Brian Gannon the co-editor of the International Child and Youth Care Network, CYC-Net, has been following the discussions on this page about the decision made by the Department for Children, Schools and Families to cease funding the National Centre for Excellence in Residential Child Care and to provide funding for the private consultancy organisation Tribal and allow it to take a significant role in residential child care affairs in England. Brian sees some similarities between this and recent developments in the Child and Youth Care field in South Africa. (Child and Youth Care is a title which encompasses what is known in the United Kingdom as residential child care).
We do not claim to comment with authority on child care matters in South Africa but we have looked in admiration at some of the innovative practice in residential child care in that country and so it is interesting that although there are honours degree courses in child and youth care in South Africa - indeed people like Thom Garfat and Leon Fulcher have led a masters level programme for child and youth care workers - there still appears to be a feeling of some exasperation among child and youth care workers that their distinct professional discipline has not been given the recognition it deserves. We suspect that this exasperation is experienced in many countries and that it is epitomised by the reaction to the decision of the United Kingdom's government to cease funding England's National Centre for Excellence in Residential Child Care.
Brian Gannon writes : I have been interested in looking over your shoulder at the recent correspondence you have been having about DCSF and felt it has a resonance for child and youth care workers in SA. To illustrate this I am quoting below something which Merle Allsopp, National Director of South Africa's National Association of Child Care Workers, wrote at this time last year in the Association's journal Child & Youth Care Work:
”The first week of May is International Child and Youth Care Worker's Week.Some child and youth care programs here and abroad will have celebrated this occasion recently, using it as an opportunity to recognize child and youth care workers and express appreciation for the very distinct and exacting work that they do.
In the context of this being the month that we especially celebrate child and youth care workers, it is rather ironic that the last week of this month will see the release of the research on the 'Demarcation of Social Services' sponsored by the Department of Social Development and managed by the South African Council for Social Service Professions. Effectively a survey of opinion, the findings of this endeavour will tell us as child and youth care workers whether we exist or not!
This is not a new experience for child and youth care workers - this being defined by popular opinion of others outside the field. The international child and youth care literature from time to time refers to similar situations arising in other countries - with concomitant protests and expressions of outrage being recorded by affected child and youth care worker fraternities.
The outcome of the research and the implications of this outcome may mean that we as the South African child and youth care field have to rework our strategies and approach to achieving recognition for our field. For we have reason to be concerned about the implications, not only of the research, but about the conditions which gave rise to the research. Why question the existence of the profession in the first place? We have an established Professional Board, and consulted-upon draft regulations which will allow child and youth care workers the dignity and affirmation that comes with registration. If we question the existence of the profession, we question the validity of people who identify as child and youth care workers, and we question the existence of the Professional Board. More than anything else, we cast doubt on the contributions made to at-risk children and families by
of some of our most active and helpful social service professionals in the country.
But as I worry about hidden agendas that may be operating in our country in relation to broadening the range of social service professions beyond social work, I think too about something Thom Garfat wrote a while back - on the dangers of letting others define us, and avoiding hooking too deeply into the views that others have of our profession. I am reminded that as child and youth care workers we must remain steadfast in our certainty of the value of our unique profession and what we have to offer young people”.
(Posted April 29th, 2010).
Sunday, 16 May 2010
Wednesday, 5 May 2010
NCERCC : Richard Rollinson’s letter to Sir Paul Ennals, the Chief Executive of the National Children’s Bureau 16th April, 2010
This was first posted on the goodenoughcaring website at http://www.goodenoughcaring.com on April 20th, 2010
Dear Paul,
NCERCC
I am writing to you to express my continuing concern – and that of many others - about the prospect of NCERCC being wound down now that its funding from the DCFS has ceased. As one of the members of the original committee, along with Bill Utting, which worked hard to develop the proposal that NCB then put successfully to the government for such a Centre for residential care, I have always held a particular interest in how NCERCC has developed. Along with many, many others, I have been delighted with how it has located itself at the heart of our residential sector in so short a time.
You yourself will be aware of this heartening reality. Therefore you will also understand just how taken aback and troubled we are now by the imminent disappearance of this Centre. We also wish to make clear that while we genuinely appreciate the support and institutional base that NCB has provided for NCERCC during its existence, we believe strongly that “ownership” of the Centre extends well beyond NCB itself. It is one of the greatest achievements of NCERCC that it has become already what we had always hoped, a “home base” for our residential sector and capable of being a “critical friend” when necessary in order to generate improvements in such provision. We are not prepared to simply see such an achievement and role drain away now, to be “replaced” by a different government supported activity to “drive through” improvements. [Note the so 90s business language.]
