An Evaluation of Integrated Working in Childrens Workforce - Assignment Example

An Evaluation of Integrated Working in Children’s Workforce Introduction The traditional view that the parents were the ultimate source of holistic support for children’s welfare has been superseded by a contemporary integrated working method. By integrated, it means forming into a holistic approach by putting all resources together. Jones and Leverett (2008, p. 125) define integrated working as including “the entire children’s workforce (that is, every individual who works, on an employed or voluntary basis, with children and their families across sectors such as health, education, early years and childcare, play work, social care, police, youth support and leisure services) under the ‘interagency’ umbrella”. Due to the diverse and unique capabilities and background of the workforce, the effectivity of increasingly integrated working in the children’s workforce is hereby evaluated in terms of its ability in delivering better services for children and families. From specific chapters of the course book ‘Promoting children’s wellbeing: policy and practice’, specific examples of integrated working would be analyzed to assist in the determination of the program’s effectiveness in improving the quality of service delivered. In addition, two DVD transcripts exemplifying integrated working would provide an illustration of how its effectiveness helps children’s workforce in their delivery of appropriate child care. Integrated Working Perspectives From the definition of integrated working, it is clearly identified that all individuals who work towards the achievement of improving children’s welfare in a comprehensive aspect must be assessed in terms of specific contributions for child support. Since the competencies and qualifications of parents, carers and other individual providing child care are relevant ingredients in determining the quality of care that could be accorded, the government has identified a vision for a world-class children’s workforce, to wit: “… is competent and confident; people aspire to be part of and want to remain in; where they can develop their skills and build satisfying and rewarding careers; and where parents, carers, children and young people trust and respect. (DfES, 2005a, p. 3) In a related study conducted by the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) (2007) there are seven identified qualities that young people and children prefer in their care service. These qualities are: choice, flexibility, information, being like other people, respect and being heard, fairness and non-discrimination, and safety (CSCI, 2007, p. 4). Aside from these, children emphasized the need for effective face-to-face communication which includes listening attentively, understanding what messages are being relayed, the ability to explain clearly and to do appropriate action. Of equal relevance is the carers ability to include children in the communication process through active participation, involvement and consultation especially from children with learning disabilities. Finally, to be classified as integrated working approach, the skills and knowledge applied by various practitioners should share a core or common component. Accordingly, the “Common Core of Skills and Knowledge for the Children’s Workforce (DfES, 2005b) identified six areas of expertise: effective communication and engagement, child and young person development, safeguarding and promoting the welfare of the child, supporting transitions, multi-agency working, and sharing information.” These common set of skills and knowledge form the framework for integrated working which should be structured in such a way that their format exudes uniformity in style and process to ensure a standard pattern of learning for all the children in identified locations. The Need to Evaluate Integrated Working Jones & Leverett (2008) averred that “all UK governments agree that children will benefit from closer working between practitioners and between agencies” (p. 129). There should be close coordination and effective communication among different practitioners and professions working towards children’s wellbeing. In this regard, the Common Assessment Framework was introduced to specifically address the integration in purpose, process and structure of what needs to be done for children’s welfare and how it should be done. With an identified framework which is uniform for all service providers, the process of undertaking an evaluation of that framework becomes feasible. According to Jones & Leverett (2008, p. 149), “the process of evaluating attempts to judge or make recommendations that in turn can help sustain or improve the quality of a service or practice intervention. Evaluation can focus on both the process and the outcome, and can be either an ongoing process or a one-off event”. Evaluation is means to determine if the modules and teaching methodologies applied to children are in fact effective in instilling the objectives identified therein. In addition, not only are the methodologies assessed and evaluated, but the practitioners as well. By evaluating practitioners and carers, administrators and agencies would easily identify the strengths and weaknesses of service providers. In doing so, areas of improvement could be implemented to correct inefficiencies and ensure a most effective delivery of services to children and their families. Methods of Evaluation Stone & Rixon (2008) stipulated that “one element of evaluation might be to consider to what extent integrated teams or new initiatives or structures have overcome obstacles and enabled more positive ways of working” (p. 168). Another effective way of evaluation is through setting targets and measuring if the process and systems achieved the desired results. In fact, Banks (2004) emphasized that “the importance of targets inevitably raises the question of how they are set and whether they are the right ones. Practitioners