Memorandum submitted by the Association
of Directors of Children's Service (ADCS)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
— Health of CIC—We are
concerned that there is no reference to promoting health, within
the Bill although this was recognised as an issue in the White
Paper.
— Mental Health/Well being—We
support the priority given to health assessments for alcohol and
substance misuse, together with teenage pregnancy, but also would
like to emphasise the importance of the availability of appropriate
mental health and emotional well being assessment and support
services for this vulnerable group.
— Education and Schools—We
think the Government should develop guidance for schools which
interprets and drives the application of the new duty of well
being that was introduced by the Education and Inspection Act
2006. We believe that subject to the impact of that guidance,
government should keep open the option for that duty to become
a duty to cooperate that matches other partners under the Children
Act 2004 (which is a point that also applies to GP's). And we
believe that Ofsted should strengthen the way it inspects schools
for the quality of support they provide to children in care.
— Children and young people in both
the looked after and youth justice systems—We share
concerns that the two systems do not work sufficiently well together
in an integrated way to improve outcomes, and support further
guidance to ensure a better coordinated response is available
to these young people including a focus on shared rights and responsibilities.
— Unaccompanied asylum seeking children—ADCS
seek assurance that all new policies and guidance that cover children
in care also apply to those who are looked after with immigration
needs.
— Resources—We are concerned
about the appropriate availability of resources to fully implement
the requirements of the Bill.
— Social Work Practices—We
welcome the opportunities of the pilot arrangements and wish to
be involved in the subsequent evaluation.
— Implementation Plan—We
propose that a "user friendly" summary be published
and widely disseminated for staff involved in service delivery,
parents, carers and children.
— Workforce—We suggest
that three groups need to be prioritized: (1) Social workers;
(2) Foster Carers; and (3) Residential Care Workers.
— Missing from the Bill—We
note that a number of ideas that were explored in the original
Green Paper have been dropped.
INTRODUCTION
1. The Association of Directors of Children's
Services represents leaders of children's services in local authorities
and children's trusts. This submission has been prepared on behalf
of the Association by Ann Baxter, Corporate Director of Children,
Education and Social Care at Stockton-on-Tees, and Chair of the
ADCS Health, Care and Additional Needs Policy Committee, and Andrew
Christie, Director of Children Services at Hammersmith and Fulham,
and Vice Chair of the London Branch of ADCS.
2. The Association would be willing to give
oral evidence if asked to do so.
3. The Association welcomes the opportunity
to submit written evidence to the Select Committee on provision
for children in care (CIC) and wishes to commend the DCSF on its
level of commitment to ensuring that children and young people
receive the highest quality of care and support and that their
outcomes should continue to improve. We have had a high level
of access to the DCFS in their work to address the White Paper,
Care Matters. We are also aware that the Children and Young
People Bill will form only one dimension of the strategy to implement
the recommendations of that White Paper. Nevertheless it is a
critical dimension and we generally support the content of the
Bill.
4. The Select Committee should note that
ADCS alongside LGA and other members of the Children's Inter Agency
Group (CIAG, which is chaired by ADCS, are collaborating with
DCFS in the development and launch of the Care Matters implementation
programme). We welcome this as a model for joint working between
central and local government.
CHILDREN AND
YOUNG PEOPLE'S
BILL
5. Health of CIC—We are concerned
that there is no reference to promoting health, within the Bill
although this was recognised as an issue in the White Paper. We
feel that this is an opportunity to ensure a statutory status
for the guidance "Promoting the Health of Looked After Children",
together with a timetable for implementation. It is also an opportunity
to ensure this is a requirement for healthcare bodies as well
as local authorities and to ensure co-ordination with DH developments
and the Operating Framework for the NHS. Thought should also be
given to the respective responsibilities of the originating and
host health authorities in the case of children placed across
health boundaries. Although Care Matters properly assumes
that children should be placed within their authority of origin
where possible, and where it is in their best interest; this is
not a principle that can properly be applied without exception.
It remains the case that children placed out of area may experience
additional difficulties in accessing health care, particularly
from specialist services such as CAMHS.
6. Mental Health/Well being—We
support the priority given to health assessments for alcohol and
substance misuse, together with teenage pregnancy, but also would
like to emphasise the importance of the availability of appropriate
mental health and emotional well being assessment and support
services for this vulnerable group.
7. Education and Schools—We
commend all of the initiatives outlined within the Bill and the
White Paper to strengthen educational outcomes for children in
care and especially those which strengthen the roles and accountabilities
of schools. We see much good practice, but also variable practice.
