Sir Martin Narey’s recent report on residential child care not only reviews the quality of children’s homes but makes 34 recommendations for their better use by children’s services.
Echoing the recent Ofsted social care report that the overwhelming majority of homes are already good or outstanding, Narey opens his report stating “that children living in homes in England are treated overwhelmingly well”. He reports being “hugely impressed” and that “we can be generally and genuinely confident about the quality of care in children’s homes”.
The Independent Children’s Homes Association (ICHA), the representative body for children’s homes, sees the report as finally giving children’s homes the status they deserve. Narey notes children’s services should “no longer see the homes in which they work as institutions to be used only as a last resort”. He continues: “There is a very real and unmet demand for the greater use of children’s homes as part of an initial assessment for older children when first coming into care, and those on the edge of care.”
Anne Longfield, children’s commissioner for England, welcomed the report’s recognition that many children living in residential care see it as a positive experience. Children England said the report painted “an authentic and well-evidenced picture of the key issues and challenges for residential care”.
And the government has said it will act on the report. A residential care leadership board will be established, consisting of experts, officials and providers that will lead the sector, reporting directly to the children’s minister. This body will reform commissioning practice, help councils get better value, advise ministers on demand for services and develop best practice in workforce recruitment.
Turning the disparate recommendations into a coherent programme of work will require much more analysis. There are also enormous challenges in practice delivery, programming and funding. These are largely ignored in the government response which, though warm to the content and spirit of the report, refers development to its innovation programme.
Narey refutes several high profile beliefs. The right placement is seen as more important than the distance involved. With a close analysis of data, he rebuts claims about the criminalisation of children in residential homes, and makes recommendations to ensure young people aren’t be “needlessly criminalised”. Narey sees small homes as no better than larger ones, and says what is needed is a range of options that best meet children’s needs.
The report highlights deep-rooted problems in the commissioning of care with a lack of strategy, an over-reliance on framework contracting, and too many spot purchases.
The ICHA has warned against councils interpreting the recommendations for getting better value as an opportunity to drive down fees. This connects to our recent survey (pdf) that found provider income “barely meeting outgoings, and reserves are all but drained”. The ICHA warns against “aggressive negotiation”. And while Narey sees merit in pursuing different commissioning relationships, he advises against commissioning being “simply about exerting financial pressure on providers”. He sees possible savings through assured and planned occupancy and gives examples of current shared commissioning arrangements between local authorities and providers. The ICHA has consistently called for needs analysis and planning to ensure the right homes are in the right place meeting the right needs.
Creatively, Narey realigns the call for Staying Put for over-18s in children’s homes with new proposals for Staying Close to help smooth the transition to independent living. The government has committed to trialling Staying Close later this year.
For many decades, there has been a discussion as to whether residential child care is a part of social work. The report makes specific recommendations about this relationship, suggesting that social work practice improves its direct understanding of residential group living. The sector sees residential child care as a profession with its own knowledge and practice, identity and integrity. Children’s homes’ practitioners point to knowledge and practice frequently ahead of social work in the assessment and delivery of care for vulnerable young people.
Some sectors of residential provision are disappointed at their omission in the report, especially residential special schools. There is very little regarding secure accommodation. And fostering organisations have been discomforted with Narey’s observations. He sees a review of fostering as being overdue.
The report does not provide the blueprint to a new future. Narey appreciated that the situation was too complex. He sees the need for sophistication rather than simplification. But the report clears many fogging debates and provides a focus on what is needed.
Join the Social Care Network to read more pieces like this. Follow us on Twitter (@GdnSocialCare) and like us on Facebook to keep up with the latest social care news and views.