recognize that targets can enable clarity and equity, and focus attention on important areas of practice.” Other evaluation methods which provide information on the effectiveness of the delivery of service for children are as follows: surveys, interviews, observation and school-related statistical information. Surveys can be solicited from all participants of the program – from the children, parents, carers, providers and even the local agencies. Interviews provide immediate response to interviewers on the effectiveness of the training or teaching methods instituted. Observation and statistical information can both be utilized for research studies which require an acceptable number of samples to prove hypothesis and form conclusive recommendations. Programs which Underwent Evaluation To prove how evaluation of integrated working determines the effectiveness of processes and outcomes, several programs were identified with built in evaluation methods. Stone & Rixon (2008) stipulated that “Sure Start provides an example of a major attempt to promote interagency working for children. The idea of partnerships between agencies and including families was built into the programme from the outset.” (p. 179). Glass (1999, 264) stated that “at a policy level [Sure Start] represents a commitment to investing in our children for a long-term future and a commitment to the belief that statutory and voluntary agencies working together with a common goal can achieve more than the sum of the individual parts”. The built in evaluation of Sure Start had diverse patterns due to the “number of central objectives with a range of related and detailed targets (Sure Start, 2002)”. The National Audit Office evaluation of Sure Start children’s centres emphasized “how having people from different organizations working together in an integrated way is both essential and very challenging” (p.178). The feedback mechanism, however, failed to provide direct connections between what services were delivered and their interagency nature. Another program, the Children’s Fund, was established to promote interagency working. According to its official evaluation agency, the National Evaluation of Children’s Fund, “alongside its key targets, three guiding principles of the Children’s Fund were prevention, partnership, and ensuring children and young people’s participation in the design, delivery and evaluation of preventative services” (NECF, 2004a). The evaluation process generated information on participative practices among participants including children and practitioners. Feedback from Carers and Parents Chris Young, a support officer for Pupil and School Support Service in Birmingham, which is an agency that supports children with learning difficulties in mainstream schools right through from nursery up to secondary, relayed that an advantage of multi agency working is its ability to solicit relevant and updated information for other participants of the program. He stressed the importance of close coordination and being well informed in all facets of the children’s service to avoid redundancy in activities and methodologies. In ‘Working with Parents’, cares and practitioners recognize the value of including parents in child support programs. Their participation assists both the children and other family members in determining the scope of improvement of their child’s wellbeing. This is actually in conjunction with the government’s initiative to work not only the children but also with the parents as well. The idea is to work alongside other agencies to integrate family support service alongside health visitors, social workers, GP surgeries, and other care practitioners. Conclusion As averred by Jones & Leverett (2008), “some of the most important factors in achieving good interagency work do not involve highly technical, complicated issues of interagency coordination, but rather are to do with the people skills that staff brings to the child protection process.” The evaluation methods assist in determining if integrated working accomplished the identified objectives of the specific programs designed to deliver services to children and their families. Ultimately, the evaluation also identified that the skills and competencies of the practitioners are the most importance influencing factor to ensure that an efficient and effective delivery of services were appropriately accorded to children and their families, alike. References Banks, S. (2004). Ethics, Accountability and the Social Professions, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan. Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI). (2007). Children’s Services: CSCI Findings 2004–07, Retrieved August 26, 2009 from Department for Education and Skills. (2005a). Children’s Workforce Strategy: A strategy to build a world-class workforce for children and young people, Retrieved August 26, 2009 from Department for Education and Skills. (2005b). Common Core of Skills and Knowledge for the Children’s Workforce, Retrieved August 26, 2009 from DVD Audio Transcript. Chris Young. DVD Video Transcript. Working with parents. Glass, N. (1999). ‘Sure Start: the development of an early intervention programme for young children in the United Kingdom’, Children & Society, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 257–264. Jones, C. & Leverett, S. (2008). ‘Policy into practice: assessment, evaluation and multi- agency working with children’. Promoting children’s wellbeing: policy and practice. The Open University. United Kingdom. National Evaluation of the Children’s Fund (NECF). (2004a). Collaborating for the Social Inclusion of Children and Young People: Emerging Lessons from the First Round of Case Studies, Research Report No. 596, London, DfES. Stone, B. & Rixon, A. (2008). ‘Working together for children?’ Promoting children’s wellbeing: policy and practice. The Open University. United Kingdom. Sure Start. (2002). PSA Targets 2003–06, Retrieved August 26, 2009 from Read More