Promoting the wellbeing of children in out of home care: involving children and

parents in care planning and review

Jonathan Dickens, Georgia Philip and Julie Young

Centre for Research on Children and Families, University of East Anglia

Workshop Structure

1The review process

2The studymethodology

3Key messages

Care planning and review In England there is an elaborate system of planning and

review for looked after children, intended to avoid drift and delay, achieve permanence and ensure good care

Wishes and feelings of the child must be taken into account (Children Act 1989). There is an expectation that children should be involved in the review process

Since 2004, ‘independent reviewing officers’ have chaired the reviews, but there have been on-going questions about their effectiveness and independence

New regulations and statutory guidance came into force in 2011, to improve care planning and strengthen the role of the IRO

Care planning and review

How is the system

working?

Our central research question

The research methodology: 2012-14

Case file analysis in

four LAs (122 cases)

In-depth interviews on half the case file cases (61)

A multi-professional focus group

in each of four LAs

Two focus groups with

young people

National questionnai

reIROs (65)

Team managers (46)

Children’s guardians (39)

IROs (54)

SWs (54)

Parents (15)

Children (15)

Professional

Phone based

Structured

Parent

Home based

Very unstructured

Child

Home based

Activity based

Use of a ‘PASS’ card

The Interviews

Children’s Interviews

Key questions

Poster about me

Decision cards

‘My review’ sheets

‘My SW / IRO’ sheets

Warm-up activity

Art/drawing/sticking exercises can draw the child in and encourage a more equitable view of the relationship

Who I live with…..

Family who I don’t live with…..

Likes…..Me…..

‘My Review’ sheets

Children were asked to draw where people sat in their LAC review

Me

Teacher

IRO

SW

Mum

My Review

‘Who makes decisions about…?’

Where I live?

Whether I can sleepover at friends

piercingsMy hair cut

How much pocket money I get

Decision cards

• Risk assessment needed • obtain info from referring person, have a ‘buddy system’ in

place, know your travel arrangements, leave valuables at home, prepare for a smoky environment

• Risk of interference/influence from other people in household – including small children

• emphasise that the interview needs to be private and that answers from key person needed

Home-based Interviews

Discussion of research methodology

Involving children and parents in care planning and review

Key findings & issues

Involvement

The purposes of involvement

• Instrumental - achieving best outcomes for children through better knowledge /communication/timely action

• Rights based– participation rights of children, parents and professionals (NB foster carers as parents and professionals)

The experience of involvement

• If the review process, including the meeting, is positive, clear, reassuring, affirming and enabling this can in itself have a positive impact on all participants - and the success of the care plan.

Involving children in reviews; findings:

IROs were seen as having key role in ‘tailoring’ the review and (along with SW) consulting children

Survey of IROs showed that just under ¼ visited ‘most’ children between reviews

Attendance at reviews increased with age: File analysis showed 5-12, 43% , 13-15, 65%, 16 + 80% attended some or all of the meeting

Survey of IROs showed that just over half felt they were not involving children appropriately; interviews showed that consultation documents consistently seen as an area for development

Review venues are an expression of the dilemma over balancing rights and needs of those involved – not simply the child’s ‘choice’• For 2 LAs around 70% of reviews took place in the foster home• Across all 4 LAs about 15% took place in schools

Key dilemmas for IROs and social workers:

‘Balancing’ rights and needs of children, birth family, carers and professionals – in order to improve child outcomes

Balancing the need for honesty and openness with need to ‘protect’ children’s privacy or feelings

Balancing the requirement of a formal, transparent system, with the need to be responsive and sensitive to the child

Bearing in mind the child’s chronological age, emotional age /stage and cognitive ability

Taking account of the type of placement e.g. long-term foster care and the DfE concept of a proportionate role for social workers, IROs and review processes.

Involving children: the review meeting

‘The child’s meeting’ and/or a ‘planning meeting’?

“You know, and it’s a difficult thing to get that balance right. Because if you just present a sort of rosy view because the child’s there, actually you’re not going to get a proper plan agreed because you’re discussing things that aren’t correct. But equally, to destroy a child, you know, that’s cruel” (SW interview)

“I am like the main person, which is right, because you never want to feel in a review, your review, you don’t want to feel like the black sheep do you? You don’t want to be, you know, only listening, you want to be involved in it” (17 year old girl, LTFC)

Involving birth parents:

Involved in plans?

Involved in planning and the child’s life

They never left us out of any plans; they would tell us what ideas they had and what was best for A and we just went along with it. There is no point trying to fight social services. (Mother, 3 children in care, 4th removed at birth)

You know, when we were talking about him coming home to sleep, she (social worker) is asking my opinion and how I feel it will be, and she is listening to me. She is really lovely. (Mother)

The IRO role as bridge building for parents

I think the [IRO] is on everyone’s side; he was a little bit for us and a little bit for the social worker, a big part for A (child) of course, I think he is trying to do the best for A, yeah. (Parent)

He treated us normal, he treated us like we were normal people (parent with learning disabilities) (Parent)

She made me feel like the mother that I am, yeah. (Parent) 

Discussion…

Multiple ‘parents’ in the lives / care plans of looked after children: ‘biological parents’; ‘corporate parents’; ‘attachment figures’. A role for everyone?

A need for an independent professional and oversight in the lives of looked after children? How independent?

A difficult balance - ensuring standards are met but allowing for flexibility and tailoring to each individual case?