Looked-after Children - Children, Schools and Families Committee Contents


Memorandum submitted by the National Centre for Excellence in Residential Child Care (NCERCC)

INTRODUCTION TO NCERCC

  NCERCC is a major collaborative initiative to improve standards of practice and outcomes for children and young people in residential childcare in England.

  NCERCC is a principal point of reference and facilitates dialogue across the whole residential sector of England. NCERCC works collaboratively with key stakeholders: providers, practitioners, commissioners, researchers, regulators, children and young people are involved it its work.

  Feedback from users indicates that NCERCC is fulfilling its key objective of impacting significantly on the sector and thus on the life chances of children and young people in residential care.

  NCERCC provides

  Up-to-date information on significant policy, research and practice developments:

    —  Opportunities to exchange and promote good practice.

    —  The means to highlight issues critical to the well-being and life chances of children in residential child care.

    —  Access to practical tools and materials for service and practice improvement.

    Website: www.ncb.org.uk/ncercc

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

FOUNDATION DOCUMENT 1

1.  WHAT WORKS IN RESIDENTIAL CHILD CARE?

  http://www.ncb.org.uk/Page.asp?originx_3878zp_281027214486h24p_2007534826u

  What works in Residential Child Care, a summary of decades of research, address the two prominent themes in the literature: what makes a difference for residential child care practice and what makes a difference for placements.

What works for Residential Child Care practice?

  These fundamentals that need to be present in Residential Child Care practice and thus form the basis for workforce development and regulation.

    —  Culture—perform best with concordant societal, formal and belief goals, strong positive staff cultures and strong positive children's cultures or at least that did not undermine the work of the home.

    —  Homes which meet the personal, social, health and educational needs were much more likely to be safe places for children.

    —  Theories for practice—a clear theory or philosophy is essential.

    —  Clarity of purpose—this should be found in the Statement of Purpose and define the primary task—What are we here for? What are we doing?

    —  Leadership—clear and coherent leadership is fundamental.

    —  Relationships—between staff and children—the hallmark is feeling cared for with understanding, sympathetic, comforting, consistent and individual attention.

    —  Relationships between children—peer relationships are a core component needing positive, successful skill and understanding of formal and informal group work from adults.

    —  Relationships with family members—working with the family "in mind"—not necessarily direct work but always aiming to strengthening connections.

    —  Countering institutionalisation—daily life is built from an active attempt to produce systems that best match children's wants and needs.

    —  Therapeutic support—the "therapeutic" in daily life and by access to specialist services—"Therapy".

    —  Staff involvement—where staff feel empowered

What works for Residential Child Care placements?

  There are better outcomes when needs are matched to placement.

  There are three groups of needs but as every child needs a unique way of having their needs met so there is no one thing we can say is Residential Child Care. Any local, regional or national strategy for Residential Child Care will need to ensure that all three tiers of intensity are available so that matching of needs to placements can occur. It is concerning that Price Waterhouse Coopers in their study of Children's Homes and Fostering http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RW74.pdf.

  none of the highlighted local authorities had conducted the necessary audits of need and placement activity that would underpin a placements strategy. NCERCC knows of few local authorities who have conducted such audits but those who have are ensuring that their strategy will ensure access to all three tiers.

(a)  Children with relatively simple or straightforward needs

  These children need either short-term or relatively "ordinary" substitute care.

  Why are they a child in care?

  Their families may be stable and supportive but there has been a crisis or difficulty and they need short term, days or weeks, of support.

  What do they need?

  Good quality daily care and support.

  How will they behave?

  There can be a reasonable expectation that the child will return home and resume their usual lifestyle.

  Where will they be placed?

  Usually fostering, but there are many children who have preference for residential child care or are unsuited for fostering and so can go to a short break or short stay mainstream children's home.

  What is a short break children's home?

  Short breaks are often part of a wider package of care, which can involve health and education services and other agencies and are for children with learning disabilities and allow carers and families to "take a break". The children will have permanent and substantial physical and /or learning disabilities but will not be very challenging in their behaviour or require expert nursing care.

  Short stay mainstream children's homes

  Short stay mainstream children's homes provide time-limited care for children. These homes may serve different purposes; a child may need looking after because of unplanned or unforeseen events; or they may be waiting for a long-term place to become open; or it may be for assessment.

(b)  Children or families with deep rooted, complex or chronic needs with a long history of disability, difficulty or disruption, including abuse or neglect

  These children require more than simply a substitute family care.

  Why are they a child in care?

  There may be longer times when these children need stabilising, from weeks and months to years. They may have been a child in care before.

  What do they need?

  They need individualised care in a safe and containing environment, provided by grown ups who are consistently thoughtful about each child's care. There will be clear boundaries and limits with some negotiated flexibility.

  How will they behave?

  Their behaviour may be unsafe, self-harming or unpredictable and need to be managed in order to stabilise their lives.

  Where will they be placed?

  Long term mainstream children's homes

  These homes provide care for a child for a substantial period of time, possibly until the child reaches adulthood. Most homes provide children with a key worker who will work with a child to ensure that their needs are being met in line with their Care Plan. This will include how a child's emotional, educational, social and health needs will be met. There will also be consideration given to the contact a child will have with their family and friends. These homes tend to provide care for groups of children and a key task for workers within the home is balancing the needs of each individual child with the needs of the group.

  Children's homes for children with disabilities

  Some children with disabilities have complex needs resulting from disability rather than a lack of parenting capacity. They require specialised long-term care that can provide care, education and health needs often in one place.

  Residential Special Schools

  Residential Special Schools provide an enriched educational experience but also address children's disability, and/or social, emotional psychological and behavioural needs. Residential Special Schools can be children's homes too if young people live there more than just term time. There will specialist staffing and provision.

(c)  Children with extensive, complex and enduring needs compounded by very difficult behaviour who require more specialised and intensive resources

  These children with "high cost: low incidence needs" require particular care and specialist settings. The children have serious psychological needs and behavioural problems that can overshadow other goals.

  Why are they a child in care?

  Their needs may have been obvious from an early age and be the result of physical or sexual abuse. They may be involved with Youth Justice or mental health teams.

  What do they need?

  Intensive support and treatment with care, education and health all on one site and directed to creating a change in the child's and families circumstances.

  How will they behave?

  They will find it hard to sit still, often easily be verbally and physically aggressive, unpredictable, irrational, or unable to reason and show little concern for others. They can be out of touch with their emotions and show little or no sense of guilt or apology.

  Where will they be placed?

  These children need a place with a therapeutic community, an adolescent mental health unit, a small "intensive care" residential setting, secure unit or occasionally a place that is just for them on their own but still residential child care.

  What is a Therapeutic Community?

  Within a clear set of boundaries concerning time, place and roles there will be very close relationships between children and grown ups with frequent sharing of information and open resolution of problems, tensions and conflicts. Daily life will be purposeful tasks—therapeutic, domestic, organisational, educational—and there will be a shared commitment to the goal of learning from the experience of living and/ or working together

  What is an adolescent psychiatric unit?

