1 / 15

Placement Stability

Placement Stability. The Sheffield Picture. Why research this?. Measured on performance indicators Improve outcomes and services for children Other predictive measures using existing EMS data had not been effective Greater detail from qualitative methods needed. What were we looking at?.

xuan
Download Presentation

Placement Stability

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Placement Stability The Sheffield Picture

  2. Why research this? • Measured on performance indicators • Improve outcomes and services for children • Other predictive measures using existing EMS data had not been effective • Greater detail from qualitative methods needed

  3. What were we looking at? • NI 62 – children who had had 3 placement moves within a 12 month period (from 31st March 2007 to 1st April 2008) • NI 63 – children who had had a long term placement (greater that 2.5 yrs) break down

  4. Methodology • Variety of methods • File audits of 20 children (random stratified sample) • Interviews with children’s social workers on their views on reasons for placement breakdown/moves • Focus group with Independent Reviewing Officers

  5. Areas that File audits/ interviews covered • The child’s history • The child’s behaviour • The level of attachment difficulties • The extent and nature of placement preparation • The stability of those associated with the placement • Contact issues

  6. Findings • Some long term placement breakdowns were positive • Some long term placement breakdowns were not preventable • Children in the NI 63 group tended to be older & able to express their wishes & feelings and ask for these to be taken into account • Level of children's behavioural and educational difficulties was extremely high

  7. Findings 2 • Breakdown of a LT placement often led to a ‘domino’ effect, with the child then having a number of placement moves • Attachment difficulties were felt to be impacting on children’s behaviour in the great majority of children • Limited placement choice may adversely effect subsequent moves

  8. Findings 3 • Children who were suffering frequent placement moves had greater instability of factors which surrounded their placements • changes of social worker • changes of fostering support worker • changes in educational provision • other changes and more unplanned moves

  9. Findings 4 • Contact issues did not seem so important in this sample. • Contrary to myth children had few changes of social workers • Offending behaviour did not appear to impact significantly on placement stability • Child disability not at all imp in placement moves, slightly so in LT breakdown

  10. Implications for practice 1 • Increase placement choice • Improve access to therapeutic services for LAC for severe emotional, attachment and behavioural problems • Maintain stability around placements esp education • Improve training for foster carers around behavioural support and coping with adolescence

  11. Implications for Practice 2 • Improve awareness and put in support after respite placements, and long term placement breakdowns to prevent ‘domino effect’ • Improve awareness around the pressures on foster carers of sibling placements when dynamics between siblings problematic

  12. Implications for Practice 3 • Improve preparation for placement for both child and foster care/ residential unit • Improve assessment of children's needs on all levels, and put in place a rigorous planning process to meet them in the foster home. • Question PI which suggest that breakdown of a long term placement is always negative

  13. Gaps in Research • No comparative group where placements had NOT broken down – what works? • Views of Family Placement workers who support placements were not sought • Audit tools were heavily biased in looking at foster placements rather than residential placements

  14. References • RiP (2008) Performance Pointers: NI 62 Stability of placements of looked after children: number of moves. • DEd and Skills ( 2005) Qualitative Study: The placement stability of looked after children. • Beecham J and Sinclair I (2007) Costs and Outcomes in Children’s Social Care : Messages from research. • Sinclair I (2005) Fostering Now. Messages from Research. Jessica Kingsley. • Munro ER and Hardy A (2006) Placement Stability – A review of the literature. Report to the DfES. Loughborough: Centre for child and family research. www.lboro.ac.uk/publications/ccfr/Publications/placement stabilitylitreview.pdf • Sinclair I, Baker C, Lee J, and Gibbs I (2007). The Pursuit of Permanence. A study of the English Care system.

  15. References 2 • Borthwick S & Lord J. (2008). ‘Together or Apart : Assessing Brothers and Sisters for Permanent Placement.’ BAAF

More Related