Search

Foster carers characterise a highly diverse workforce that shares the choice to provide a home and family for children who can no longer reside with their family. This diversity makes supporting and providing for carers’ training needs a complex task for fostering services. Understanding what might influence their engagement in training would be useful. This article outlines themes related to foster carers’ engagement with social pedagogy, using data from the Head, Heart, Hands (HHH) programme evaluation. Analysis of interviews with seventy-six foster carers over a period of three years is presented. The emerging themes were used to devise an illustrative typology of receptiveness to training. The themes relate to the perceived impact of HHH on their practice and compatibility with the existing children’s social care (CSC) system. The article explores the factors that may influence foster carers’ positioning within the typology. The contributions that such a typology might make to the wider evidence base across CSC, in terms of the implementation and potential impacts of intervention, are discussed.

Within a context of substantial adoption policy reform in England, this paper explores post adoption support. Findings from a small-scale survey of 22 local authorities in England and interviews with 11 adoption practitioners (from 11 of the authorities that completed the survey) are presented and related national policy discussed. The paper argues that support should continue postmatching a child with their adoptive parent(s) and that this should be the norm rather than the exception. It also emphasizes the need to improve the availability of and access to post adoption support in a timely manner.

In many developed countries around the world residential care interventions for children and adolescents have come under increasing scrutiny. Against this background an international summit was organised in England (spring 2016) with experts from 13 countries to reflect on therapeutic residential care (TRC). The following working definition of TRC was leading: "Therapeutic residential care involves the planful use of a purposefully constructed, multi-dimensional living environment designed to enhance or provide treatment, education, socialization, support, and protection to children and youth with identified mental health or behavioural needs in partnership with their families and in collaboration with a full spectrum of community based formal and informal helping resources". The meeting was characterised by exchange of information and evidence, and by preparing an international research agenda. In addition, the outlines of a consensus statement on TRC were discussed. This statement, originally published in English and now reproduced in a Dutch translation, comprises inter alia five basic principles of care that according to the Work Group on Therapeutic Residential Care should be guiding for residential youth care provided at any time.

This paper utilizes data gathered as part of an exploratory study to assess the costs and impact of the Common Assessment Framework (CAF), to examine the impact that the lead professional role had on families and workers. The study found that both families and workers believed the lead professional to be central to the CAF process, providing a range of support, coordinating multi-agency responses to need and acting as a single point of contact between families and workers. The paper highlights the need for consideration to be given to inter-agency working, data sharing, training for workers and the capacity implications for those taking on the role. The extent to which the lead professional might be more integrated into the continuum of support for vulnerable children and families is also examined. The paper highlights the need to consider the lead professional's role in not only preventing the need for more intensive services, such as those provided by statutory social work, but also maintaining outcomes achieved once a child protection plan is closed, or a child is reunified with his or her birth family after a period of being in care. The implications of the findings for policy and practice are discussed.

PurposeIn England in recent years, concerns have been raised about the proportion of time social workers and other frontline children's social care practitioners spend carrying out desk‐based, administrative activities. This article aims to report time use activity data from front line workers on the amount of time spent on different activities to support children in need (as defined by the 1989 Children Act).Design/methodology/approachThe data were collected from a range of sources including focus groups, event records (diaries completed by practitioners) and online surveys.FindingsThe proportion of time spent on direct and indirect activities varies according to the types of process. Those associated with ongoing support have the highest proportion of direct activity, whereas those associated with decision making, especially if a one‐off activity, have the highest proportion of administrative activities. The greater the needs of the child, the more direct and indirect support was given, but there was some variation across social work teams. But the activities of social workers are interconnected, making it difficult to provide conclusive evidence, but the concern about the imbalance between direct work and administrative tasks seems justified.Research implications/limitationsThe findings highlight the complexity of exploring how social workers spend their time and how the proportion of time spent on direct and indirect activities is determined by the needs and circumstances of children and their families.Practical implicationsWider contextual practice issues are also explored including the recent increases in referrals to children's social care and the use of electronic recording systems.Originality/valueThe breakdown of the activities using the approach outlined in the article increases transparency in understanding how social workers spend their time.

