e.g. having to add the school at the contact stage, then again as an involvement, then again as a service only to be told the original start date isn't valid and you have to now navigate all over the show to untick a box before you can continue.

* Chronology not in chronological order (what’s that about?)

* Bad navigation e.g. "I'm sorry but that piece of information is in the CLA module, you can't save this page until you have been there to update the legal status... p.s. if you leave this page all of your work so far will be LOST... have a nice day"

* Having to repeat or copy and paste pieces of information from a contact, onto a referral, onto the initial, onto the core, onto the child’s plan etc. etc. etc. and then repeat the same for 4 siblings

I could go on...

These are not electronic database issues, these are fundamental database design flaws. If I had only ever driven a car that had no seats I would say that cars are a bad idea. However a car with seats in comparison is very useful. In this case I don’t have a problem with cars, but I do have a problem with bad car design! Remember a lot of the ICS designers/developers are not practitioners and the DCFS compliancy doesn’t include user satisfaction as scoring criteria against every compliancy e.g. you might be able to copy an assessment but how easy is it to actually do it from a users point of view and then navigate to update it on the sibling’s record. This is where ICS is having difficulty and practitioners are getting cheesed off.

In summary… keep an open mind about electronic databases before jumping on the "NO COMPUTERS" band wagon because there are some very good ones out there.

My most recent ICS experience was using a new system that is very very intuitive. It guided me through the processes as per the book (without me needing the book), promoted thinking outside of the box (e.g. outcome focused planning) and removed duplication allowing me more time for direct work. It is that easy to use that we have managed to progress a case to core without receiving any training what so ever. The system I am talking about is an absolute model of good database design and other providers could learn here about making a usable system that practitioners will embrace. It is like using a “TOMY - My first ICS product”

That's an interesting post paul. However, I'm worried that the very nature of any database will lead social workers to change how they work, making it about filling in the various fields in the database rather than working with the individual.

Thanks for the reply Willis,

It depends upon your definition of a "database". At the moment we already use databases to help us manage case paperwork, I'm referring to our paperfiles. Our paper files are split into sections (e.g. contacts, assessments, careplans) and we work largely with templates provided by the local authority and central government. In my opinion a paperfile is an inefficient database filled with inconsistances and duplication (not in all cases but in many). And worse, when a paperfile becomes too big another is created, and another... ending up with a child's life split across 3 or 4 files. Then as other agencies/teams become involved they create their own paper files (in numerous geographical locations) and the inconsistances and duplications grow with each new involvement.

A good electronic database design (the ultimate ICS) should stop the practitioner having to think about computer usage. The ICS is not intended however to stop the practitioner thinking full stop. As soon as a system becomes purely about filling in fields it is a box ticking exercise and I agree with your comment completely. My vision of ICS is that it is a single electronic alternative to our current paper files. A well designed ICS should allow the practitioner to be flexible in their approach to improving the quality of life for a child/young person without becoming hung up about filling in the boxes or limited about the options available.

We have recently had a big push at our Authority on using a shared case notes area across all sites and already the benefits of everybody sharing one file are showing. Family support workers are able to read social worker's notes and vice versa. Family first (our CP/CLA prevention team) have also been given access to the shared notes area and assessments. People are now much more excited about getting a good practitioner tool. A fringe benefit has also been that people are taking more ownership for the shared electronic file and core person information is more up to date e.g. dad's new mobile number, other professionals involved and their contact details etc.

The last ICS we piloted was as you described, it was rigid and inflexible and tried to automate social care (virtually impossible because every child has completely different needs). It was also clunky and made administration very difficult and time consuming (in comparison to writing on good old fashioned paper). In my opinion it was also near impossible to enter a care plan without an advanced degree in IT. We also found that the outputs generated after persisting with loading case details were completely useless. These weaknesses were not down to database systems in general but down to very very bad design by that particular provider.

Now that we are testing a new product we are very optimistic that we have an ICS that will allow case files to be easy to manage without limiting the work that can be done with children and families. It is my opinion that in 5 years time new practitioners will wonder how we ever did the job without an ICS. A bit like trying to imagine not having a mobile phone.

Somebody should be responsible for making sure systems available to Authorities are not only complient, but also easy to use and not rigid in a way that tries to influence poor practise or generalise the needs of children.

Its good to see some of the systems seem to be working. I have to say that my experience and most of my colleagues is very frustrating. Generally the picture is that it is much more time consuming with workers sat at their desk for long periods this means less time spent with children and their parents/carers. Case loads are reducing and thresholds going up meaning less people get a service. We collect so much more information its difficult to find what you are looking for and to make sense of it, its difficult to get a coherent picture. The outputs are long and complicated, not suitable for Court and confusing for customers and we still need paper files for the signed documents. I think it will be many years before we see any benefits. It needs a radical overall is needed to reduce and improve the systems

Thanks for the question -

 Just wanting to share my views on ICS. Three points really:

1 - It would be easier and more relevant if there were drop-down 'prompt' menus instead of boxes asking the same question in half a dozen different ways.

2 - The amount of time spent detailing a snap-shot of the problem issues could be better spent on a solution-focussed approach, recognising that the original assessment should be out of date as soon as it is completed.

3 - It is intrusive where questions do not relate to issues requiring social work intervention.

The ICS framework as it stands currently is too rigid in its tram-lining of social work assessment of issues. It is not easily readable, with no multi-agency action points identified for follow-up at the assessment stage.  It should be a guide to good practice and not prescriptive, facilitating recording of social work interventions instead of taking up more time than social work itself.

Computer systems have changed the way we think and learn but, in my view, we, and service users, deserve more respect than the current format allows. Having said that, in principle I think ICS is a good thing, but there is more to social work than this and the current proformas take up too much time.

Hi shared thoughts

It's hard to imagine any complex public service not operating through some sort of database these days. So it is really just a question of adapting it so it works in the most useful way for social workers and service users 

Data bases, such as those being developed for ICS, are absolutely necessary but the current batch are unwieldy, confusing management tools.

They are not comprehensive enough e.g. they cover necessary ICS records and data but do not include the vast array of other processes and forms, which are usually located in a range of different places, on people's computers, on notice boards, in filing cabinets or in briefcases.

Critically, these systems have little, if any, process/procedure incorporated into them; they don't inform and support practitioners on the due processes, they offer no guidance, except confusing 'Process Maps'.

I am dumbfounded that government have left LA's to develop their own systems for ICS, leaving the market open to software programmers, who know little if anything about the profession, to create monsters.

As they stand, these systems do not help, except in counting and ticking boxes. We have a long road to tread before they are really useful.  One of the first tricks would be to make them feel like they are 'ours' rather than 'theirs', to incorporate all necessary records/forms and, crucially, advice and help with procedures and guidance.

Don't hold your breath! 

Anyone tried filling in a LAC document??  38 pages and that's blank!  Try doing it for a family of 7 and then explain to a 10 yr old why their life is in a box.  ICs is about government not knowing what it is doing.  Lets get New Labour to find three and half hours to complete one form.