  The focus here is on health and they are often close to or part of hospitals. The staff are mostly nurses and doctors, but there are social workers and teachers too. Young people will have needs such as a psychiatric illness, eating disorder, suffering from post-traumatic stress, or complex conditions that may include learning difficulties and behavioural problems. Some have experienced abuse or have difficult family and social circumstances.

  What is a secure children's home?

  Secure Children's Homes are specialist residential resources offering a high quality of care, education, assessment and therapeutic work. These are the only children's homes allowed to lock doors to prevent children leaving. Such restriction of liberty is a serious matter and entry is only by having a legal order from a Court made to protect the child or the community.

  What is a one-bedded children's home?

  Some homes are specifically registered and designed to have just one child living in them. For some children, living with a group of other children is not the best way in which to meet their needs. They need to have the opportunity to have the specialist support that residential child care can provide, but without the complexities that group living might bring. Their placement will follow an assessment and be meeting a specific treatment or care need. A key difference between foster care and a one bedded home is that a team of staff are employed to work with the child in the children's home. The staff members do not live on site and go home at the end of their shift.

FOUNDATION DOCUMENT 2

Excellence in Residential Child Care

  http://www.ncb.org.uk/Page.asp?originx_5945eq_86679079225686b29o_2008481625c

  The seminar was an opportunity to map out a vision for residential child care, create a picture of what excellent residential care would look like and to identify which developments would need to be actively supported to deliver excellence for all young people.

  This report should be read as a companion to the report summarising the discussions that took place in the Autumn 2007 Children's Residential Network regional meetings, which is being published at the same time. http://www.ncb.org.uk/ncercc/ncercc%20news/ncercc_crn_full_report.pdf

  In this way NCERCC aims to provide a view of the sector as it is seen currently and the future developments needed.

  These two documents taken together are intended to provide a foundation for discussions deriving from Care Matters and the Children and Young Persons Bill. They have implications for workforce development.

  The high level invited participants to the seminar identified that there were four priority areas that need to be focussed on in order to achieve Excellence in Residential Child Care. These were:

    —  Clear Strategy for Care.

    —  Ensuring Stability of Placement.

    —  Good Career structure/qualifications (What should qualifications include?).

    —  Funding Follows Child.

Clear Strategy for Care

  It is imperative that all involved recognise the value of Residential Child Care. In order for the strategy to be successful there would need to be a national approach to Residential Child Care, and this requires support across all political parties.

  In addition to those responsible for Residential Child Care policy, practice and provision, there needs to be commitment from local neighbourhoods, communities, families and children and young people.

  A financial commitment from budget holders demonstrating the value placed on Residential Child Care is essential. The strategy may be unsuccessful if there is limited capacity and resources to commission and to provide good Residential Child Care services. There is a concern that venture capitalists may have a dominant and adverse effect on the development of a strategy for care.

  The strategy would need to be based on research identifying needs and potential provision. The outcome of this auditing should inform a ten-year plan with clear expectations and subsequently informing the flexibility and additional capacity required. The commissioning process should follow the format identified in Care Matters.

  Staff would need to be well trained and there would need to be consideration into how to ensure that "good" care staff are recruited.

Ensuring Stability of Placements

  Placement stability was identified as imperative for excellence in Residential Child Care. In order for this to be achieved for children and young people, there needs to be a thorough assessment of the placement needs of the individual. Placements must be planned and subsequently there must be choice in the available placements so that these needs can be met.

  There was recognition that a change in decision maker or commissioner may have an effect on the success of the strategy. All those involved and all structures need to be in congruence in order for placements to achieve stability. It is the meeting of needs which should define commissioning and funding.

Good Career Structure/qualifications (What should Qualifications Include?)

  There needs to be a thorough training in the theory and practice underpinning Residential Child Care and a recognised qualification. This qualification must be professional not vocational, recognising Residential Child Care as having its own theoretical framework and distinct child care practice.

  There must be reflective leadership and management and they must also have a training path. National Occupational Standards need to be linked with curriculum knowledge and activity.

  The profession needs to have national pay scales to reflect experience and qualifications. Research tells us that qualified professionals are motivated to remain in Residential Child Care.

  In order for this to be successful, specific organisations must be on board and in support of the strategy. It would need to be supported by Government, providers, CWDC and Academic Bodies. It will require explicit attention to developing an increased positive perception of the status of Residential Child Care workers.

  There were fears that certain things may get in the way of achieving this aim. Funds would be needed to implement this development. A commitment to implementing and sustaining a strategy is imperative and a major concern was those who would need to fund this priority may panic at the cost implications. Alternatively, rather than recognise that Residential Child Care meets the needs and wishes of many young people and needs supporting to deliver outcomes, money may be redirected into other services such as fostering or to bolstering existing training NVQ packages.

  Without a strategy this could not succeed. It could not be left to market forces. The inability of the sector meeting the National Minimum Standards target has proven the need for national training delivery accessible to all personnel

Funding Follows Child

  There must be a Governmental commitment to legislation and funding strategies (including Health Services), which endorse Residential Child Care as a positive choice. Agencies need to co-operate with each other and learn from each other: cooperation not competition. There needs to be access to funding for Looked After Children. Trained staff need to be able to assess needs using evidence based evaluations and there needs to be subsequent professional analysis.

  The cultural view of Residential Child Care must shift. If Residential Child Care is perceived as the last resort the changes identified in the seminar will not be successful.

FURTHER EVIDENCE RELATING TO THE TERMS OF REFERENCE OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE

1.  CARE PLACEMENTS

The Impact of Market Forces on the operation and capacity of the residential child care sector

  Full report http://www.vcsengage.org.uk/PDF/NCERCC%20Full%20Report.pdf

  This report sets out the findings of quantitative and qualitative research into the impact of market forces on the operation and capacity of the residential child care sector. A further survey has recently been completed by the Independent Children's Homes Association that shows a continuing concern regarding the resilience of the Residential Child Care sector.

  This research provides an insight into the current situation of Residential Child Care provision. The views of voluntary, local authority and independent providers, and of those commissioning their services, were collected via two questionnaires and examined. The full findings are reproduced in Appendix One of this evidence document.

  These findings are set in the context provided by a literature review of recent overviews of commissioning, and the residential child care sector; and by a survey of current developments in the participation of young people in their care and welfare planning within residential care facilities.

  Current government thinking is to promote the use of "contestability" as a concept and practice for all services, including the residential child care sector. It states that there should be a distinction between purchasers and providers in public services; and that the service should be open to providers to have an opportunity to compete for public contracts. Following on from the Gershon report concerning public sector efficiency commissioners of all children's services are required to ensure that—over and above a child centred focus—the best value for money is obtained in terms of both quality and price.

  Responses to the questionnaire clearly support the observation that, whilst it would be misleading to reduce "contestability" to the single idea of competition, current commissioning arrangements focus more keenly on price than any other factor. The specific effects of this upon the voluntary sector are given in the report; and the effects are compared with those for the local authority and independent sectors.

