Submission of the Association of Directors
of Social Services (ADSS) to the Education and Skills Select Committee
in Relation to the Inquiry on Every Child Matters
1. Introduction
1.1 The
ADSS represents the Directors of Social Services in England, Wales
and Northern Ireland. Directors of Social Services are responsible
through the activities of their departments in local authorities
with social services responsibilities for the well being, protection
and care of vulnerable people including children in need and their
families, older people, people with disabilities and people with
mental health problems.
1.2 The ADSS works through
a committee structure. The Children and Families Committee works
to promote better care and upbringing for children in need, in
liaison with organisations in the statutory and voluntary sector
and maintains close links with government. The ADSS has a wealth
of evidence regarding the provision of services for children in
need and a clear view on the future of children's services.
1.3 ADSS welcomes the
opportunity to submit evidence to the inquiry set up by the Education
and Skills Select Committee into "Every Child Matters".
2. The Children Act 2004
2.1
The Association has been closely involved in the progress of
proposals for the development of the children's agenda from the
earliest stages, both on our own and in partnership with key agencies
in the statutory, voluntary and community sectors. Though there
have been significant developments in the year since the Association's
response to the Green Paper, "Every Child Matters" (ECM)
was written, the principles it contains still encapsulate our
position on many of the key issues. Some of the core messages
which still pertain are:
- Government should set out a national
framework, national standards and national inspection processes
- We welcome the key role for local
government and local partners in this Paper. Nationally prescriptive
structural change will not achieve local change or of itself solve
policy, practice and safeguarding issues
- The focus should be on outcomes
not models and methods of delivery
- Local solutions to the expectations
and requirements of government are likely to be more successful
in achieving cultural and behavioural as well as organisational
change
- Every relevant organisation should
be tied into the process, not just two local government services
- there needs to be appropriate prescription to ensure this happens
- There are serious risks that a rushed
process will undermine the achievement of the vision and increase
the risks to children rather than improve them
- Time is needed - to test and evaluate
new models of working - and to base change on evidence informed
practice
- Current resources in the system
are insufficient and it is not safe to assume that it is possible
to create new resources through the proposals in the paper - in
fact the proposals will cost more at least in the short term
- There needs to be a major focus
on the workforce - immediately as well as in the medium and long
term
- Political leadership and engagement
is crucial at local as well as national level.
3. The Duty to Cooperate
3.1
From the outset ADSS and other partners have been keen to ensure
that all the key stakeholders have a legal duty to collaborate
placed upon them. The rationale for this is that only through
prescription can we expect to achieve nationally prescribed standards.
If some crucial partners have the autonomy and choose not to collaborate
it is possible that the best efforts of the other partners locally
will be compromised. This would impact adversely on the experience
of children in that area.
3.2
The Children Bill has now completed its passage through Parliament
and schools have not been named on the face of it with a duty
to cooperate. General Practitioners are also exempt.
3.3
ADSS considers that despite this, there are other powerful drivers
which will help to ensure the compliance across the country by
schools which will be necessary to deliver the outcomes stipulated
as the aspiration for every child. Legislation is already in
place (Education Act 2002) which places a duty on schools to act
in a way that safeguards children and promotes their welfare.
Schools are also required to act in a way that promotes community
cohesion. Failure to cooperate could place schools in breach of
these Acts.
3.4
Another key incentive where it is necessary will be the Integrated
Inspection Framework requiring schools to demonstrate the contribution
they make to the achievement of children in their area of the
five outcomes which underpin the vision of ECM.
3.5
The inclusion proposals, unveiled by the Secretary of State recently,
for all local schools to share the allocation of hard to place
pupils between them are welcome. Where it works as suggested this
should ensure that there is not a concentration of previously
excluded children in a few schools, compounding discipline problems.
It is not though clear what compulsion there will be if local
agreement cannot be reached and where oversubscribed schools continue
to refuse a share of these children because all their places have
previously been allocated.
4. Information Sharing and Unique
Identifying Number
4.1
Good decisions about the necessary intervention for children
can only be taken in the light of sufficient information about
their circumstances. Decisions about Victoria Climbié were
made on the basis of partial information, rather than a comprehensive
picture made up of information held by different agencies. It
is a familiar pattern that the pieces of information available
about a child only become pooled following serious injury or death.