none 32 si The International Work Group for Therapeutic Residential Care convened an International Summit on ‘Pathways to Evidence-Based Practice’ at Loughborough University (GBR), Centre for Child and Family Research on 27-29 April, 2016 with generous support from the Sir Halley Stewart Trust and in partnership with The European Scientific Association on Residential and Family Care for Children and Adolescents (NLD) (EUSARF), the International Association for Outcome-Based Evaluation and Research on Family and Children’s Services (ITA) (IAOBER) and the Association of Children’s Residential Centers (USA) and with the additional support of Action for Children (GBR) and the National Implementation Service (NIS) (GBR). Membership includes: Lisa Holmes (Chair), Director, Centre for Child and Family Research, Loughborough University (GBR); James K. Whittaker (Co-Chair), Charles O. Cressey Endowed Professor Emeritus, University of Washington, School of Social Work, Seattle (USA); Jorge Fernandez del Valle, Professor of Psychology and Director, Child and Family Research Group, University of Oviedo (ESP); Frank Ainsworth, Senior Principal Research Fellow (Adjunct), James Cook University, School of Social Work and Human Services, Townsville, Queensland (AUS); Tore Andreassen, Psychologist, The Norwegian Directorate for Children, Youth and Family Affairs (NOR); James P. Anglin, Professor, Faculty of the School of Child and Youth Care, University of Victoria (CAN); Christopher Bellonci, Board-Certified Child/Adolescent and Adult Psychiatrist; Associate Professor, Psychiatry Department, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA (USA); David Berridge, Professor of Child and Family Welfare, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol (GBR); Amaia Bravo, Lecturer, Department of Psychology, University of Oviedo (ESP); Cinzia Canali, Senior Researcher, Fondazione Emanuela Zancan, Padova (ITA) and President, International Association of Outcome-Based Evaluation and Research in Family and Children’s Services (IAOBER); Mark Courtney, Professor, School of Social Service Administration, University of Chicago (USA); Laurah Currey, Chief Operating Officer, Pressley Ridge, Pittsburgh, PA (USA) and President, Association for Children’s Residential Centers, (USA); Daniel. L. Daly, Executive Vice President and Director of Youth Care, Father Flanagan’s Boys’ Home, Boys Town, NE (USA); Robbie Gilligan, Professor of Social Work and Social Policy, Trinity College Dublin IRE), Hans Grietens, Professor, Centre for Special Needs Education & Youth Care, University of Groningen (NLD) and President, European Scientific Association on Residential and Family Care for Children and Adolescents (EUSARF); Annemiek T. Harder, Assistant professor, Department of Special Needs Education and Youth Care, University of Groningen (NLD); Martha J. Holden, Senior Extension Associate with the Bronfenbrenner Center for Translational Research and the Principal Investigator and Director of the Residential Child Care Project at Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (USA); Sigrid James, Professor, Department of Social Work & Social Ecology, School of Behavioral Health, Loma Linda University, CA (USA); Andrew Kendrick, Professor of Residential Child Care, School of Social Work and Social Policy at the University of Strathclyde (GBR) and Consultant at the Centre of Excellence for Looked After Children in Scotland (CELCIS) and the Centre for Youth and Criminal Justice (CYCJ) (UK); Erik J. Knorth, Professor, Department of Special Needs Education and Youth Care, University of Groningen (NLD); Mette Lausten, Senior Researcher at SFI - The Danish National Centre for Social Research, Copenhagen (DNK), John S. Lyons, Senior Policy Fellow at Chapin Hall, University of Chicago, IL (USA); Eduardo Martin, Lecturer at the Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology, University of La Laguna, Tenerife (ESP); Samantha McDermid, Research Fellow, Centre for Child and Family Research, Loughborough University (GBR); Patricia McNamara, Senior Fellow (Honorary), Department of Social Work, University of Melbourne (AUS); Laura Palareti, Assistant Professor in Social Psychology, Department of Education Studies, University of Bologna (ITA); Susan Ramsey, Parent and Former Children’s Mental Health Advocate, The Walker School, Needham, MA (USA); Kari M. Sisson, Executive Director, Association of Children’s Residential Centers (USA); Richard W. Small, Walker Executive Director Emeritus, The Walker School, Needham, MA (USA); June Thoburn, Emeritus Professor of Social Work, University of East Anglia (GBR); Ronald Thompson, Senior Director, Boys Town National Research Institute for Child and Family Studies, Boys Town, NE (USA); Anat Zeira, Professor, School of Social Work and Social Welfare, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and Head of Research and Evaluation at the Haruv Institute (ISR). Our work group wishes to thank CFRC staffer Laura Dale at Loughborough for extraordinary efforts in producing this statement in record time and for her care and assistance with all phases of our Summit activity. Whittaker, James K; Holmes, Lisa; del Valle, Jorge F.; Ainsworth, Frank; Andreassen, Tore; Anglin, James; Bellonci, Christopher; Berridge, David; Bravo, Amaia; Canali, Cinzia; Courtney, Mark; Currey, Laurah; Daly, Daniel; Gilligan, Robbie; Grietens, Hans; Harder, Annemiek; Holden, Martha; James, Sigrid; Kendrick, Andrew; Knorth, Erik; Lausten, Mette; Lyons, John; Martin, Eduardo; Mcdermid, Samantha; Mcnamara, Patricia; Palareti, Laura; Ramsey, Susan; Sisson, Kari; Small, Richard; Thoburn, June; Thompson, Ronald; Zeira, Anat Whittaker, James K; Holmes, Lisa; del Valle, Jorge F.; Ainsworth, Frank; Andreassen, Tore; Anglin, James; Bellonci, Christopher; Berridge, David; Bravo, Amaia; Canali, Cinzia; Courtney, Mark; Currey, Laurah; Daly, Daniel; Gilligan, Robbie; Grietens, Hans; Harder, Annemiek; Holden, Martha; James, Sigrid; Kendrick, Andrew; Knorth, Erik; Lausten, Mette; Lyons, John; Martin, Eduardo; Mcdermid, Samantha; Mcnamara, Patricia; Palareti, Laura; Ramsey, Susan; Sisson, Kari; Small, Richard; Thoburn, June; Thompson, Ronald; Zeira, Anat

