Halfway Through EIP2: Assessing Where We Are on the Key Deliverables – Progress and Imperatives

Half time, time to think it through, consider the change, see it from a different view.
Amy Winehouse
Back to Basics
Billy Bragg among others

Safety planning and networks

 Being at the Goal

 10 – In all our cases we work with family from the earliest meetings to build a network around the children and family, these networks are active in building and monitoring safety plans that focus on the everyday living arrangements of the child(ren), and the safety plans are iterative, detailed and rigorous.

0 – Building and working with networks is the exception and not the rule, most plans focus on services rather than the everyday living arrangements of children and this is unlikely to change.

Where would you rate the situation today? 

  • See it more than I don’t see it, families tell us this (in complaints, compliments)
  • Starting to be considered often – talking about it
  • See a bit of tick boxing, skill base is not solid enough as only a few people have been on the training
  • Definite expectation as to how we work, there are good examples of practice
  • More and more people thinking about how we do this
  • Value based system
  • It depends where you look. I see Signs of Safety plans that are rigorous in operational areas (some areas of family support, assessment and intervention North & south) that involves the family
  • Some good plans that work but inconsistent. If we took 100 plans, 60 would be referring for services. Across the board, it depends on the individual
  • We lack the challenge from leaders and them knowing what good looks like, drive it. QA system says its good, so managers say why do we need to change.
  • Enthusiasm; child in the middle of the plan; CP conference chairs trying harder to involve family and network in planning
  • We have got a plan and we have been implementing it. We sent people from all over the county to the FF training; it is being put into the training resources; seeing buy-in; some people have been doing it but not necessarily calling it that.
  • There’s still a lot to do, some do it well and all of the time.
  • The culture and resources are not fully there yet
  • There are enough early adopters to make it work
  • Still some who see it as others responsibility to make it happen
  • Broad spectrum of staff, those who are not driving conversations in a different way to those who are consistent
  • It’s a big challenge for large organisations to have the detailed conversations needed to make the changes in culture, takes time to grow it
  • Core family we are getting well involved
  • Consideration given by workers
  • Building a culture of looking at family first
  • Family owned safety planning
  • Immediate safety plan at the front door
  • No written agreements, moving to safety planning
  • Legal planning meeting being robust expecting family owned plans
  • Use of support from dedicated teams in agency
  • When busy we default to what we used to do
  • Inconsistent practice
  • Front door not robust at doing it

Making Progress Towards the Goal

10 – Since starting EIP2, we have a made a clear and concrete trajectory plan, we are implementing that plan to build the number of cases in which we are working with families to build networks around the children and families with these networks being active in building and monitoring safety plans that focus on the everyday living arrangements of the child(ren).

0 – We are pretty much where we were when EIP2 started, we have not noticeably increased the use of networks nor the extent to which safety plans focus on everyday living arrangements of children, and our trajectory plan might look okay on paper, but it is not happening.

Where would you rate the situation today?

  • Got a plan in place, but still got young people into care with no network in place (reviewing cases at the moment) thinking is still let’s get the child safe before
  • We are not there, but we are making progress; some think they’ve slipped back from what I have seen in practice and the descriptors I have been given (looking at all the outliers); is it that we know more?
  • We are a point in the implementation – there is a level of knowledge and commitment that wasn’t there before; we have still got to get there in terms of knowledge
  • Still some confusion on what a safety plan is
  • Have been alert to the implementation plan and able to change it in line with what it has thrown up and maintain focus on the end goal while altering the flow of the plan to achieve it.
  • There are some teams that have just got it and are getting on with it
  • Complexities of teams, mix of practice and taking on concepts
  • Individual manager, service manager, practitioner cultures
  • The challenge of different demographics e.g. heavy reliance on interpreters and how that impacts
  • Need to ID the factors at play in the teams that drive their approach
  • We have a clear trajectory, plan but things happen in some part and not others
  • First 6 months would have been a 0 but we have a plan, training, evidence of trajectory planning in CIN
  • People have got used to the language and even if we don’t see it everywhere the family networks are helping the safety planning process and how it connects.
  • We are thinking differently
  • Family Finding but what does it mean to different areas and different people
  • Further on than when we started, we have a plan and all service areas including fostering are on board with this.
  • We introduced the progress plan to replace cin/cp and this focuses on how the network will keep the child safe
  • We try to build network from an early point but need to see more of it
  • Need everyone trained and up to a level so there is resilience – is there any train the training, some people genuinely believe in this
  • Leadership – practice takes courage and bravery, need managers to support this, sense that we think that we are there, but our leadership needs to be better
  • Need to consider how we as an organisation can ensure we know who the important people are to children we are in service to
  • More workers are using this, and thinking in this way
  • Workers trying to be creative
  • Being encouraged
  • Not enough effort
  • Understanding of strengths and safety
  • Time to practice and gain confidence
  • Organisational trajectory is too light, not driving the practice enough and not owned by the organisation, milestones therefore not owned
  • Unclear what our goal actually is, so can’t articulate this to staff

RAG Ratings (a broad perspective)

  

Alignment of forms and processes

Being at the Goal

10 – The forms workers use in case management match full implementation of Signs of Safety practice, from referral / MASH through initial assessment and intervention to safety planning and case trajectory and timeline, and the processes that cases pass through both meet statutory processes and clearly align with full Signs of Safety practice

0 – The forms reflect the three columns of Signs of Safety assessment but are not strong on danger statements and safety goals, or the other analysis categories, and go nowhere near safety planning focused on everyday living arrangements, networks, trajectory and timeline for case management

Where would you rate the situation today?