  Concern is expressed by providers from all the sectors that this focus should equally be on practice. The research shows that providers are highly concerned about recent developments in the commissioning of residential child care. Their concern relates to the current definition and operation of commissioning and the ways in which it has the potential to adversely affect provision and practice.

  Providers report that they perceive an imbalance of stress on costs over practice as the operating factors in deciding placement. In order to continue to prosper providers have to have regard for how they think the market for services is changing, rather than thinking about how they can operate more effectively as a sector.

  This research reports provides an insight into the position of the voluntary sector as, of all the three sectors—local authority, independent and voluntary—it is experiencing the most severe effects of the current commissioning arrangements. The data shows that about half of respondents within the voluntary sector are experiencing a downturn in levels of occupancy and a decrease in turnover and, of these, 50% have identified their current position to be poor. The research identifies various reasons for this.

  Two factors that can be emphasised are full cost recovery and the use of funds. Both are factors not present in the independent or local authority sectors. Some proposals for the voluntary sector to address their situation, notwithstanding these hurdles, are proposed at local, regional and national level.

  The research includes a view of the effects of these factors on daily life. This is explored from a young person's view in the section "Participation and consultation in residential child care in England". From the research undertaken, it was clear that the sector of placement was not an influential factor in the level of participation of young people in their plans and the delivery of their care and welfare.

  The voluntary sector was neither better nor worse than other sectors in this respect. All sectors have much to do to improve the participation of young people and proposals are included in that section of the report. Indeed, there is potential for the voluntary sector to take a distinct lead on developing this aspect of residential child care; and thereby to achieve some redress from the current decline in placements as the value of participation is identifi ed by commissioners.

  Both commissioners and providers report a need to establish a joint understanding of the work of both commissioning and residential child care. Providers and commissioners share a common goal but are not as yet engaged in common work concerning the quality and reliability of care nor in spelling out what the important component parts of that care are, beyond the legislative requirements that care should be safe.

  It is clear that there is a widely accepted need for the development of sound partnerships that are built on best practice and do not expose either side of the relationship to undue risk, especially at the expense of the care offered to a young person. Through providing local, regional and national coordination, the voluntary sector can be proactive in developing a strategy that all sectors and commissioners can use. With commissioners and providers jointly working to recognise and acknowledge the future role for the residential child care sector in general and the voluntary sector in particular in the years ahead, and with each agreeing to contribute to making it happen, much needed thinking time would be spent on the content and the substance of the services rather than on negotiating the best financial deal.

2.  SOCIAL PEDAGOGY

Introducing Social Pedagogy Into Residential Child Care in England

  http://www.ncb.org.uk/ncercc/ncercc%20practice%20documents/introducing_sp_into_rcc_in_england_feb08.pdf

  Discussions about the potential of social pedagogic ideas, especially in Residential Child Care have until recently been confined to academic circles and a growing number of practice settings.

  The White Paper Care Matters included a proposal for piloting projects to examine the effectiveness of Social Pedagogy in Residential Child Care explaining that the pilots were to focus on adapting social pedagogical approaches, as practiced in Residential Child Care settings in continental Europe, with a view to significantly improving outcomes for children in public care.

  This report is an evaluation of a project commissioned in advance of Care Matters by the Social Education Trust (SET) in September 2006 and managed by the National Centre for Excellence in Residential Child Care (NCERCC). The project was and is the first research study into the implementation of Social Pedagogy into England. It aimed to develop knowledge of the theories behind social pedagogic approaches, build the confidence of Residential Child Care workers and discover possible ways of translating social pedagogic approaches into meaningful practices in English Residential Child Care settings.

  Nine Residential Child Care settings participated in a programme of practice development training facilitated by Social Pedagogue consultants from Germany and Denmark. The overall outcome of this pilot project, as seen through the eyes of the facilitators and participants, was highly positive.

  The key aims and objectives of facilitating a better understanding of the relevance and possible translation of social pedagogic approaches into the English Residential Child Care context and increasing staff confidence in relating to the ideas and translating them into their every day practice in this project, have been met.

  At the beginning of the project almost half of the participants had none or very limited knowledge of social pedagogic approaches, according to the responses to an initial baseline questionnaire. The main expectations of the participants were to gain more insight into Social Pedagogy, how it could be transferred into their current practices, and what new inspirations the project could bring to their practice. Almost 60% of the participants described themselves and their work colleagues as being positively receptive towards practicing pedagogically while about 40% described themselves as being neutral or less than positively receptive.

  By the end of the project, over two thirds of the participants stated that they now had a more solid understanding of the essence of Social Pedagogy. For some they regained, for others renewed, the importance of having authentic, appreciative relationships when working with young people in Residential Child Care settings. A third of the participant's affirmed that they had already taken on many aspects of a social pedagogic approach in their current practice. Participants spoke of experiencing their dreams and motivations being rekindled in choosing to work with young people in residential settings.

  Almost 70% of the participants were able to connect to, translate and use aspects of the themes in Social Pedagogy that they were introduced to, immediately in their everyday practice.

  Participants report the biggest impact of this project was either a reconfirmation or gaining of new perspectives on how to meet the needs of young people in Residential Child Care without needing to discard the knowledge and experience they had already built up. On the contrary they felt that they could refine and develop their existing knowledge, skills and teamwork, by consciously embracing and implementing a more social pedagogic approach in their everyday practice.

  As one participant put it "over the years, `the head' for example, staff policies, risk assessments, children coming in as a last resort, has dominated how I perceive and work with the young people. I have rediscovered `the heart' and can see working with these young people with a renewed perspective".

  Participants felt that the most problematic barrier to taking on a social pedagogic approach was how young people in Residential Child Care and those who chose to work with these young people are perceived in the wider English society, where coming into Residential Child Care is frequently seen as the last resort. In comparison, much of continental Europe perceives Residential Child Care as the best option for meeting some young people's needs for safety and development opportunities.

  The participants reported that other barriers such as risk assessments, strict regulations in relation to safeguarding procedures, and fear of false allegations made by young people, put limitations on being able to completely translate social pedagogic relationships into current practice. Even with a commitment to child-centred working, participants felt that changing the culture within Residential Child Care will be in a context of facing increasing challenging and complex behaviour from young people.

  Participants welcomed the appreciative, holistic child/centred approach Social Pedagogy offers and felt that the possibility of creating real changes for the young people in Residential Child Care for the better in England was achievable.

3.  WORKFORCE

3(a)  Training and Qualifications in the Residential Child Care Sector

  Full report available from CWDC

  The project focuses specifically on Workforce Development within Residential Child Care (RCC) and examines: whether there is evidence that there is a lack of available and accessible training, what steps can be taken to enable employers to meet National Minimum Standards. This research was undertaken by the Social Care Association and NCERCC.

