Title

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px 'Helvetica Neue'; color: #000000; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000} p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px 'Helvetica Neue'; color: #000000; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000; min-height: 12.0px} span.s1 {font-kerning: none} The message is you've cut too deep It's telling that it's not until a council's children's services are rated inadequate that cuts are reversed and funds are suddenly found for more social workers and frontline managers. So despite the heightened anxiety councillors feel about cutting child protection services, the risks involved in reducing social work posts when referrals are on the increase, the consistent findings of serious case reviews that without adequate professional supervision newly qualified and inexperience social workers will be overwhelmed and quickly out of their depth, the director was forced to deliver savings. Two questions why and how come the additional funds could be found once the authority had been , ‘named and shamed'. Most authorities do give additional protection to social services they recognise that services are supporting vulnerable children and adults. However it's limited protection. The chief executive expects all departments to take their fair share of cuts. So yet again options for cuts of 3%, 5% and 7% are required from all directors and only in the final stages of the budget setting process, after all the arguments have been heard, all the risks assessed and the public reaction gauged will members decide which options they are prepared to take. At this stage Children's social services and adult social services can expect some very limited protection at the expense of more library closures, further cuts to the voluntary sector, yet more delays in road repairs, switching off street lights and closing public toilets as any saving no matter how small is a contribution to avoiding deeper cuts to services to vulnerable children and adults. The message from such an inspection is you've cut too deep, you are required to take immediate action. The chief executive and leader of the council have little option but to admit the service has let young people and their families down. Changing the senior management team isn't going to address the concerns of the inspectors who have clearly identified that the problem is too few experienced social workers and too few managers to offer essential regular professional supervision. So in this case a £1m is found to create a safer service. The money has to come from somewhere. In the short term it might come from postponing the planed major IT upgrade or from the building maintenance budget or some money from the reserves. But a one off sum can't fund permanent posts which is why the accountants will object to using capital funds to plug revenue holes. In the end the additional funds for children's services will come from other departments including adult social services. After years of cuts most directors, and cabinet portfolio holders would recognise (off the record) that should they be inspected tomorrow they too would be told that they have cut too deep. Maybe some directors of children and adult services secretly think the only way they will get some desperately needed additional money in their budget is to have a damning inspection report. In the mean time the risk management strategy adopted by councillors and directors for services to vulnerable children and adults is little more than cross your figures and hope. Blair McPherson is former director of community services and blogger

Title

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

Children's services risk management strategy is a leap of faith

By Blair McPherson | 30 July 2018

Popular articles by Blair McPherson

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING

Popular articles by Blair McPherson