This must call into question the clarity of the current legislation
and the thresholds which currently apply for sharing information
between agencies when there is concern about a child. It is quite
clear that where there are specific child protection or youth
justice concerns, agencies may share what would otherwise be confidential
information. It is very often the case that initial information
is either unclear or falls short of those trigger points and unless
there is consent, agencies will take the view that they are bound
by data protection or human rights legislation to maintain confidentiality.
Different interpretations by lawyers make decision taking in this
area more complex and risky for frontline practitioners.
4.2
Specific decisions in this area reflect potentially conflicting
underlying principles, each of which should hold in different
circumstances. On the one hand it must be possible to share information
about children without consent which will help to protect them
from harm and on the other, children and families have a right
to confidentiality and to privacy in relation to personal information.
The current balance is set more in favour of the latter, sometimes
to the detriment of the former.
4.3
Although there are no predictive indicators which will reliably
identify in advance which children will be harmed, there are risk
factors which are commonly associated with abuse and the presence
of these in a family may contribute to a justifiable lowering
of the threshold. Mental health issues and domestic violence may
be just two of these. Decisions about whether and what information
to share will always be a matter of professional judgement, based
on an assessment of all the circumstances, though clearer guidance
is necessary.
4.4
ADSS welcomes the learning that the pilot areas on information
sharing and assessment are developing and would advocate a thorough
evaluation from all of these to allow the successful models to
be ascertained and applied. The reasons for success also need
to be made explicit because it could be the model, the application
of it in local circumstances or the leadership which has delivered
the benefit.
4.5
In relation to the unique identifier for children ADSS is aware
that this has been the subject of thorough research and consideration.
It is acknowledged that there are strong reservations in some
quarters about the use of the NHS number both because of confidentially
issues and for technical reason. There also continue to be doubts
about the use of the National Insurance (NI) number as there are
reported to be in the region of 70 million issued, considerably
above the total number of the population, compromising any claim
to be unique. Tellingly Victoria Climbié would not have
had a NI number.
4.6
Whatever the outcome, it is crucial that a credible explanation
is offered for the choice in order to gain backing and ownership
and that robust arrangements are put in place to ensure that all
children are covered.
5. The NHS Priority for Children
in Need
5.1
The Kennedy Report into the paediatric cardiac surgical service
in Bristol in 2001 indicated that it was "an account in which
vulnerable children were not a priority, either in Bristol or
throughout the NHS". It is absolutely clear that the full
engagement of health partners is crucial to the effective delivery
of services to the most vulnerable children. The importance and
role of health professionals, especially GPs in promoting the
wellbeing and protection of young children and those with disabilities
cannot be underestimated. Children are not the largest group of
service users in the NHS and child protection work does not have
a high profile among paediatricians. Following the publicity around
the role of paediatricians in the Victoria Climbié Inquiry
there has been additional concern that even fewer doctors will
be attracted into this work.
5.2
Given that the responsibility for children's health issues remains
with the Department of Health (DH) while the Department for Education
and Skills (DfES) holds the wider brief for children's services,
it essential that there are consistent messages and priorities
across government. At a local level there is an expectation of
seamless integration across all the relevant services for children.
The document from the DH on the implementation of the National
Service Framework for Children is due to be published in December
and it is important that the messages contained in it cohere both
with those in the document written by DfES and to be launched
on December 1 2004, "Every Child Matter: Change for Children"
and with the DfES five year education strategy.
6. Resources for Children's Services
6.1
The vision in the Seebohm Report was a preventative one with universal
access at the point of need but it became diluted with scarce
resources focused increasingly tightly on the relatively few with
very high levels of need. Access to services became defined by
eligibility criteria, so derided in the Victoria Climbié
Inquiry Report.
6.2
Historically there has been a significant gap between the funding
available to all agencies to deliver children's services and the
amount needed. This has been evident for children's social care
services in the surveys undertaken annually by the ADSS, the Local
Government Association (LGA) and the Society of Treasurers.