  National Minimum Standard for Children's Homes 29.5:

    "A minimum ratio of 80% of all care staff have completed their level 3 in the Caring for Children and Young People NVQ by January 2005. Staff may hold other qualifications that require similar competencies, and these may be courses developed locally which are accredited. New staff engaged from January 2004 need to hold the Caring for Children and Young People NVQ or another qualification which matches the competencies or begin working towards them within three months of joining the home"

  The need for a trained workforce has been a recommendation made in many reports regarding Residential Child Care. The inclusion of NVQ III into the National Minimum Standards as the stated accreditation and with targets set for percentages of the workforce in each setting has been a strategy for addressing this continuing need. The CSCI 2007 annual report on the state of social care shows that 70% of staff in children's homes and 80% in Residential Special Schools meet the required Standard which must be borne in mind is a minimum. This result follows the same route as previous attempts to professionalise the service, for example, the 1992 Residential Child Care Initiative did not lead to a net increase of qualified leaders in the workforce, with many transferring to fieldwork practice on qualification.

  There have been additional concerns that the NVQ, though establishing the competence of a worker, may not have been sufficient to meet the needs of young people. This study shows concern regarding the relevance of training to the task, the needs of their staff and unit. There is a perceived mismatch between the complexity of the work and the content and structure of the available training for this staff group. Although training targets are being pursued across the sector, there are concerns they do not provide an adequate training for purpose as currently structured and delivered. Other UK countries have a wider expectation of training and qualification.

  The project aimed to identify the numbers in the work force, numbers qualified, turnover rates and clarify where roles overlap with other Sector Skills Councils; to establish training capacity, availability of assessors and verifiers, sources of training and effectiveness of qualified workers; to identify the qualifications which are due for 2008, by seeking the information from staff and managers; to obtain views about future needs for training for Residential Child Care; and to map current qualifications and identified gaps, establish examples of excellence and recommendations for improvement and for qualification development.

  This would enable the project to give an overview of the current situation that could be used to build up a detailed picture on which a training strategy could be based.

  The study elicited a response rate significantly higher than those responding to similar consultations/ requests for information from government agencies. It covered more than 20% of registered residential places for children and young people and an estimated 4.5% of all staff working in this sector. Base line data has been established on which future information can build a more detailed and comprehensive picture.

  Although the percentages meeting National Minimum Standards were close to the stated target, the study shows that in reality outcomes are not as secure. Whilst more than a quarter reported no difficulties in accessing training, almost a further quarter highlighted the difficulty of a lack of availability of assessors and verifiers. This is thought to be a significant deficit in capacity and may warrant further scrutiny as will the differences found between social and educational settings.

  For some the key impediment was the price of training with smaller proportions reported general access as an issue and the locality of educational institutions or assessment centres. Often in addition were the problems associated with finding staff cover for training and the cost this entailed.

  A significant minority knew little concerning how to access information regarding availability of accreditation/assessment, a situation made less clear still given the finding that provision is patchy across the country. The study shows that by no means is there universal and equal access. The need for a more unified, coherent approach that delivers easily accessed information about courses and availability is emphasised by respondents in this study. In-house training was recognised as beneficial in terms of budget and access. Quality assurance is achieved through a national on-line under- pinning knowledge resource, which is seen as helpful. The back-up provided by a regional training, support and consultancy service allied to the regional commissioning of placements would be welcome.

  The study notes a lot of training activity towards qualification. The sector is busy about the task of ensuring staff have suitable qualifications and are competent to practise. With a turnover estimated at a high of 26% in the sector, qualification performance may be only 7% net each year. This situation seems exacerbated by the numbers of part time staff.

  Responsibilities for ensuring that agency staff are kept up to date do not seem to be effective. The aspiration for the NVQ award to be portable even though development is yet to be achieved and will need to be for this group of workers.

  The situation may well persist until all social care staff as well as social workers must be registered with the General Social Care Council. These registration arrangements will need to be in place to ensure that requirements for updating knowledge and skill are met.

  Counter to general perception, none of the respondents to the questionnaires indicated they had difficulty in replacing staff that have left. Moreover, the data shows that in the sample over the last year more have been employed than the number leaving. NCERCC considers this finding demands further research given that the Children's Workforce Strategy found the issue of turnover is an impediment to access to training.

  This is given added valency when understanding a new recruit works at only 60% of their productive potential when first appointed, only reaching 100% after a year in post. In addition to the disruption to care and the financial costs, managers also find rates higher than around 15% unmanageable, meaning that turnover presents a multi-faceted burden. Given that rates as high as 26% have been recorded for residential care staff and that turnover rates in general are around 10 to 15%, managers are clearly facing difficult challenges.

  The key findings from this project are:

    —  The key task for the future is to match the talent of staff with the complex requirements of contemporary Residential Child Care and to ensure that the training provided is capable of preparing people adequately for this task.

    —  There is a need for a fundamental redesign and delivery of professional training courses focussed on Residential Child Care. The proposed review by CWDC of the structure of qualifications, due to take place by 2008, along with the development of regional commissioning structures, provides an opportunity to redesign professional courses to build on current good practice and achievement that meet the requirements of Residential Child Care in the 21st Century.

    —  Any revised training programmes should consist of a combination of core modules supplemented by specialist subjects that will provide the Residential Child Care workforce with a range of specialist skills which can be deployed in the different fields of operation and are transferable as they grow and develop.

3(b)  Fit for the Future?

  Residential child care in the United Kingdom

  http://www.ncb.org.uk/ncercc/ncercc%20practice%20documents/ncercc_fitforthefuture_nov06.pdf

  This four-nation study, concerned with recruitment, morale, and retention, suggested some future directions for maintaining and improving the morale and job satisfaction of staff across the residential child care sector. An adapted version of the conclusions and agendas for future action are included here.

  A major theme is the similarity in findings for the studies across all four nations. It was crucially important that each of the research teams set out to gather information that enables the commonalities and differences in residential child care to be identified especially noteworthy given some of the structural differences in the development of the residential child care sector, differences that have been growing in recent years.

  Structural factors are reflected in the pattern of unit ownership, statutory, voluntary and independent, and other major differences such as different levels of qualification. In this aspect Northern Ireland stands out with its very large proportion of staff holding a recognised social work qualification. There are other differences; Scotland, for example, retains a much higher proportion of residential schools in the child care sector.

  The results showed few differences between the range of child care settings in terms of morale and job satisfaction and the issues that were raised by the residential child care staff who participated in the research.

  In highlighting the high levels of morale and job satisfaction among residential child care workers and their managers the report acknowledges that there is no cause for complacency. Teamwork features as a prominent factor that affects staff experiences of their job. Support from colleagues as well as managers was very important for these workers' sense of job satisfaction. More importantly these factors together contribute towards the quality of care that children and young people receive in a range of residential settings, and are therefore critical determinants of the outcomes of the residential care experience.

