The Dutch auction of children in residential child care

In a recent article by Lauren Higgs, Residential care providers urged to work together to stop closures published on May 4th in the Children and Young People Now Daily, Raphael Silver, a member of the Law Society’s Children Panel suggests that private sector providers of residential child care should band together to resist local authorities who are pooling their budgets and working together in order to purchase residential child care services more cheaply.
In our experience the Dutch auction of children who need places in children's homes has been occurring in one way or another for a number of years. Essentially what happens is that individual providers are implicitly and discreetly warned that if they don't squeeze their fees local authorities won't place children with them. In response providers are forced to cut their costs or go out of business. For obvious reasons providers resist cutting costs on feeding, clothing or keeping youngsters warm and sheltered - although sometimes this has occurred - and so what is cut is the most important resource of residential care - staffing. Less experienced, less well trained staff and so less expensive staff are recruited and training budgets are slashed and all this is done in a service where it is generally acknowledged that staff training is seriously under-resourced.

It is not necessary to have ideological sympathy with the private provision of residential child care in order to be motivated towards pointing out this lack of concern for the quality of care children and young people receive. For better or for worse governments have encouraged the private sector to fill the void left when the voluntary and the statutory sectors beat a partial retreat from residential child care and for the forseeable future private sector provision is a necessary and significant part of the service. It is generally understood that those who operate a business wish to make a profit and of course few of us are reluctant to collect our wages, salaries or fees at the end of each month and neither would we quietly stand by if someone arbitrarily decided to cut our earniings.

In Lauren Higgs’ article, Roy Williamson, the executive officer of the Independent Children’s Homes Association comments that because of their strength in unity local authority commissioners “can play providers off against each other” and in some instances “have driven prices down so far that they risk putting providers out of business”. Roy Williamson argues that while providers are “ not unrealistic about the state of public finances…… we all want what’s best for quality. We have to look at how we can work together and have open discussions between providers and commissioners.”

Meanwhile, many individual providers and registered managers remain silent on the matter fearful that any comment will not go down well with the local authorities who are referring to their children’s homes.

In the recent general election campaign all the political parties have been careful to insist that if elected investment in front line services for children will not be reduced. It is a shame that their colleagues in local government do not feel able to act in unison with them. Perhaps there is a tacit understanding that children in residential care – recipients of a service already in reduced circumstances - are exempt from any of the positive consequences of noble political commitment. (Posted, May 10th, 2010)

Link
Lauren Higgs CYP Now Daily at http://www.cypnow.co.uk/Archive/1000764/Residential-care-providers-urged-work-together-stop-closures/