I am forwarding by email too further expressions of concern, anger and dismay that have been circulating since news of the risk to NCERCC has emerged. An important part of this concern is about how we were ignorant of that risk until decisions had been made concerning central government funding and with no opportunity until now to participate in securing alternative funding. Even now we wish to follow this route and believe that with NCB we can achieve such funding – so long as we have time to do so and the Centre does not close up shop, so to speak, before this can be done. It is not an alternative to NCERCC we desire, nor a pale shadow of what it has become. It is the “real article” we seek to preserve and help to grow further.
Given the longstanding support of residential care by NCB across the years – and I have been privileged to be part of several of these earlier NCB based activities – it is our hopeful expectation that your organisation can act even now to secure the continued and active presence of NCERCC in the sector, preferably but not absolutely necessarily from its NCB base. Many of us are fully prepared to participate fully in this effort, and we have some ideas already.
Thank you again for the support NCB and you yourself have given NCERCC over these recent years. I look forward to hearing from you about how by our working together now it can continue to make a difference for our sector.
Yours sincerely,
Richard Rollinson
Independent Consultant in residential child care
Chairman of the Professional Advisory Group of the Charterhouse Group of Therapeutic Communities, of the Planned Environment Therapy Trust and of the Care Leavers Foundation
(Posted 20th April, 2010)
Dear Paul,
NCERCC
I am writing to you to express my continuing concern – and that of many others - about the prospect of NCERCC being wound down now that its funding from the DCFS has ceased. As one of the members of the original committee, along with Bill Utting, which worked hard to develop the proposal that NCB then put successfully to the government for such a Centre for residential care, I have always held a particular interest in how NCERCC has developed. Along with many, many others, I have been delighted with how it has located itself at the heart of our residential sector in so short a time.
You yourself will be aware of this heartening reality. Therefore you will also understand just how taken aback and troubled we are now by the imminent disappearance of this Centre. We also wish to make clear that while we genuinely appreciate the support and institutional base that NCB has provided for NCERCC during its existence, we believe strongly that “ownership” of the Centre extends well beyond NCB itself. It is one of the greatest achievements of NCERCC that it has become already what we had always hoped, a “home base” for our residential sector and capable of being a “critical friend” when necessary in order to generate improvements in such provision. We are not prepared to simply see such an achievement and role drain away now, to be “replaced” by a different government supported activity to “drive through” improvements. [Note the so 90s business language.]
I am forwarding by email too further expressions of concern, anger and dismay that have been circulating since news of the risk to NCERCC has emerged. An important part of this concern is about how we were ignorant of that risk until decisions had been made concerning central government funding and with no opportunity until now to participate in securing alternative funding. Even now we wish to follow this route and believe that with NCB we can achieve such funding – so long as we have time to do so and the Centre does not close up shop, so to speak, before this can be done. It is not an alternative to NCERCC we desire, nor a pale shadow of what it has become. It is the “real article” we seek to preserve and help to grow further.
Given the longstanding support of residential care by NCB across the years – and I have been privileged to be part of several of these earlier NCB based activities – it is our hopeful expectation that your organisation can act even now to secure the continued and active presence of NCERCC in the sector, preferably but not absolutely necessarily from its NCB base. Many of us are fully prepared to participate fully in this effort, and we have some ideas already.
Thank you again for the support NCB and you yourself have given NCERCC over these recent years. I look forward to hearing from you about how by our working together now it can continue to make a difference for our sector.
Yours sincerely,
Richard Rollinson
Independent Consultant in residential child care
Chairman of the Professional Advisory Group of the Charterhouse Group of Therapeutic Communities, of the Planned Environment Therapy Trust and of the Care Leavers Foundation
(Posted 20th April, 2010)
DCSF letter to Charles Sharpe
This was first posted on the goodenoughcaring website at http://www.goodenoughcaring.com on April 20th, 2010
DCSF
20th April, 2010
Dear Mr Sharpe
Thank you for your email dated 31 March about residential children's homes and an organisation called Tribal. On this occasion I have been asked to reply.
Tribal was awarded the support and challenge for children’s homes project after successfully completing a full formal tender process and has significant experience and expertise in delivering a support and challenge role to public service commissioners and providers.