  Based on a cohort of nearly 1,200 residential child care workers and their managers, the research highlights the commitment of the sector to provide good-quality care and to produce the best outcomes for the children and young people who live in a residential setting. Well-motivated staff with high levels of morale and job satisfaction are more likely to create high-quality care and best outcomes. This research identifies what residential child care staff consider the most important factors leading to high levels of motivation, morale and job satisfaction. There are no particular surprises in the factors they identify and the ratings given to their relative importance. The findings of this research confirm many of the findings from previous studies. In this sense they confirm what is already known but provide more contemporary evidence of continuing importance.

  What motivates residential child care staff most is being able to take a pride in their job. It is therefore very important to them that the young residents make progress both while they are living in residential settings and after they leave. While the number of children living in residential settings has reduced significantly over the past 15 years since, for example, the Utting (1991) and Skinner (1992) reports, and with there being no growing evidence of single children living in designated residential settings, it remains the case that residential child care continues to be defined as group care. Previous research evidence (Whittaker, Archer and Hicks 1998) demonstrates the crucial importance of teamwork in group care settings. The current research affirms the continuing centrality of teamwork as a key determinant of both motivation and staff morale. Residential staff who contributed to this research were clear that effective teamwork remains dependent on the level of support available to the team, both individually and collectively. Effective teamwork is also linked to quality of leadership available to a team, particularly the contributions of unit managers and other senior staff who have responsibility for providing immediate support and guidance.

  These findings pose the question as to how best to develop both effective teamwork and leadership in residential child care settings. This research attempted to identify what relationship might exist, for example, between morale and job satisfaction, teamwork and leadership, and qualifications and training. The findings suggest that while residential staff do not see qualifications in themselves as important contributors to morale, they do see training as very important. This finding is consistent with previous research by Sinclair and Gibbs (1998) showing that the extent to which training can develop effective teamwork and leadership is a crucial link, which will be returned to below. This research does suggest that investment in training by employers can be perceived as a reflection of the extent to which residential child care is valued. Knowing that the work is valued is one of the top three determinants of morale identified across the four nations. While it remains difficult to be more than tentative about the relationship between these factors, this research highlights the continuing importance of:

    —  teamwork and leadership (both now work strands for NCERCC); and

    —  qualifications and training (both now work strands for NCERCC).

  In each of the four studies, residential staff were consistent in their emphasis on the crucial importance of teamwork both to staff morale and to the quality of care provided to young residents. This research identified what residential child care staff considered as the key factors in effective teamwork. Consistent approaches to working with young people that were flexible enough to meet individual need were seen as the core of effective teamwork. Staff emphasised the importance of stable membership of a team seeking to maintain consistency in their approach.

  This reflects concerns about recruitment and retention in the sector, particularly in relation to staff turnover. Concerns were also expressed about the impact of sickness and absenteeism and the need to use agency staff to cover the shifts of absent staff, in relation to problems of maintaining consistency. The key question centres around who is defined as a team member, because effective teams are based on consistent and stable relationships. This is reflected in the importance attributed to communication and information-sharing as critical factors in effective teamwork. Across the four nations, staff tended to place greater emphasis on the importance of "informal" systems such as discussion between staff while working together on shift and in handovers. Nine out of 10 staff on average found formal team meetings helpful, or very helpful in ensuring effective communication within their staff teams. This reflects the fact that regular team meetings have become a significant feature of residential child care practice.

  Kahan (1994) reminds us that staff learning depends on existing practice in their workplace and their opportunities for organised and systematic training. She also emphasises that the whole staff team must be committed to good-quality care and that all working practices should be directed towards that goal. She calls this the "competent workplace" (Kahan 1994: p256). But how is this to be achieved? The evidence from this research indicates that regular team meetings and handover meetings at the end of each shift contribute towards effective teamwork. Again this is consistent with earlier Department of Health funded research (1998), which emphasises the crucial importance of teamwork in delivering good outcomes for young residents.

  Messages from Research concludes that effective teamwork reflects positive staff cultures in children's homes and that these cultures require "regular attention" (Department of Health 1998: p32). There is little clear evidence about how people learn to work together and become an effective team. We may well know more about what happens to outcomes for children when teams are ineffective than about the components or ingredients of effective teamwork. There is some consensus that establishing clear objectives for each children's home is likely to generate a healthy culture. Agreement between staff, described as "congruence", about what are seen as helpful responses by staff in looking after children, does not articulate the processes that are effective in arriving at these agreements. Training can facilitate learning to work together as a team (Crimmens 1997; Walton 1994).

  The research demonstrates clear links between the importance of the teamwork and high levels of morale and job satisfaction that are more likely to lead to good outcomes for looked after children. This indicates that it is imperative to invest in developing effective teams as a normal aspect of supporting residential child care workers in their practice.

  This research suggests that residential staff are able to share work problems with colleagues and, for example, are able to effectively debrief after critical incidents involving violent or aggressive behaviour. It is also evident that the majority of staff feel able to approach their managers with work problems. Informal supervision and individual supervision were also seen as helpful.

  However, the evidence in this research of the availability of regular supervision indicates that provision remains patchy and inconsistent across the sector. This must represent a cause for concern. Formal supervision remains an important element of support for staff and provides opportunities for the exercise of effective leadership as well as staff development. The role of formal supervision continues to be debated within residential child care. This research indicates that we may need to know more about the full range of support systems available to staff working in residential child care settings in order to effectively evaluate the potential and importance of formal supervision. Since the research this has been attended to by NCERRC developing specific supervision practice development materials.

  The government recognises that people want well-designed jobs with appropriate support, development and respect. The Department for Education and Skills (2005a) has developed a tool-kit for managers, which aims to "establish a shared set of skills, knowledge and behaviours towards which managers from any sector and across a range of settings can work".

  Campbell (2005) sees effective management and inspiring leadership as essential to bringing about new arrangements in children's services, especially in the management of multi-agency teams. He suggests (p1) that all managers "need to breathe life into workforce development". Managers are seen as "Children's Champions", leading change as well as developing their teams. Again the issue of effective management and leadership is linked to the delivery of better outcomes for children. There is recognition that poor leadership produces high staff turnover, which is expensive and demoralising.

  Previous research (Hills and others 1998) evaluated the impact of the Residential Child Care Initiative (RCCI) designed to implement the Utting (1991) recommendation that all managers of children's homes and their deputies should be qualified to DipSW standard. The research found that managers who participated and achieved professional qualification experienced greater self-confidence. While participation did not enhance their basic competences, the managers experienced a sense of enhanced status and authority, particularly from a better understanding of theory to back up their work. There was also some evidence of a more positive view of training and a willingness to pass their learning on to colleagues (Department of Health 1998). This evidence suggests that leadership is learnt, and that investment in the professional development of managers of children's homes will enable them to be more effective leaders.

  The quality of leadership may provide an explanation for the higher levels of staff morale and job satisfaction in Northern Ireland identified in the four nations study. It is not the possession of qualifications in themselves that is the determining factor. The enhancement of knowledge and the expectations of what constitutes the role and task of managers and supervisors in children's homes, which comes from the learning processes involved in acquiring qualification, may lead them to be more effective in supporting and leading staff. They may also develop a more positive attitude towards professional education and training based on their own experiences. This then becomes part of a team culture that encourages and supports all staff to engage in professional education and training.