6.3
Broadening the constituent population that can have early access
to preventative services has to be reflected in the resource base
available to all key stakeholders in the childcare sector. ADSS
has for several years been asking for a review to be commissioned
to examine future social care trends and the level of resourcing
needed to ensure that local authorities and other agencies can
provide the high quality services which are necessary for children
and to which all agencies aspire. This would be along the lines
of the review carried out by Derek Wanless for the NHS in 2001.
This has not so far been forthcoming and there is a real possibility
that it would reveal a significant mismatch between need and resources.
6.4
ADSS with LGA is in the meantime undertaking a piece of work
to ascertain the additional costs involved in implementing successfully
the changes that will be required by the Children Act 2004 and
the change programmes being instigated in some representative
authorities.
7. Safeguarding Children
7.1
Safeguarding will only happen effectively if it is everyone's
business. Sustainable change will only be possible if communities
are involved in identifying the issues that need to be addressed
locally and in ensuring that the necessary outcomes for children
are secured.
7.2
The reform agenda now underway seeks both to enable the earlier
identification of children in need with a view to preventative
action and also to ensure targeted services are made available
to the most vulnerable children. Schools have always had and will
continue to have a crucial role in the identification of children
whose needs are not being met, partly as a result of their close
contact with a huge proportion of children aged between 4 and
16 years.
7.3
There is a risk that with a renewed focus on the provision of
more childcare for primary school children and the emphasis on
children's centres that the intensive services for the most needy
children will slip from view. While ADSS supports the thrust of
preventative effort there will always be a need for highly specialised
services for those most at risk of harm.
8. Cultural Attitudes Towards Children
and Young People
8.1 There
are potentially conflicting views in the way children and young
people are regarded both by the public and by different parts
of government with different responsibilities. This is reflected
in the polarisation of children and young people as at one extreme:
young, innocent and in need of protection and at the other of
young people who are out of control, violent and responsible for
much crime. There is strong support for the stance that values
all children and young people throughout their childhood and adolescence
and a commitment to translating this into action for all. This
must include those whose early experiences have contributed to
a lifestyle of exclusion and anti-social behaviour as well as
other groups like Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children. If the
primary duty of Youth Offending Teams is to prevent re-offending,
there should also be a focus on promoting well-being. Similarly
this should also be a major concern for those looking after young
people in custodial settings.
9. The Children and Young People's
Workforce
9.1
ADSS recognises the centrality of a strong, valued and skilled
workforce to the delivery of modernised services for children
and their families. The high vacancy rates for children's social
workers both in the field and residential settings indicates the
scale of recruitment issues, leading to a culture of reliance
on agency workers. The recruitment campaigns have made an impact
and have helped to promote a more balanced and comprehensive view
of what is involved in social care and in working with children
and young people. The recent announcement from the General Social
Care Council (GSCC) of the increase in numbers of students entering
social work training is another positive indicator. Between 2000
and 2003 there was a 33% increase of those starting social work
programmes with a 12% increase on the numbers embarking on the
social work degree course over the previous year.
9.2
ADSS also welcomes the work that has been done over the past
year to develop a common core of skills which are necessary for
every professional whose work involves direct contact with children
and young people. Because most children live in families this
should include skills in communicating with parents and basic
knowledge of mental health, learning disability, substance misuse
and domestic violence. This is just as relevant for professionals
who may work substantially with adults like GPs or the police.
Foundation modules should be required for a whole range of professionals
regardless of whether they will ultimately work in the statutory,
voluntary or independent sectors. This will also ensure that when
professionals work together in multi-disciplinary settings there
will be shared skills and approaches to children. In addition
there will need to be discrete training for each profession so
that specialist skills are available to meet the range of needs
that children and their families have.
9.3
ADSS supports the progress towards a full Children, Young People
and Families Workforce Development Council which, when established,
will strengthen the children's workforce by ensuring that all
children's workers are appropriately skilled and qualified. It
will promote greater integration across the workforce and help
to ensure that better support is available to families and carers.
10. Conclusion
10.1
There has been enormous progress over the past twelve months in
setting out the new agenda and clarifying the legislative base,
the structures and frameworks that will underpin the changes.
As ever, it is the successful implementation of these plans in
every locality across the country that will determine whether
the lives of individual children are changed as a result. That
is the challenge that faces all of us in the immediate future.
Penny Thompson
John Coughlan
Joint Chairs ADSS Children and Families
Committee
22.11.04
| 