Tribal’s team includes a strong blend of consultants, analysts and researchers with experience as trusted advisors to the children’s services sector, local authorities and central government. For example, Janet Rich Director of Simplicitas, has 17 years of professional experience in the field including in therapeutic residential care, leaving care and the mental health of looked after children. Janet will be acting as expert advisor to the programme and will chair the Project’s Advisory Group, bringing together key stakeholders in residential care and others. The Tribal team also includes Professor Peter Marsh of Chair in Child and Family Welfare at the University of Sheffield to provide academic expertise and develop a strong evidence base for the work.
Tribal will initially be focusing on engaging key stakeholders in residential care, to provide a seamless transition of support. They will work on developing face-to-face presence alongside a web presence and publication of newsletters aimed at providers and managers to encourage wider sector participation and engagement.
This project will offer an opportunity to support the dissemination and embedding of evidence based practice, play an active role in rolling out lessons from recent pathfinder and pilot activity to raise the quality of care in Children’s homes and act as a catalyst for a the development of evidence based practice within the sector as a whole.
I hope this information is useful.
Yours sincerely
Emma Hutchinson
Public Communications Unit
www.dcsf.gov.uk
Calum Strathie writes I received an identical response to the one Charles Sharpe did from DCSF when I asked it about Tribal and NCERCC except that Pamela Kearns of the Public Communications Unit replied to me and not Emma Hutchinson. I'm not sure if it's a standard response, but it's interesting how they make Tribal out to sound like a jar of Nescafe - "A Strong Blend"! Do any of the names in the blend mean anything to you? The question is "do we want the instant processed variety of Tribal?" or "do we want the fresh roast aroma of the Real McCoy from NCERCC?" There's no contest really.
DCSF
20th April, 2010
Dear Mr Sharpe
Thank you for your email dated 31 March about residential children's homes and an organisation called Tribal. On this occasion I have been asked to reply.
Tribal was awarded the support and challenge for children’s homes project after successfully completing a full formal tender process and has significant experience and expertise in delivering a support and challenge role to public service commissioners and providers.
Tribal’s team includes a strong blend of consultants, analysts and researchers with experience as trusted advisors to the children’s services sector, local authorities and central government. For example, Janet Rich Director of Simplicitas, has 17 years of professional experience in the field including in therapeutic residential care, leaving care and the mental health of looked after children. Janet will be acting as expert advisor to the programme and will chair the Project’s Advisory Group, bringing together key stakeholders in residential care and others. The Tribal team also includes Professor Peter Marsh of Chair in Child and Family Welfare at the University of Sheffield to provide academic expertise and develop a strong evidence base for the work.
Tribal will initially be focusing on engaging key stakeholders in residential care, to provide a seamless transition of support. They will work on developing face-to-face presence alongside a web presence and publication of newsletters aimed at providers and managers to encourage wider sector participation and engagement.
This project will offer an opportunity to support the dissemination and embedding of evidence based practice, play an active role in rolling out lessons from recent pathfinder and pilot activity to raise the quality of care in Children’s homes and act as a catalyst for a the development of evidence based practice within the sector as a whole.
I hope this information is useful.
Yours sincerely
Emma Hutchinson
Public Communications Unit
www.dcsf.gov.uk
Calum Strathie writes I received an identical response to the one Charles Sharpe did from DCSF when I asked it about Tribal and NCERCC except that Pamela Kearns of the Public Communications Unit replied to me and not Emma Hutchinson. I'm not sure if it's a standard response, but it's interesting how they make Tribal out to sound like a jar of Nescafe - "A Strong Blend"! Do any of the names in the blend mean anything to you? The question is "do we want the instant processed variety of Tribal?" or "do we want the fresh roast aroma of the Real McCoy from NCERCC?" There's no contest really.
Pulling the plug on good enough residential child care - DCSF style
This was first posted on the goodenoughcaring website at http://www.goodenoughcaring.com on April 12th, 2010.
We have had a large and supportive response to our recent report of the damaging blow dealt to residential child care in England by the decision of the Department for Children, Schools and Families to cease funding the National Centre for Excellence in Residential Child Care.
Some of us may have been present at the NCB conference in Birmingham in 2005 when Bruce Clark, then the Divisional Head of the Looked After Children Division in the Department of Education and Skills announced government funding of £731,000 to establish the NCERCC. It seemed then that residential child care had been provided with a strong platform from which to establish its place as a caring discipline.