  The NCERCC conference 2008 will launch practice development material addressing management and leadership and these will complement others regarding teamwork and groupwork.

  Residential child care staff recognise that effective outcomes for children are dependent on more than their individual and collective input. They recognise the importance of being actively involved in the external world of each child they look after, particularly with respect to their families and social networks. Some dissatisfaction was expressed by staff who participated in this research in relation to the quality of contact with other professionals and the extent to which they are seen as part of wider child care "teams". This raises some concern about the capacity of residential child care staff to effectively contribute to the interdisciplinary, interprofessional and multi-agency practice contexts required by the modernising agendas. The question of developing teams that are fit for purpose will be picked up below in looking at training and qualifications.

  Evidence from this research contributes towards the continuing debate about the relationship between qualification and training. Residential child care staff have a clear understanding of their preferences on a spectrum of training from "in-house" to that offered more formally in educational institutions. In each of the four national cohorts, more than two-thirds of residential child care staff rated training as a very important factor in promoting high levels of staff morale. By comparison, less then one-third rated qualifications in themselves as important. The research evidence is that the highest level of staff morale is recorded in Northern Ireland, which also has the highest percentage of staff holding a recognised professional qualification in social work. The latter reflects a clear and explicit commitment to a fully qualified workforce in Children Matter (Social Services Inspectorate 1998), which linked high levels of relevant qualifications to better outcomes for children. The puzzle is that this link between qualifications and outcomes for children and the political commitment that follows is by no means unique to Northern Ireland. It was a key recommendation of both the Utting (1991) and Skinner (1992) reports, and was reiterated in Utting (1997). It is also at the core of contemporary commitments to workforce development, which will be evaluated more closely in looking at current moves towards the development of a children's workforce.

  With the possible exception of Northern Ireland, this research confirms that levels of qualification of residential child care workers, as opposed to their managers, continues to fall short of benchmarks established for example in England and Wales by the Utting report (1991). A benchmark of 80% of residential child care workers who have been awarded the NVQ 3 in Caring for Children and Young People is enshrined in the National Minimum Standards for residential child care in England. A similar standard exists in each of the other nations in this study. NVQ 3, or its equivalent, remains the basic qualification for the registration of residential child care workers with the English General Social Care Council. Therefore, the acquisition of formal qualifications remains at least one key indicator of the claim to professional status by any occupational group. In consequence, there continues to be a problem in reconciling the positive perception of training among residential child care staff demonstrated in this research with a comparable enthusiasm and commitment to the acquisition of relevant qualifications.

  Respondents to this research raise a range of concerns about the relevance of the existing qualifications framework, namely the NVQ 3 and the professional qualification in social work. Equally, concerns are raised about the relevance of existing training programmes, both to the residential child care task and to meeting the needs of young residents. Questions are raised about the quality of existing training and this research provides some evidence of demands for training to be more specifically tailored to the residential child care environment.

  Apart from the availability and relevance of training, lack of motivation and confidence among residential child care workers is cited as a barrier to participation in training programmes. These changes will, however, require significant commitment on the part of residential child care workers, their supervisors and managers to meet the challenges of the new agendas. One of the challenges of registration, for example, is the expectation that a social care worker must take responsibility for maintaining and improving their knowledge and skills (General Social Care Council 2002). This reiterates an earlier observation by Kahan (1994, p259):

  Staff who have chosen to work in child care should expect to augment their knowledge and understanding by undertaking some individual study. This may intrude to some extent in to their own time, but this is the nature of working in a way which aspires to the professional. (Kahan 1994, p259)

  The Residential Forum (1998) emphasises that residential child care workers should take part in training provided by employers, and that personal time needs to be invested in professional development as a commitment to lifelong learning. There also appear to be some expectations that individual staff should contribute towards the costs of their education and training with a target of meeting 15% of the cost of their own qualifications by 2005 (Campbell 2005). Kahan (1994) acknowledges that these are particularly tough expectations for residential workers already struggling, for example, with the demands of shift working.

  Additionally, the very nature of the residential child care task, which requires that staff are available across 24 hours of each day, is seen as inhibiting effective training. The availability of resources to provide staff replacement costs is identified as a major obstruction. There was, however, little indication of existing commitment to training staff in the workplace as recommended by De Silva (2000) as a strategy for overcoming some of the obstructions identified above.

  Workforce issues including the recruitment and retention of staff were identified. Shift work and the rota seem to be inevitable causes for concern. Problems with maintaining a full staff team through turnover in team membership and absenteeism were reflected in concerns about dependence on agency or bank staff and the potential for inconsistent staffing impacting adversely on the quality of care and outcomes for young residents. Staff were also concerned about additional stress associated with looking after children and young people with challenging behaviour, particularly when this included aggressive and violent behaviour towards staff and residents. There was a recognition across the four nations that these difficulties were compounded in the absence of staff who were experienced, trained and qualified, capable of working consistently with colleagues in a group care setting.

  While recruitment is seen as a particular difficulty, often dependent on local labour market circumstances such as the demand for women's labour, this research provides a number of positive indicators of the relative stability of a core workforce across the four nations. There was little sense that staff continue to work in residential child care because of an absence of alternative employment. While concerns were expressed by both workers and their managers about the perceived low status of the sector, more than eight out of 10 respondents in this research were happy to tell others that they work in residential child care. The nearly seven out of 10 respondents who affirmed that they intended to remain in post over the coming year reinforces this finding. The Welsh researchers suggest that this is something of a paradox between the public perception of residential child care and the realities of working in the sector as indicated by many of the responses in this research.

  While many of the factors, such as shift working, will continue to be seen as relatively unattractive, the length of service of a significant proportion of the sample in this research, coupled with their views and opinions, suggests that there is a relatively stable workforce committed to longer-term employment in the sector. This is consistent with the findings of Berridge and Brodie (1998: p126) who found a "core of residential stalwarts surrounded by a wider group who have been in post for only a short time".

  However, the evidence also indicates an ageing staff profile, raising the question of how to attract new staff into work in children's homes. While this research does not underestimate the actual and potential difficulties of recruitment and retention, it is important to highlight the existence of a solid foundation of committed residential child care staff, which should form the base for future developments in the sector.

  One key factor that repeats itself throughout this research is the commitment by residential child care staff to provide the best possible care for children and young people. "Residents' progress" is among the top-ranking factors that motivate residential staff.

  However, this research also demonstrates that the behaviour of young people, particularly when it is aggressive or violent, negatively affects levels of morale. This is being addressed in forthcoming e-learning materials being produced by SCIE and NCERCC.

  One factor, which compounds the problems of managing difficult behaviour, is a perception on the part of residential staff that children and young people continue to be admitted to the care system in accordance with the availability of beds. Therefore the volume of unplanned and emergency admissions to residential child care settings across the four nations remains a major cause for concern. Other documents are referred to in this evidence that address his matter.