Multidimensional treatment foster care (MTFC) is a specialist foster care programme specifically designed for children and young people who display emotional or behavioural difficulties. Developed in the US at the Oregon Social Learning Centre the programme has since been introduced in a number of countries around the world. The focus of this paper is on the implementation of the adolescent programme in England (MTFCE-A) and the development of a research methodology to estimate the child welfare unit costs of the programme. A ‘bottom up’ approach to estimating unit costs is introduced and the costs of the MTFCE-A programme are compared to other placement types. The paper compares the costs of MTFCE-A placements with placements prior to and following MTFCE-A for a small sample of children and young people. The findings show a reduction in costs during the time spent in MTFCE-A placements. Comparisons are also drawn with the costs of alternative placements identified for the children and young people had they not been placed with MTFCE-A carers.

In veel ontwikkelde landen wordt in toenemende mate kritiek geleverd op residentiële interventies bij kinderen en jongeren. Tegen de achtergrond hiervan vond in het voorjaar 2016 in Engeland een internationale conferentie plaats van experts uit 13 landen op het gebied van therapeutische residentiële zorg (TRZ). De volgende werkdefinitie van TRZ was leidend: "Therapeutische residentiële zorg omvat het geplande gebruik van een speciaal hiervoor ontwikkelde, multidimensionale leefomgeving, die tot doel heeft behandeling, onderwijs, socialisatie, ondersteuning en bescherming te bieden of te versterken voor kinderen en jongeren met welomschreven psychische en/of gedragsmatige problematiek; dit in samenwerking met hun gezin/familie en een breed scala aan formele en informele hulpbronnen in de samenleving". De bijeenkomst stond in het teken van kennisuitwisseling en het ontwikkelen van een internationale onderzoeksagenda. Tevens werden de contouren van een consensusverklaring over TRZ besproken. Deze verklaring, die hier integraal wordt weergegeven, omvat onder meer vijf basisprincipes van zorg, die in de visie van de Werkgroep TRZ altijd richtinggevend dienen te zijn voor goede residentiële jeugdhulp.