Over a number of years the idea of the NCERCC was nurtured into being by a group of people and organisations with decades of practical experience, learning, research, development and management in residential child care. It is hard for us as residential child care workers not to feel a sense of humiliation when a consultancy organisation like Tribal with no depth of experience in our field is awarded such a powerful role in our work while the views of those whom we recognise as having deep insight of our professional discipline – residential child care - are dismissed.
Of course in a world dominated by a relatively small number of people seeking high financial rewards we understand that a large commercial consultancy like Tribal may claim expertise in anything in order to win a contract. To present a tender for a contract like the one Tribal has been awarded a commercial body can usually persuade an academic - with a curriculum vitae which suggests some interest in child care issues - to climb on board. We do not know if this is the case with Tribal, though its description of its current expertise does not include residential child care.
It may be that Tribal matters are a sideshow in this. The overwhelming majority of responses to our report identified the real villain of the piece as the DCSF. In pulling the plug on the NCERCC, not it seems despite of the latter's good work but, so it claims, because of it, DCSF is pulling the plug – in the way that its predecessors have done over many decades – on any informed and genuine intention to provide good enough residential child care. (Posted, April 12th, 2010).
Comments
Richard Rollinson writes, “Many of you will know I endorse the positions set out by Adrian Ward and Charles Sharpe on the goodenoughcaring website. After a conversation with John Kemmis, [of Voice for the Child in Care ] I have agreed to write to Paul Ennals at the National Children’s Bureau where NCERCC was based to emphasise the depth and intensity of the dismay felt by so many across our sector. Before NCERCC residential child care was seen as the "poor relation" of children's services and government/social policies. In light of all these comments, my communication to Paul will be brief, and forwarded with it will be the communications amongst ourselves to give it the reality and strong feeling it represents in our collective view. I am encouraged that neither a holiday period nor the start of an election has dimmed our strength of feeling”.
Adrian Ward comments, "I agree wholeheartedly with the concerns you have raised, and feel that DCSF has acted in a wholly destructive way towards NCERCC and the whole sector. There was no consultation whatsoever about the diversion of funds from NCERCC's remit into this 'Support and Challenge' programme, and as far as one can see DCSF is taking no responsibility for the consequences of its actions. NCERCC has helped to create and develop some outstanding projects such as the Children's Residential Network which have brought real value to young people by promoting and supporting good practice, and the risk is that this work will be lost, as I'm sure NCB doesn't have the money to continue any funding".
John Burton writes, "Politicians are guided by self-interested groups and have no idea of the results of their decisions. This doesn’t absolve them from responsibility. All government policy can be seen as a sophisticated system of denying accountability and passing it down to the lowest level possible – to people who are actually trying to do the work with commitment and belief. And the new legislation and guidance then makes it even more difficult to do the real work. Look at the Care Quality Commission response to the failure of inspection at the care home where Rachel Baker was convicted of manslaughter last week. It is high time we spoke out and I applaud your opinion piece".
Chris Taylor comments, " NCERCC has done well on what seems like quite a small budget, and residential care needs a unifying and professionalising voice. I know nothing about Tribal, but note that although they claim their "expertise spreads across many markets" they do not mention any form of childcare, let alone residential care. They do offer a range of services in education, perhaps a return to the old Children's Homes with Education model. I also doubt that NCERCC will be the only casualty of the desperate need to reduce both deficit and debt...residential care has always been a soft target".
We have had a large and supportive response to our recent report of the damaging blow dealt to residential child care in England by the decision of the Department for Children, Schools and Families to cease funding the National Centre for Excellence in Residential Child Care.
Some of us may have been present at the NCB conference in Birmingham in 2005 when Bruce Clark, then the Divisional Head of the Looked After Children Division in the Department of Education and Skills announced government funding of £731,000 to establish the NCERCC. It seemed then that residential child care had been provided with a strong platform from which to establish its place as a caring discipline.
Over a number of years the idea of the NCERCC was nurtured into being by a group of people and organisations with decades of practical experience, learning, research, development and management in residential child care. It is hard for us as residential child care workers not to feel a sense of humiliation when a consultancy organisation like Tribal with no depth of experience in our field is awarded such a powerful role in our work while the views of those whom we recognise as having deep insight of our professional discipline – residential child care - are dismissed.