  While residential staff remain concerned about the disruptive potential of both violent and aggressive behaviour and unplanned and emergency placements, they remain committed to making effective helping relationships with young people. This commitment is reflected in the expectation of residential staff across the four nations to be more involved in therapeutic work with children and young people. The evidence from this research may again be paradoxical in this context, and this may relate to unclear or contradictory expectations that are unresolved in the ways in which the residential role and task is interpreted by teams of workers in different settings. Both Ward (2003) and Smith (2005) emphasise the potential for therapeutic work in all activities involving children and young people. Smith (2005: p2) emphasises the "conscious use of everyday opportunities" to engage meaningfully in the lives of children and young people. Collective failure to make use of therapeutic activities is nowhere more evident than in the educational outcomes of the majority of children and young people who are looked after by the state.

  This report consistently expresses concern that across the four nations the importance attached to supporting children's education by residential child care staff is lower than expected. What is of even greater concern is that staff who report that they are not currently involved in helping the children they look after to attain educationally do not think they ought to be any more involved. This issue is receiving attention from NCERCC and forthcoming practice materials will address the methods of supporting learning.

  Yet the research demonstrates that residential child care staff are committed to meeting the needs of the children they look after. They must turn this broad commitment into professional activities that demonstrate their ability and willingness to meet the challenges of 21st century agendas, including the collective ability to meet the expectations of membership of any wider children's workforce. A commitment to holistic working requires helping children make the most of their talents and potential. We recognise that a significant proportion of children arrive into children's homes with existing multiple and complex deficits (Department of Health 1998). It might be that the first thing we are required to do is to assess what assets the child brings and to focus on building them up from a position of their strengths. It is imperative therefore that residential child care workers have an effective understanding, for example, of child development in order to ensure that they are capable of meeting complex needs. Through the work of NCERCC this matter has been addressed in the revisions of the National Occupational Standards that underpin the IQF and QCF being developed by CWDC.

APPENDIX ONE

FINDINGS—THE IMPACT OF MARKET FORCES ON THE OPERATION AND CAPACITY OF THE RESIDENTIAL CHILD CARE SECTOR

  Full report http://www.vcsengage.org.uk/PDF/NCERCC%20Full%20Report.pdf

  There were sufficient responses from each sector to ensure the sample was useful for research purposes, providing a broad representation of the sector. As much data came to the researchers after the deadline for returns as before it. This additional information can either be added to an extended analysis or provide a comparative sample.

PROVIDERS OVERALL

  There were, in total, 76 responses from providers and 20 from commissioners.

  Providers were asked for their factual position in the market-place and for their perception of how work in the residential child care sector is changing and their response to any changes. Providers' opinions were also sought to account for why changes are taking place in the residential child care sector.

FACTUAL POSITION

  Taking all the providers together, the total number of settings responding to the research were 295; and the maximum number of placements was 1,937. The sectors' response rates to the questionnaire were: voluntary, 16%; local authority, 39%; and independent, 45%. Children's homes were represented by 68% of responses and residential special schools by 32%.

REPORTED CHANGES

  The overall view pointed to a small downturn in occupancy over the last two years.

  Currently, the average level of occupancy is 79%; and 38% of respondents state that their current percentage level of occupancy is less than it has been over the last two years. For some (13%), there has been an increase in the level of occupancy; whilst 33% have experienced the same levels.

  When assessing business in terms of turnover, the majority (59%) of providers are maintaining their level of turnover, whilst 26% report a decrease. A higher turnover is reported by 15% of respondents.

  A total of 53% of providers state that they are getting sufficient referrals, against 47% who say they are not.

  As a consequence of the changes identified, 21% of providers judged their current position in the market-place to be poor. For 10%, their assessment of the situation is that it is "getting worse" whilst 11% state that they are "at risk"; 40% referred to their situation as "improving" and 39% as "strong".

RESPONSE TO CHANGES

  Providers identified the changes they were making as a response to external factors.

  Of the six changes, a "change in staffing" and "increased spending" were the most frequently cited (24% and 22% respectively). Other changes made were a "change in facilities" (16%) and a change in pricing (15%). "Decreased spending" and a "change in property" accounted for 12% and 11% respectively.

  It is not clear, from these qualitative statements, whether the changes are being made in order to address the changes in rates of occupancy, referrals or other criteria identified; or whether these changes were stimulated by other considerations.

PROVIDERS' OPINIONS TO ACCOUNT FOR CHANGES IN THE RESIDENTIAL CHILD CARE SECTOR

  Providers selected those factors that they think commissioners take into account when considering placing a child with their organisation.

  The strongest factors were "quality of outcomes" (18%); "fee levels" (18%); and "previous experience of dealing with a provider" (18%).

  The "provision of registered education and care" was identified by 14% of respondents as being a factor in influencing the commissioning process.

  In overall terms, 35% of respondents identified the "increasing complexity" of the residential sector as a major factor or trend influencing residential child care.

  There was also a strong response to other suggested factors and a substantial proportion (24%) referred to "the impact of the Filkin letter"; 22% to "smaller/individual settings/packages" and 19% to "shorter-term placements". The question "Is price any more of a motivator now than in the previous two years?" elicited agreement from 78% of respondents: with 43% strongly agreeing and 35% agreeing. Those disagreeing made up 11% of respondents. This level of agreement is the highest margin drawn out by the research in this report.

SUMMARY

    —  The data shows a decrease in occupancy and referral levels, with some providers (21%) assessing their current position to be poor.

    —  Taking the figures as a whole, the picture is mixed. Some providers are experiencing increased use of residential child care while others are experiencing a small but distinct decline.

    —  The figures indicate grounds for uncertainty within the sector as to the likely use of residential child care in the future. If these trends were to continue, the sector would decline steadily and the situation become serious in a few years.

THE VOLUNTARY SECTOR

Factual position

  The voluntary sector within residential child care returned 12 (16%) of the questionnaires. The respondents operate within four children's homes and ten residential special schools.

  Taking the voluntary providers together, the number of settings responding to the research were 16 (with an average of four); and the maximum number of placements was 471 (with an average of 39).

Reported changes

  Currently, the average level of occupancy is 79%; and 58% of respondents (compared to 38% in the overall trend) state that their current percentage level of occupancy is less than it has been over the last two years. For some (8%), there has been an increase in the level of occupancy; whilst 33% (the same as for the overall trend) have experienced the same levels.

  When assessing business in terms of turnover, 38% of providers are maintaining their level of turnover (as against 59% for the overall trend); whilst 54% report a decrease in turnover (as against 26% for the overall trend). A higher turnover is reported by 8% of respondents.

  Alongside the reported decrease in occupancy levels, 31% of providers state that they are getting suffi cient referrals (as against 53% for the overall trend); and 69% say they are not (as against 47% for the overall trend).

  As a consequence of the changes identified, half of the voluntary providers judged their current position in the market-place to be poor. A quarter of this group assessed their situation to be "getting worse"; whilst another quarter stated that they are "at risk". In contrast, 42% referred to their situation as "improving"; and 8% as "strong" (as against 39% for the overall trend).

