Archived decisions
Summary of key themes and corporate strategies
1. Consultation
2. Comparison
What? |
How? |
All reviews | |
- Performance against national PIs - Approaches to undertaking BV review |
Participation in benchmarking event with Southampton City - other local authority undertaking Best Value review of family support services) |
Reception and Assessment | |
- Areas of good practice - Strengths and weaknesses of alternative service/inclusion models |
Visits/telephone contact with Hertfordshire & Luton - other local authorities funding family support workers in association with schools (identified by ADSS/DOH) |
- Optimum working practices |
Analysis of job descriptions for inclusion social workers |
- Consistency and equity of access to services - Capacity and demand - Performance - Distribution of activity between R&A and Family Support |
Analysis of Children in Need (CiN) Census 2002: - referral rates - population - staffing levels - activity levels |
- Performance in comparison to other shire authorities in SE region and across SSD areas |
Analysis of PAF/DIS performance indicators: - % referrals that are repeat referrals within 12 months - % initial assessments completed within 7 working days from referral - % core assessments completed within 35 working days |
- Pros and cons of service centre model |
Visits/telephone contact with other local authorities; West Sussex, Devon & Essex. - Devon and Essex are conducting BV reviews of their R&A services which are both fronted by service centre. - Essex also use SWIFT recording system |
Social Services Direct | |
- Geographical equity of service - Distribution of childcare/MH activity |
Analysis of referrals January-June 2003: - volume - source - area of origin - work group - response |
3. Compete
How? |
Why? |
All services under review | |
- Consider alternative providers for non-statutory elements of services under review - Identify opportunities for collaborative working, efficiency savings, improving cost effectiveness | |
Inclusion social workers | |
Mapped roles and functions with related services (e.g. Connexions CAMHS services) |
- To ensure no unnecessary duplication of function - To identify areas where collaboration required |
Reception and assessment teams | |
Considered alternative providers for advice function |
To explore potential for transferring advice function to service centre |
Cost analysis based on Children in Need (CiN) Census 2002 |
To compare activity costs between R&A and Family Support teams by area |
Considered alternative collaborative models of service in other local authorities |
To identify most efficient and effective model for delivering: - a single assessment - improved care pathways for children - agreed thresholds of need |
Social Services Direct | |
Review of staffing arrangements and service option appraisal by SS Direct management team |
To increase cost effectiveness through: - introduction of SSA grade to improve flexibility of workforce - matching staffing levels to demand - `leave inclusive' rota to reduce over-time |
4. Equalities
All reviews | |
- Key issue is equity of access to services e.g. not all schools have inclusion social workers, R&A staffing and admin. allocations are `historic' i.e. resources not matched to need | |
Inclusion social workers | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- Service set up to enable early intervention and address difficulties of disadvantaged groups of children e.g. those with emotional and behavioural difficulties. - ISWs visit all new starters at EBD schools at home (30% of whom would not have received a service from the SSD) - Basing a social work service within a universal service immediately de-stigmatises children and families as they can access the service through schools - Participating schools believe that ISWs have contributed to the reduction of school exclusions |
- As inclusion social workers are not a county-wide service, not all children can benefit from the support they provide - Inconsistent monitoring of ethnicity |
Reception and assessment | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- Improved monitoring of ethnicity - Guidance available regarding unaccompanied young asylum seekers |
- Inequitable access to services through area R&A teams - Concern that pressures on locally- held budgets restrict take-up of language/interpreting services - Little awareness of deaf issues within children's R&A teams - Gender imbalance. R&A workers are mostly women (potential barrier to engaging with fathers) - No identified lead within C&F sector to support/co-ordinate area teams' involvement with ethnic minority children and families - SSI inspection 2003 noted that issues of race and culture were not mentioned in children's assessments |
Social Services Direct | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- Service can be contacted via e-mail or text messaging to increase accessibility to young people |
- No monitoring of ethnicity of service users - No wheelchair access to service centre site for employees |
5. Crime and Disorder
All reviews | |
To assess the contribution made by the three services under review in meeting the aims of the corporate crime and disorder strategy; to divert young people away from crime and to deal effectively and speedily with young offenders | |
Inclusion social workers | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- ISWs provide an opportunity for early intervention and are well placed to work collaboratively with schools to help prevent youth crime - ISW intervention has the potential to improve the behaviour of school children which will impact on their future life chances and divert them from crime - Through helping children to remain in schools, there is evidence that there is less chance of them becoming involved in crime |
- School heads have reported that some pupils would not have not have completed full-time education without ISW support However, there is no statistical evidence to show impact of ISWs on school attendance and no figures available linking school attendance and crime figures |
Reception and assessment | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- Range of successful initiatives in pace to support the crime and disorder strategy |
- limited opportunities for early intervention/care management for children at risk of offending due to high thresholds of SSD - young people remanded in the care of the local authority can only access specialist assessment by YOTs and not holistic needs assessment that R&A would provide if capacity allowed - YOTs report inconsistent responses from R&A teams across the county - Little opportunities for YOT and R&A teams to work together and limited understanding of respective priorities |
Social Services Direct | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- Service helps to divert YP from crime/and respond to situations involving young offenders through providing information, advice, active listening and access to appropriate adult support out of hours |
- As a single county-wide service SS Direct has limited ability to respond on a local basis to the needs of vulnerable YP - Lack of suitable accommodation and services for homeless YP means responses are reactive. YP placed inappropriately are at risk from involvement in crime or as victims. Housing would like more co-operation out-of-hours to provide client information and to assist in negotiating with YP to return home where possible |
6. Sustainable development
Inclusion social workers | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- ISW role to promote social inclusion and improve outcomes for children at risk of exclusion - ISWs have a key role in maximising community resources through their links with home and school - Head teachers noted improved liaison and services from other agencies thanks to ISW role - Diversion from SSD intervention and from the criminal justice system makes more sustainable use of public resources |
|
Reception and assessment | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- More collaborative approaches needed to avoid duplication of assessments and services | |
Social Services Direct | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- Out of hours service operates with minimal staffing providing information, advice and management of risk for 75% of the week |
- Transport costs of providing county-wide service from a single location in the south east |
7. E-government
All services | |
Issues to consider: impact of SWIFT on improving recording and quality of management information and business case for establishing service centre | |
Inclusion social workers | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- Need for consistent business process for all ISWs (through SWIFT?) | |
Reception and assessment | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- IT solutions offer opportunities for greater organisational flexibility e.g. options for working from home to reduce travel and demands on office space, co-locating staff with partner agencies - Base funding secured for development work on information sharing and implementing IRT - Consultancy work in progress to establish business case for fronting C&F services with a service centre |
- Ensure C&F fully represented in e-government improvement proposals to establish a service centre - To ensure that the specific and complex needs of this care group are taken into account and that benefits and risks are fully evaluated - To learn from experiences of establishing service centres to access children's services (Essex CC , New Zealand, SS Direct in Hampshire) |
Social Services Direct | |
Strengths |
Areas for improvement |
- Secured substantial government funding to pioneer use of service centre technology - Technology allows service to manage greater volume of calls and to use social work resources more appropriately - Model emulated by other authorities |
- Electronic client information systems not yet integrated - Only partial access to client information currently available |