Of course in a world dominated by a relatively small number of people seeking high financial rewards we understand that a large commercial consultancy like Tribal may claim expertise in anything in order to win a contract. To present a tender for a contract like the one Tribal has been awarded a commercial body can usually persuade an academic - with a curriculum vitae which suggests some interest in child care issues - to climb on board. We do not know if this is the case with Tribal, though its description of its current expertise does not include residential child care.
It may be that Tribal matters are a sideshow in this. The overwhelming majority of responses to our report identified the real villain of the piece as the DCSF. In pulling the plug on the NCERCC, not it seems despite of the latter's good work but, so it claims, because of it, DCSF is pulling the plug – in the way that its predecessors have done over many decades – on any informed and genuine intention to provide good enough residential child care. (Posted, April 12th, 2010).
Comments
Richard Rollinson writes, “Many of you will know I endorse the positions set out by Adrian Ward and Charles Sharpe on the goodenoughcaring website. After a conversation with John Kemmis, [of Voice for the Child in Care ] I have agreed to write to Paul Ennals at the National Children’s Bureau where NCERCC was based to emphasise the depth and intensity of the dismay felt by so many across our sector. Before NCERCC residential child care was seen as the "poor relation" of children's services and government/social policies. In light of all these comments, my communication to Paul will be brief, and forwarded with it will be the communications amongst ourselves to give it the reality and strong feeling it represents in our collective view. I am encouraged that neither a holiday period nor the start of an election has dimmed our strength of feeling”.
Adrian Ward comments, "I agree wholeheartedly with the concerns you have raised, and feel that DCSF has acted in a wholly destructive way towards NCERCC and the whole sector. There was no consultation whatsoever about the diversion of funds from NCERCC's remit into this 'Support and Challenge' programme, and as far as one can see DCSF is taking no responsibility for the consequences of its actions. NCERCC has helped to create and develop some outstanding projects such as the Children's Residential Network which have brought real value to young people by promoting and supporting good practice, and the risk is that this work will be lost, as I'm sure NCB doesn't have the money to continue any funding".
John Burton writes, "Politicians are guided by self-interested groups and have no idea of the results of their decisions. This doesn’t absolve them from responsibility. All government policy can be seen as a sophisticated system of denying accountability and passing it down to the lowest level possible – to people who are actually trying to do the work with commitment and belief. And the new legislation and guidance then makes it even more difficult to do the real work. Look at the Care Quality Commission response to the failure of inspection at the care home where Rachel Baker was convicted of manslaughter last week. It is high time we spoke out and I applaud your opinion piece".
Chris Taylor comments, " NCERCC has done well on what seems like quite a small budget, and residential care needs a unifying and professionalising voice. I know nothing about Tribal, but note that although they claim their "expertise spreads across many markets" they do not mention any form of childcare, let alone residential care. They do offer a range of services in education, perhaps a return to the old Children's Homes with Education model. I also doubt that NCERCC will be the only casualty of the desperate need to reduce both deficit and debt...residential care has always been a soft target".
What is Tribal ? and what does it have in store for residential child care ?
This was first posted on the goodenoughcaring website on March 31st, 2010
Yesterday, (30.3.10), the Department for Children, Schools and Families sent out a press release which announced the awarding of what it calls “ the delivery of the Support and Challenge for Children’s Homes” to a consultancy group called “Tribal”. In changing the focus of its funding for residential child care, the government has given Tribal financial backing and has withdrawn funding from the National Centre for Excellence in Residential Child Care. At the same time the DCSF acknowledges that the National Centre has been doing a good job. We are left to wonder in whose interests this decision has been made.
The editorial group of goodenoughcaring.com has long experience of residential child care but none of its members has heard of Tribal or how it gained its reputation as a “talented multi-disciplinary team with a wealth of expertise and knowledge in residential care and previous success of delivery of similar programmes of work”.
The note attached to the press release provides little evidence in its description of Tribal’s personnel that the latter has wide experience of residential child care. Initiatives of this kind should be led by people who have in-depth experience and real insight of the discrete and sophisticated role of residential child care work.