Response to changes

  Providers identified the changes they were making most frequently in response to external factors as: a "change in staffing", "increased spending" and a "change in facilities" (24%, which is the same as for the overall trend, 21% and 21% respectively).

  Other changes made were a "change in property" (12%); "decreased spending" (12%, which is the same as for the overall trend); and a "change in pricing" (9%).

Providers' opinions to account for changes in the residential child care sector

  Providers selected those factors that they think commissioners take into account when considering placing a child with their organisation.

  The strongest factors were "fee levels" (26%) and "previous experience of dealing with a provider" (19%).

  The "provision of registered education and care" was identified by 15% of respondents as being a factor influencing the commissioning process and "quality of outcomes" by 11%.

  "Other" was cited by 22% of respondents.

  The voluntary sector showed a similar trend to that found by providers overall, in that 37% of respondents identified the "increasing complexity" of the residential child care sector as a major factor or trend influencing residential child care.

  There was also a strong response to other suggested factors and a substantial proportion (26%) referred to "smaller/individual settings/packages". Twentyone per cent responded to "shorter-term placements" and 16% to "the impact of the Filkin letter".

  The question "Is price any more of a motivator now than in the previous two years?" elicited agreement from 83% of respondents (as against 78% for the overall trend); with 50% strongly agreeing and 33% agreeing.

Summary

    —  The data shows that about half the respondents within the voluntary sector are experiencing a downturn in levels of occupancy and a decrease in turnover, and of these 50% have identified their current position to be poor.

    —  As with the overall trend, there is a strong identification of fee levels in accounting for placement decisions.

THE LOCAL AUTHORITY SECTOR

Factual position

  The local authority sector within residential child care returned 30 (39%) of the questionnaires. The respondents operate within 29 children's homes and one residential special school.

  Taking the local authority providers together, the number of settings responding to the research were 57 (with an average of three) and the maximum number of placements is 361 (with an average of 14).

Reported changes

  Currently, the average level of occupancy is 87%; and 17% of respondents state that their current percentage level of occupancy is less than it has been over the last two years. For some (17%), there has been an increase in the level of occupancy; whilst 50% have experienced the same levels.

  When assessing activity in terms of turnover, the majority (73%) of providers are maintaining the same levels, whilst 15% report a decrease in turnover. A higher turnover is reported by 12%.

  Of the local authority providers, 92% state that they are getting sufficient referrals, as against 8% who say they are not. This is markedly higher than for the voluntary and independent sectors.

  In contrast to the position within the voluntary sector, only 4% judge their current position to be "getting worse" and none are "at risk". A third, 33%, referred to their situation as "improving" and 63% as "strong".

Response to changes

  Providers identified the changes they were making most frequently making in response to external factors as: a "change in staffing" and "increased spending" (38% and 32% respectively).

  Other changes made were a "change in facilities" (16%); a "change in property" (8%); and a "change in pricing" and "decreased spending" (3% each).

Providers' opinions to account for changes in the residential child care sector

  Providers selected those factors that they think commissioners take into account when considering placing a child with their organisation.

  The strongest factors were "available bed space" (25%) and "quality of outcomes" (23%); with "previous experience of dealing with a provider" identified by 13% and "provision of registered education and care" by 9%.

  "Fee levels" were identified by 9% as being a factor in influencing the commissioning process, the lowest amongst all sectors.

  In overall terms, 43% of respondents identified the "increasing complexity" of the residential child care sector as a major factor or trend influencing residential child care.

  There was also a strong response to other suggested factors and a substantial proportion (26%) referred to "shorter-term placements". Twenty-one per cent referred to "smaller/individual settings/packages" and 10% to "The impact of the Filkin letter".

  The question "Is price any more of a motivator now than in the previous two years?" elicited agreement from 67% of respondents; with 21% strongly agreeing and 46% agreeing. Those disagreeing made up 18% of respondents. So cost has been placed significantly lower down the list of important factors by this sector than others have done.

Summary

    —  The data shows that the local authority sector is more confident generally and identifies itself as being in a strong current position.

THE INDEPENDENT SECTOR

Factual position

  The independent sector within residential child care returned 34 (45%) of the questionnaires. The respondents operate within 27 children's homes and 17 residential special schools.

  Taking the independent providers together, the number of settings responding to the research were 222 (with an average of 11) and the maximum number of placements was 1,105 (with an average of 33).

Reported changes

  Currently, the average level of occupancy is 73% (the lowest amongst all sectors); with 50% of respondents (compared to 38% in the overall trend) stating that their current percentage level of occupancy is less than it has been for the last two years. For some (12%), there has been an increase in the level of occupancy whilst 18% have experienced the same levels (as against the overall trend of 33%).

  When assessing business in terms of turnover, 55% of providers are holding (similar to 59% for the overall trend); whilst 24% report a decrease in turnover (similar to 26% for the overall trend). A higher turnover is reported by 21% report (the highest reporting this of all sectors).

  Alongside the reported decrease in occupancy levels, 32% of providers state that they are getting sufficient referrals (as against 53% for the overall trend); and 68% say they are not (similar to the voluntary sector and against 47% for the overall trend).

  As a consequence of the changes identified by providers, 24% judged their current position in the market-place to be poor. For 9%, their assessment of the situation is that it is "getting worse", while 15% state that they are "at risk". In contrast, 45% referred to their situation as "improving" and 30% as "strong" (as against 39% for the overall trend).

Response to changes

  Providers identified the changes they were making most frequently in response to external factors as: a "change in pricing" and a "change in staffing" (23% and 18% respectively). "Increased spending" and "decreased spending" both accounted for 17%.

  Other changes made were a "change in facilities" (14%) and a "change in property" (12%).

Providers' opinions to account for changes in the residential child care sector

  Providers selected those factors that they think commissioners take into account when considering placing a child with their organisation.

  The strongest factors were "fee levels" (23%) and "previous experience of dealing with a provider" (22%).

  The "provision of registered education and care" and "quality of outcomes" were both identified by 17% of respondents as being a factor in influencing the commissioning process.

  "Other" was cited by 9%.

  In overall terms, 36% of respondents identified "the impact of the Filkin letter" as a major factor or trend influencing residential child care. This was the highest of all sectors.

  There was also a strong response to other suggested factors and a substantial proportion (29%) referred to "increasing complexity"; with 21% responding to "smaller/individual settings/packages"; and 14% to "shorter-term placements".

  The question "Is price any more of a motivator now than in the previous two years?" elicited agreement from 84% of respondents (almost the same as for the voluntary sector and against 78% for the overall trend) with 6% disagreeing.

Summary

    —  The data shows that half the respondents from within the independent sector are experiencing a downturn in levels of occupancy, with 24% reporting a decrease in turnover and 21% an increase.

    —  As with the voluntary sector, there is a strong identification of fee levels in accounting for placement decisions.

June 2008







 
previous page contents

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2009
Prepared 20 April 2009