AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE INTER-AGENCY WORKING AUSTRALIA & AMERICA JULIE LAWRENCE LECTURER IN...

AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

INTER-AGENCY WORKINGAUSTRALIA & AMERICA

JULIE LAWRENCELECTURER IN SOCIAL WORK

14 September 2010 Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

1

INTERAGENCY RESEARCH

Australia (Victoria)

Comparable with similar services developed in the United States of America (Connecticut) during the 1990s

14 September 2010 Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review 2

THE INTENSIVE FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES

(FAMILIES FIRST)

•An Evaluation of the Pilot Programme (2002)•Funded by the Department of Health and Community Services, Victoria

•Examined Issues in collaboration with other agencies

•A Child Protection Service & Family Support Services (Fostering)


FAMILIES FIRST

• Voluntary family support services• Small Pilot Programme• Two family workers, a supervisor, and an

office manager• Referrals of children at imminent risk• Avoidance of ‘worst case scenarios’


FAMILIES FIRSTSPECIALIST SERVICES

• Has a therapeutic core to the work• Health & disability programmes• Substance Misuse Counsellors• Psychiatric Services Available


Interagency Relations and the Front-Line Worker

• Wimpfheimer et al (1990) offer some principles for collaborative work.

• Pre-conditions for successful collaboration…Mutuality & TimingAuthorityInfluence & Creativity


Interagency Relations…

• These preconditions frame the experience of the front-line worker. Often these workers... Receive & make ReferralsAct as advocates for the deployment of

resourcesInterpret policies & Discover unmet needsBuild or sabotage an interagency climate


Social Work Task Force(England)

‘Social Workers must play a leading role in keeping adults and children safe and thriving but cannot act successfully on their own: they rely on cooperation and action by other agencies and professions’

www.dcsf.gov.uk (2009:62)


http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/

METHODS

• Efforts made to explore the experience of front-line workers in interagency work

• First 18 months dealt with 32 families• Case records were analysed• Interviews with Families First

caseworker and Protective Services Workers


METHODS

• Group and individual discussions with managers and caseworkers – service system issues

• Local service providers in other agencies were interviewed

• Arrival and performance of Families First• Invited to ‘stakeholder meetings’• Conclusions from the evaluation were

shared at the end of the study period. 14 September 2010 Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review 10

Families First(Specialist Agency)Voluntary Agency

Child Protection Service

Spanning the boundaries:Issues of Collaboration

Linked Fostering Service

14 September 2010 Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

11

Families First What Worked Well


What Worked Well…

• At policy Level both the Government and non-Government worked in Collaboration

• Development of interagency philosophy – a shared focus

• Planning for Staffing & Training• Establishing a framework for Evaluation• Both staff groups receptive to training• A senior link person appointed - referrals


What Difficulties were Experienced…

• Referral Rates varied from across the service area

• Some workers made ‘over-enthusiastic’ referrals – before the nature of risk was identified

• Some CPS workers felt ‘stuck’ with hard cases• Professional judgements came into question

about assessment recommendations from the CPS and whether the IFPS was appropriate


Added Difficulties…

• Families First workers struggled to develop an identity recognisably different

• Raised expectations by families• Refusal of children/young people to

cooperate• Marriage & relationship referrals

remained unfulfilled


Analysis & Implications

• These observations echoed the report noted from the U.S.A. experience

• Greater emphasis needed upon relations with other family support services (fostering)

• Families do not perceive themselves to be ‘hemmed in’ by collusive professionals


Analysis Cont…

• The Stayers: chronically troubled families…• IFPS has a role in terms of offering families

hope – the surprise of discovering new skills and resources

• IFPS has a distinctive focus for a brief period of service

• IFPS is emotionally charged work – antagonism can flare up between agencies


In Summary…

• A continuing struggle about separateness and the articulation of protective goals.

• The establishment and maintenance of these common goals while allowing differentiation of means

• Attention to risk and purpose suggests questions the referring CPW and the receiving IFPS worker might ask themselves and each other!


BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Campbell, L. (2002) Interagency Practice in Intensive Family Preservation Services. Children & Youth Services Review Vol.24 (9/10) pp701-718.

• Department of Health (2009) Social Work Task Force: Building a safe, confident future. London: The Stationery Office.

• Fraser, M. Pecors, P. Haapala, D. (1991) Families in crisis: The impact of intensive family preservation services. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Lindsey, D. (1994) Family preservation and child protection: Striking a balance. Children and Youth Services Review 16, pp279-294.

• Scott, D. (1993) Inter-agency collaboration: Why is it so difficult? Can we do it better? Children, Australia (18) pp4-9.

• Wimpfheimer, R. Bloom, M. Kramer, M. (1990) inter-agency collaboration: Some working principles. Administration in Social Work 14, 89-102.


AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE INTER-AGENCY WORKING AUSTRALIA & AMERICA JULIE LAWRENCE LECTURER IN...

Documents

Transcript of AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE INTER-AGENCY WORKING AUSTRALIA & AMERICA JULIE LAWRENCE LECTURER IN...