Chloe Gill introduces new research which will help us to understand what ‘good’ means in children’s social care
There’s a large amount of information, guidance and support aimed at helping statutory children’s social care improve the services they provide. This includes policy guidelines, research findings, practice guidance and pilot programmes.
Yet, some authorities struggle to get a ‘good’ Ofsted judgement. Others move between ‘good’ and ‘inadequate’ and back again.
Research led by the Child Outcomes Research Consortium (CORC) in partnership with the NSPCC, Loughborough University and a researcher affiliated with the University of East London, wanted to explore exactly how children’s services departments in England could bring about improvement and avoid failure.
First, we needed to conduct a feasibility study to pin down what “good” means, so that we could identify a sample of stronger and weaker authorities to be involved in the main research. We hoped the feasibility study would enable us to start exploring the processes involved in improving children’s social care services.
In this post, I’m reflecting on the results of that feasibility study and discussing what they mean for the research that was originally proposed.