Hi all, 

I'm trying to gauge interest in the below and hope that some of you might have thoughts on it you're willing to share.

The Government intends to pilot social work practices next year in children's services. Practices would be responsible for the care of the children referred to them just as GPs are responsible for their practice population. The plan envisages each child being assigned a lead worker from a practice once they were taken into care by a local authority (which would retain responsibility for the progress of the care proceedings). The practice social worker would be an advocate for the child.

The Government is about to ask organisations for expressions of interest to run the pilots. Is anybody interested in bidding to run one of these or getting involved? What do people think of the plans generally? Is it something that could improve care, make services more accessible and create a system that better reflects the needs of looked after young people? Or does it sound like a case of reinventing the wheel?

Thanks

Dez

I was at a conference at the end of last year where Alistair Pettigrew of Lewisham Council, one of the proponents of practices, spoke up in favour of them. Anthony Douglas and Hilary Dawson were also strongly in favour of trying them, but social workers there were sceptical and felt that the practices would cherry pick cases and take too much resource leaving a dessicated rump service. Struck me they were being pessimistic. There's a few links at this blog on your site http://www.communitycare.co.uk/blogs/social-work-blog/2007/12/social-care-practices-grounds.html

Dez, This sounds good in principle and would wish the SW best of luck with the new pilot scheme. At least that makes someoneis responsible within the LA for making sure children get support for IEP and link it up with the schools they can make sure the schools do not mind tapping into the budget for special help . Then this will lead to children not being made a referral to LA SS for not achieving when it is likely to be dyslexia or ADHD . This is not picked up on , and an allegation made that the parents do not bother to help with reading ,homework etc or have poor parenting . Lookforward to seeing this work advocacy 1st class ,then the child can say I had a good SW she got me this access to education and college also a access to health sector. The GP's going to love this a SW coming in telling them how to spend their budget . Should be brilliant to see all the multi-agency staff work together.

As a major principle in this is going to be ensuring continuity ie. minimising the change of workers, this is surely an acknowledgement of the importance of retaining staff. How do you retain staff? Well it must have something to do with pay and working conditions. These new agencies will presumably need to be funded to provide this for their workers. The local authority will still be responsible for the children so will still have to provide services if the new agencies can't/won't take a child on. So, quite clearly there is an inbuilt propensity to "cherry pick". SW's will find them attractive to work for so the agency will have a good pick of practitioners, the agency will need to provide evidence of its success so will try and avoid difficult cases. If it is recognised that the problem needs greater resources this money could be ring fenced to provide a better service in the present structure. There does not seem to have been an argument made as to why this is not possible, just an ideological thrust that outsourcing is better.

Hi gchdevon,

I see your point and understand why some would be concerned about a two-tier system being created where 'independent' practices cherry pick the 'best' (whether that be easiest or most challenging) cases and leave the local authority to pick up the pieces for the rest. However, I think the way it is envisaged they will work is for practices to take on the entire care-planning function for all LAC in an area, so the day to day management of all those cases would be transferred to them.

If you're interested in finding out more I'd suggest checking out the DCFS prospectus on it by clicking on the link on this story from Community Care's website: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2008/05/19/108231/dcsf-produces-fresh-details-on-social-work-practices.html

 

 

This type of practice has been going on for a while in Europe,  as a newly qualified social worker i have no problem with with the idea as long it is closely watched,it would be benifical for the young person to know that they have the same  social worker they moment they come come into the care system to the moment they leave. We need to know if it will work   

 

Every Child Matters puts improved outcomes for children and young people at the centre of all activity within children's services. If social work practices are successful in putting an end to the ‘revolving door' of social workers that young people in care often complain of, few would argue that the outcome for those children would not improve.

But what about the impact on the other vulnerable children who are still the direct responsibility of local authorities, such as those who are adopted, or in short-term care placements? Professionals I have spoken to outline this as their main concern regarding the idea.

One director of children's services in southern England argued that those same outcomes - less bureaucracy, more enduring relationships between social workers and children, and improved staff morale - could be achieved by changing work practices within local authorities. "That's the challenge for us," she said, adding that her authority was unlikely to be applying to take part in the pilot.

The argument about ‘cherry picking' is one I haven't heard before - gchdevon, are social workers really that mercenary that they would discriminate against the most ‘difficult' cases, i.e. the most vulnerable children, in the hope of leaving with a bigger wage packet at the end of the month? Isn't that challenge of helping people in the most adverse circumstances why many entered the profession in the first place? In any case, it still isn't clear that social work practices would have the right to pick and choose cases. Dez is probably closer to the mark on this one.

There is little that other Organisations do (i.e. private fostering organisations) that local authorities do not do / can not do just as well or better. So, for Children in Care it must be questioned whether social workers working 9am - 5pm is really the most efficient way to meet such children and young peoples needs. Whilst I accept that 24-hour cover is provided it is not by the named social worker - yet we expect 'good' parents to be there 24/7.

The Government is right to look at ways to provide more consistency and stability but I don't think that there are any easy answers nor that the answers lies 'out there' somewhere. Local Authorities are tasked with enormous responsibilities in providing high level care for some of the most vulnerable and challenging children and young people in their care - they have got to do better, so perhaps starting with better pay, conditions and service, training, support and supervision would be no bad thing.

 

My thoughts on the subject is that it will cause a number of socialworkers to move into these new style services as many will be attracted by the better wages and conditions...

I think that it is wrong that profit can be created by the Looked After Children population I am unsure if this is the best way forward to achieve better outcomes maybe I am one of those sceptical social workers.

 

 

I too feel uncomfortable with the idea that profit/income could be generated by these new enterprises, but doesn't the fact that this will be linked to improving the outcomes for vulnerable children make it justifiable? Ultimately that's what we're all here to do and that's what everyone is always banging on about - results driven practices and services.

As anyone who has been closely following the government’s underlying motivation behind this will know this is a political initiative which has little to do with improving the outcomes of children in public care and everything to do with the continuing privatization and dismantling of local authority social work. Why do I say this? Firstly the Government knows there would be serious resistance to performance related pay if payment by results were suddenly introduced into local authority social work. Yes I know the framework is already in place for this and yes some employers have dabbled with it, but it is politically much easier to start peeling off and dividing the profession by the back door. Secondly does anyone seriously think that social work practices are going to be exempt from the LAC paperwork or that the local authorities commissioning practices will reduce caseloads?  Social Work Practices will be bound up in as much red tape as GP’s currently are and with up to 60% of their wages by year 4 dependence on outcomes, its looks to me that the social workers in these practices will be working round the clock to guarantee a decent income. Thirdly can any one find an academic who lives and breaths the study of the LAC population who supports social work practices?  Leading respected figures in the academic world such as Professor Gillian Schofield, struggle to find a shred of empirical evidence to support them although she supports much of the thrust of the rest of the legislation. Fourthly ask yourselves why the Government will not address the constraints placed on local authority social workers now to develop stronger relationships with children and cut down on paper work – answer because it wants us in local government to fail and has a political strategy to run down municipal services to act as commissioners rather than providers. Fifthly look at who are the supporters of this initiative, its certainly not us as social workers, or BASW, or the LGA, or even the Association of Children’s Directors who have major concerns – its all the private consultancies waiting in the wings and money grabbing private equity companies who will eventually swallow up these GP style practices because the little fish will not survive in the big sea without economies of scale.  The question for me is not what we as social workers think about social work practices and the pilots - it’s what we should do to stop them becoming a reality?