  • We have done a massive amount of tweaking with the current forms; use of the word ‘forms’ is not helpful
  • Our assessment literally follows the road map; aligned all of our services to this, took apart what we currently do – why do you do that?
  • We are concentrating on getting basics right
  • We have redesigned our system single assessment & plan (progress plan) that follows the SP road map, supervision templates changed. Took apart what we currently do, looked at what was mandatory, looked at what we didn’t need to do and have kept this under review with staff.
  • MASH, A&I, FSI although there might be duplication I can see some of the domains of inquiry.
  • Lot of work done on the forms, fewer workers finding it a challenge to use as they have been adapted
  • CPC process, Court work, PLO not always aligned to SofS
  • Probation and Early help have a few struggles with their processes/paperwork not dove-tailing in
  • Duplication, IT system and the time it takes to make changes, looking at redesign of the family assessment but it’s how to get it into the system so that people can record
  • Throughout the forms have scaling questions, 3 columns.
  • Significant work has been done on the forms, therefore breadth being pushed
  • Insufficient analysis
  • Confusion between frameworks. ie. Assessment triangle/Merton/Signs of Safety
  • Mapping forms have included the analysis domains on the forms so analysis not being pushed

Making Progress Towards the Goal

10 – Since starting EIP2, we are building on what we previously achieved, with a clear and concrete trajectory plan that we are implementing and monitoring, that will see our forms and processes consistent with full Signs of Safety implementation within a year’s time.

0 – We are pretty much where we were when EIP2 started, we have not reviewed or reformed our forms and processes to align more closely with full Signs of  Safety implementation, and our plan might look OK on paper but it is not happening.

Where would you rate the situation today?

  • We have made a lot of progress and are doing a lot so in a year’s time, I think we will have this
  • I haven’t seen the plan, we’ve bought a model, but the big piece of work is to come, risk and danger in front of me and not behind me
  • This will never end, this is a continuous journey which will require the organisation to be open to adapting and evolving as a learning organisation.
  • We are on with the processes, IT ongoing development because as you change one thing it effects other things
  • We have looked reviewed, there is a MOSAIC project, posts agreed for that, Project Manager, but we haven’t done any of the building or testing and we are behind and by the time EIP2 ends we won’t have met this target, we know this already, it will take longer.
  • We have a good plan, trajectory, good people waiting to start work. What’s stopping is where is the money coming from
  • Forms don’t have safety goals in them. Templates for group supervision; forms rely on individuals – not ‘mandated’ in the system. Need a radical re-look at forms.
  • Developing the forms are in the plan but definitely slipped
  • Lots of work on forms to streamline
  • Managers signing off poor practice
  • Managers not attending PODS/PL session therefore not growing confidence and competence

RAG Ratings (a broad perspective)

QA alignment

Being at the Goal

10 – Our QA tools and processes are consistent with the participative and learning ethos of our practice, Signs of Safety, they give us a sound grip on the breadth, depth and impact of Signs of Safety practice, and the QA measures and processes feed directly into learning.

0 – Our QA tools and process are designed and implemented entirely to ensure compliance with all statutory and policy mandated procedures and indicate remedial action where these are not met.

Where would you rate the situation today?

  • We have the process in place, framework that is in place
  • If it fits into the learning programme
  • Framework and language and it is part of the thinking
  • We have a collaborative audit framework and we do get family feedback and we do talk about practice
  • We get feedback from more than one source and also externally from safeguarding board, based on DLT session, we do have a system in place
  • Not convinced that there is a universal understanding of what collaborative auditing is
  • Not sure with the audits, what is the impact of this in terms of practice
  • People opt out of collaborating, quality of some of the audits, there is no feedback limited opportunity to do the learning
  • Tried to do a deep analysis of the audits, but the narrative was not there – what was the rationale, missing.
  • Lots of things for improvement, but no follow up
  • Compliance in the system, if we use it, it’s a good system, but where there is lack of compliance, difficult to get your hands on information about parents experience of service; so with people joining the team this will help the audit process.
  • There is variation in the use of the audit tools, it has definitely shifted to a participatory process in Supervision, case audit, reflective time.
  • QA is readily visible within our system and presents as a meaningful conversation and understanding of what has been taking place and the thinking behind it.
  • Could be strengthened with better QA around how we engage with families
  • Get clear on what ‘good enough’ looks like
  • We have an audit tool and we review the framework; but we won’t get rid of a tick box approach because Ofsted say we know our practice well, we could know the practice better by asking better questions
  • It’s the best I have seen it; QA framework recently reviewed and although we are not using collaborative case audit it does build in questions that relate to SofS that supports our learning audits
  • Infrastructure/processes built; doing more auditing than we ever did before; talking about what it is telling us; looks lovely but not mature and not being fully used e.g. if something expected pops up we can’t adapt.
  • Senior leaders going out with workers more – bringing them closer to the practice (example given of manager being moved by the S of S practice she saw)
  • Collaborative, lots of learning 450 in last year
  • See the next steps so what to embed
  • Closing the loop, so the outcomes and learnings do impact on where next
  • Not sure it measures the impact?
  • More focus on outcomes
  • Learning from collaboration not shared into the organisational learning
  • Not starting with a measure