Our fear is that as a consequence of this decision residential child care will be steered, despite all the efforts of recent years, by a managerialist ethos which, though it may occasionally meet some notional paper target, has never yet provided children with better quality care. If you wish to find out more about Tribal ask the Minister for Children, Schools and Families. The email address is : dcsf.ministers@dcsf.gsi.gov.uk
** Press release address :
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/everychildmatters/safeguardingandsocialcare/childrenincare/childrenincare/ (Posted March 31st, 2010)
Comments
Calum Strathie writes ,"There was something very soul-less about the language used [in the DCSF announcement, 30.3.10] which all runs counter to what NCERCC has been promoting for all these years - i.e. practice excellence and humanity. To withdraw their funding after praising them for their 'good work' makes the praise sound more than a little bit hollow, and I'm sure that NCERCC would be the first to agree that there is much work to be done in the residential sector. The press release talks a lot about 'evidence based practice' but I wonder what evidence DCSF have used to justify this decision? In any case I question the whole notion of 'evidence based practice' and I feel that far too much credence is given to this idea. Surely we should be talking about values based practice and evidence based policies. Evidence can 'inform' practice, but I doubt that it can change actual face to face practice - only good training and quality supervision can do that - unless, of course, the evidence is practice based. What now for NCERCC? Can it continue in some form?"
Richard Rollinson comments, "I am greatly concerned, less about Tribal, but more about NCERCC. The reality is that the project Tribal have won by tender bid is a mere shadow of the much deeper, broader and more integrated purpose and role/task of NCERCC in the residential sector. As the chairman of the group Momentum (which had a good number of people long committed to high quality residential care), that paved the way for the successful NCB bid to host NCERCC, I am determined that it does not disappear entirely or come to exist only in a highly restricted form. The fact is NCERCC is not simply a property of either DCSF or NCB to treat/marginalise as it wishes (though I don't think that NCB has such a crudely dismissive attitude). It belongs very much to the sector which has taken to it as a "home base" in so many respects".
Yesterday, (30.3.10), the Department for Children, Schools and Families sent out a press release which announced the awarding of what it calls “ the delivery of the Support and Challenge for Children’s Homes” to a consultancy group called “Tribal”. In changing the focus of its funding for residential child care, the government has given Tribal financial backing and has withdrawn funding from the National Centre for Excellence in Residential Child Care. At the same time the DCSF acknowledges that the National Centre has been doing a good job. We are left to wonder in whose interests this decision has been made.
The editorial group of goodenoughcaring.com has long experience of residential child care but none of its members has heard of Tribal or how it gained its reputation as a “talented multi-disciplinary team with a wealth of expertise and knowledge in residential care and previous success of delivery of similar programmes of work”.
The note attached to the press release provides little evidence in its description of Tribal’s personnel that the latter has wide experience of residential child care. Initiatives of this kind should be led by people who have in-depth experience and real insight of the discrete and sophisticated role of residential child care work.
Our fear is that as a consequence of this decision residential child care will be steered, despite all the efforts of recent years, by a managerialist ethos which, though it may occasionally meet some notional paper target, has never yet provided children with better quality care. If you wish to find out more about Tribal ask the Minister for Children, Schools and Families. The email address is : dcsf.ministers@dcsf.gsi.gov.uk
** Press release address :
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/everychildmatters/safeguardingandsocialcare/childrenincare/childrenincare/ (Posted March 31st, 2010)
Comments
Calum Strathie writes ,"There was something very soul-less about the language used [in the DCSF announcement, 30.3.10] which all runs counter to what NCERCC has been promoting for all these years - i.e. practice excellence and humanity. To withdraw their funding after praising them for their 'good work' makes the praise sound more than a little bit hollow, and I'm sure that NCERCC would be the first to agree that there is much work to be done in the residential sector. The press release talks a lot about 'evidence based practice' but I wonder what evidence DCSF have used to justify this decision? In any case I question the whole notion of 'evidence based practice' and I feel that far too much credence is given to this idea. Surely we should be talking about values based practice and evidence based policies. Evidence can 'inform' practice, but I doubt that it can change actual face to face practice - only good training and quality supervision can do that - unless, of course, the evidence is practice based. What now for NCERCC? Can it continue in some form?"
Richard Rollinson comments, "I am greatly concerned, less about Tribal, but more about NCERCC. The reality is that the project Tribal have won by tender bid is a mere shadow of the much deeper, broader and more integrated purpose and role/task of NCERCC in the residential sector. As the chairman of the group Momentum (which had a good number of people long committed to high quality residential care), that paved the way for the successful NCB bid to host NCERCC, I am determined that it does not disappear entirely or come to exist only in a highly restricted form. The fact is NCERCC is not simply a property of either DCSF or NCB to treat/marginalise as it wishes (though I don't think that NCB has such a crudely dismissive attitude). It belongs very much to the sector which has taken to it as a "home base" in so many respects".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)