We urge caution in the way in which children in care can be crudely
compared with other groups in a way which does not reflect the
exceptional problems that children in care and their carers have
to overcome. But this does not mean that we must not be ambitious
for these children. In particular, we are convinced that three
steps need to be taken in this regard (alongside the positive
proposals within the White Paper). We think the Government should
develop guidance for schools which interprets and drives the application
of the new duty of well being that was introduced by the Education
and Inspection Act 2006. We believe that subject to the impact
of that guidance, government should keep open the option for that
duty to become a duty to cooperate that matches other partners
under the Children Act 2004 (which is a point that also applies
to GP's). These are general duties but would impact especially
on groups such as children in care. And we believe that Ofsted
should strengthen the way it inspects schools for the quality
of support they provide to children in care. We welcome the proposal
that more emphasis be placed on value added data in measuring
achievement, as opposed to simply relying upon raw attainment
scores.
8. Children and young people in both
the looked after and youth justice systems—We share
concerns that the two systems do not work sufficiently well together
in an integrated way to improve outcomes, and support further
guidance to ensure a better coordinated response is available
to these young people including a focus on shared rights and responsibilities.
9. Unaccompanied asylum seeking children—ADCS
seek assurance that all new policies and guidance that cover children
in care also apply to those who are looked after with immigration
needs.
10. Resources—We are concerned
about the appropriate availability of resources to fully implement
the requirements of the Bill. This particularly applies where
additional funding comes in the form of provision in the RSG settlement
for authorities which are below "the floor". It is suggested
that additional funding that is made available for educational
purposes be delivered through the Standards Funding within the
Dedicated Schools Grant. This means that the money can (a) be
ring-fenced, and (b) encourages the concept that the needs of
looked after children be treated in the same way as other vulnerable
groups within the education system.
11. Private fostering—We welcome
the postponement of the decision whether to use the Children Act
2004 power to establish a registration scheme, and look forward
to the outcome of the current Ofsted inspection programme to inform
further developments.
12. Social Work Practices—We
welcome the opportunities of the pilot arrangements and wish to
be involved in the subsequent evaluation. We have no difficulties
with the development of further mixed economies of care and believe
the record of local government children's social care services
is evidence of our completely open approach. We have expressed
reservations about how these practices may function while not
compromising the crucial aspects of the parental and financial
accountabilities which must rest with the local authority and
the DCS as corporate parent. We also wish to ensure that any financial
support that is offered to the pilots should not distort the results
of the pilots and that those results are given careful consideration
before any next steps. We have actively used our networks to encourage
authorities to consider applying for pilot status.
13. Pilots—A number of the
new ideas put forward as part of the Care Matters programme are
to be piloted. We welcome this approach and urge that the pilots
will be properly evaluated over a sufficient period of time; with
proper attention being paid to dissemination and review of the
findings before proceeding to any general roll out.
14. Implementation Plan—We
welcome the proposal that an Implementation Plan be published.
It is likely that this will be primarily aimed at senior managers
and policy makers. We recommend that a "user friendly"
summary be published and widely disseminated for staff involved
in service delivery, parents, carers and children. This should
be modeled on the publications used for Every Child Matters which
had a great impact.
15. Workforce—Having a well
trained, competent and stable work force is crucial to the success
of the Care Matters programme. We would suggest that three groups
need to be prioritised. (1) Social workers—it remains the
case that there is not a reliable supply of social workers who
are properly trained for the task. We welcome that attention that
is being paid to this issue by the DCSF and the Children's Workforce
Development Council. Local authorities continue to invest a great
deal in this area. However, it is our view that the degree courses
do not adequately prepare social workers for the social work role
in Children's Services. More specialist training is required,
above and beyond for an increase in supply. (2) Foster Carers—we
welcome the development of more specific standards, and the attention
being paid to the right kind of training and support for foster
carers. (3) Residential Care Workers—probably the staff
group where there are the most serious concerns about skills and
competence. Some of the least trained staff provide the majority
of care for some of the most needy children and young people.
We commend the proposals to explore the application of pedagogy,
as in place in many other European States, and urge that this
remains a priority within the programme.
16. Missing from the Bill—We
note that a number of ideas that were explored in the original
Green Paper have been dropped, in particular, the proposal not
to extend care for children in stable placements from 18 to 21.
Whilst we understand the reasons for that, we suggest that thought
needs to be given as to what is stated publicly in respect of
these developments. We believe that many may have had expectations
raised and will seek some form of explanation as to why some proposals
have been prioritised over others.
February 2008
| 