Making Progress Towards the Goal

10 – Since starting EIP2, we have closely examined our QA tools and processes and made a clear and concrete trajectory plan that we are implementing and monitoring and that will see us with a reformed set of tools and process consistent with our practice ethos, informing us about practice breadth, depth and impact, and feeding learning, within a year’s time.

0 – We are pretty much where we were when EIP2 started, we had already made some moves towards being more participative but workers would tell us QA is much more about compliance and being checked than about learning, and our plan might look OK on paper but it is not happening.

Where would you rate the situation today?

  • Feel that is going to happen, it is more about compliance at the moment,
  • Collaborative audit was quite tricky and long, wished I knew more about this – not done one before
  • Meeting had earlier in the week, workshop on what new Signs of Safety audit tool would look like, much shorter and faster, team managers liked it
  • Looking at it now; hopeful it’s a new system and that we can do something with this
  • Trajectory plan – no concrete plan in place
  • Don’t feel we have really done anything on this deliverable but there is less of manager going and finding out more of what do we need to do about this together
  • Making the move to 100% collaborative and use of peer support and challenge has been well received
  • Trying to avoid fitting the service user into our system working to strengthen ourselves so that every process is collaborative, and our QA goes deeper to show the workings out around decision making and learning
  • We have Camden coming in to review our QA process because they got ‘outstanding’ for their QA; Camden however do systemic, not Signs of Safety, they don’t have a QA team
  • We do have some managers who do quality audits on closure
  • Learning audits, thematic, dip sampling have different templates auditing in different ways. The learning audit is the one most aligned to the approach
  • Would be higher if we were feeding the learning more – going back a while after an audit to see if the audit had improved the work.
  • Example given of a worker being excited and enthused after having a case audited.
  • I am still worried about appreciative inquiry and reflective supervision (some of our targets) – progress made but not there yet.
  • Clearer measure
  • Asking for the evidence
  • Senior drive
  • Sharing the learning
  • Compliance outcome, worker will do
  • Family involvement
  • Audit has become about system watching and not about helping families and practitioners. How we build and include feedback from families; not been easy and need to think about how we take this forward

Rag Rating

What are the one or two imperatives for the next year that will be necessary for EIP2 to have been a success?

  • Family networking reaching for the network from the first contact
  • Our organisation models that we are a network to our own practice development and we model it across the organisation
  • For children and families to be able to tell them how they have been helped
  • Evidence with all families, DS and SG meaningful, remove all professional terminology
  • Harmonise our different lenses – without arguing or taking offense
  • Family and friends and networks being fully explored with each and every child where it is safe to do so
  • QA framework, slowing down our thinking, difficult situations, comprehensive review of QA and training on the flow chart, they will get Signs of Safety
  • More group supervision and family network meetings
  • Grow forest and champions
  • More AI
  • QA – intro collaborative audit; Come away from compliance towards quality and learning
  • Leadership to learn, own and lead Family Finding and safety planning in their area of service
  • Learning; co-ordinated approach to developing internal training/learning
  • Safety Planning & Networks; Review court SWET, viabilities assessment, SGO, Kinship care assessments and align with Signs of Safety; re link to local family justice board.
  • Decision & ownership on alignment forms and processes / IT
  • Develop the PL confidence and consistent commitment – Improving Safety Planning
  • Create learning & training pathway
  • Leadership messages (what Signs of Safety means to me) and branding
  • Consistent leadership is top
  • Audit process
  • Family finding embedded in all practice
  • PLs doing 1:1 with workers who are not there yet
  • Identifying future training group
  • Networks increased, number measurable
  • QA aligned including worker and family input
  • Increase in successful safety plan
  • Families part of celebrations
  • Review training offer, including FF
  • Embed FF starting from beginning of involvement
  • Clarity around FF network meetings
  • Improving Self QA with a good loop back into learning for the organisation
  • Improving analysis
  • Stronger organisational trajectory and ownership within the organisation.

 


Back to the EIP2 Journal – October 2018