AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE INTER-AGENCY WORKING AUSTRALIA & AMERICA

1. AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVEINTER-AGENCY WORKINGAUSTRALIA & AMERICA JULIE LAWRENCE LECTURER IN SOCIAL WORK Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

2. INTERAGENCY RESEARCH Australia (Victoria) Comparable with similar services developed in the United States of America (Connecticut) during the 1990s Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

3. 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) Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

4. 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’ Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

5. FAMILIES FIRSTSPECIALIST SERVICES • Has a therapeutic core to the work • Health & disability programmes • Substance Misuse Counsellors • Psychiatric Services Available Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

6. Interagency Relations and the Front-Line Worker • Wimpfheimer et al (1990) offer some principles for collaborative work. • Pre-conditions for successful collaboration… • Mutuality & Timing • Authority • Influence & Creativity Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

7. Interagency Relations… • These preconditions frame the experience of the front-line worker. Often these workers... • Receive & make Referrals • Act as advocates for the deployment of resources • Interpret policies & Discover unmet needs • Build or sabotage an interagency climate Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

8. 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) Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

9. 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 Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

10. 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. Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

11. Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

12. Families First What Worked Well Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

13. 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 Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

14. 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 Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

15. 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 Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

16. 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 Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

17. 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 Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

18. 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! Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

19. 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. Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review

20. 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. Julie Lawrence (PhD) Literature Review