Private social work practices – why this pilot should
not fly
A UNISON social work briefing
Introduction
The Government has set up a pilot scheme to test the idea of local authorities being
able to contract out social work services for children in care to private social work
practices.
The Government came up with this controversial idea as part of its “Care
Matters” White Paper. It decided to press ahead with legislation to implement a pilot
programme, despite widespread concerns expressed in the consultation about the
implications for looked after children, local authorities and social work teams.
UNISON, and many others, do not believe that effectively outsourcing children in
care to private practices will address the issues the government has claimed it is
concerned about – such as high staff turnover and bureaucracy.
“There is no evidence to suggest that an independent agency would be any
more able to recruit and retain staff than a local authority and it would not
remove the financial constraints on social workers…It is clear from good
practice that one essential ingredient is a ‘good management grip’ on
what is happening. A transfer to an independent provider would likely
weaken that grip and marginalise local authority control and direction
of care for each child.”
Local Government Association
UNISON supports the idea that social workers should be freed up from bureaucracy
should have more delegated decision-making powers and should enjoy more
freedom and autonomy in seeking to provide better and more stable outcomes for
looked after children.
But we don’t believe that making social workers set up their own businesses is the
best way to achieve this. Neither is outsourcing the work to existing private
companies or voluntary organisations.
UNISON undertook intensive lobbying work around the legislation which set up the
private social work practice pilots. As a result, a number of assurances were given
about publication and consideration of the evaluation report before decisions are
made.
SharePoint/Local Govt/Social Care/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
k/local govt/social services/private social work/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
1
UNISON activity so far
UNISON policy is to monitor the impact of the pilots; provide support and guidance to
our branches; monitor and scrutinise the evaluation of the practices; and research
the viability of the proposed business model.
So we have been taking a close interest in the pilots – we have held meetings with
the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) and the research
evaluation team. We also have a working group of UNISON representatives from the
six local authorities involved in the pilots who have been able to feed back
information on what is happening on the ground, and guide the union’s work on this
issue.
So what do we know about the pilots?
Background
The pilots cover social work services for looked after children who are expected to
be in care for at least two years. The pilots are to work with between 100 and 200
children, and to be ‘social worker-led’. The local authority remains the corporate
parent and retains ultimate responsibility for the quality of the service which it has
contracted out to the private practice.
Child protection social work, family support and intervention social work, and the
independent reviewing officer role all remain with the local authority.
The pilots are supposed to receive the same amount of funding as the in-house
service would have – to ensure that they are not ‘gold-plated’ to succeed. The
contracts are to include a performance-related element so that part of what the
private practice gets paid depends on achieving certain outcomes.
Government funding for the pilots has been provided to cover set-up costs and
consultancy.
Around 17 local authorities expressed an interest in bidding to become a pilot. We do
not know how many actually submitted a bid. In January 2009 the following six
authorities were selected:
Blackburn with Darwen*
Hillingdon
Kent
Liverpool
Sandwell**
Staffordshire
*Blackburn is now testing the idea of a practice in-house rather than the outsourced model the
Government wanted, which the council believes is too risky.
**Sandwell has put its pilot ‘on hold’ following an Ofsted inspection which identified concerns
about the council’s performance on safeguarding and the risks associated with pressing
ahead with the pilot.
SharePoint/Local Govt/Social Care/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
k/local govt/social services/private social work/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
2
Timescale
The pilots were all supposed to have been up and running with a full caseload by
Autumn last year, but there has been significant slippage with this. During the period
Autumn 2009 to Autumn, 2011 the pilots are to be evaluated. The evaluation report
will be delivered to the Government in 2012 and a report must be made to
Parliament. By 2013 a decision must be taken about whether or not to make the
private practice model available to other local authorities. There is some uncertainty
as to what will happen after 2011 – will the pilots carry on running pending a final
decision?
Models
The Government said it wanted the pilots to test three models:
1. A professional practice run by qualified and registered social workers (social
enterprise or GP model);
2. A third sector (community/voluntary sector)model where the practice is run by a
third sector organisation;
3. A private sector model where the practice is run by a company.
In terms of involvement of private sector companies, only one of the pilots
(Hillingdon) has contracted out to a pre-existing private company, although we know
that many private sector companies, including Serco, did show some interest.
This may reflect considerable and widespread concerns about the ethics and
efficiency of privatising social work with children in care to profit-making companies.
It may also reflect confusion around tendering requirements in the pilots which meant
that not all of them went out to an open tender (see below). Or it may mean that the
private sector is holding back for now and looking to move into this area further down
the line.
And Blackburn has taken a decision to keep its practice in-house and run it
independently from the Government pilot.
Uncertainty about procurement rules
UNISON feedback has revealed that the pilot authorities have taken widely differing
approaches to the issue of procurement.
From what we have been able to piece together:

Liverpool, Hillingdon and Sandwell went through a full open tendering process –
Sandwell had initially wanted to restrict itself to the social enterprise model but
received legal advice which said it could not do so

Blackburn initially proceeded on the basis that it would have to go out to open
tender. However it decided that “it was not in the best interests of the Council to
outsource the statutory duties associated with children in our care to a legally
separate entity” (Executive member briefing paper 14 October 2009). A decision was
SharePoint/Local Govt/Social Care/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
k/local govt/social services/private social work/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
3
made to instead pursue a social enterprise model, but locate it as a subsidiary
company of CXL. CXL is a not-for-profit organisation wholly owned by Lancashire
CC, Blackpool MBC and Blackburn with Darwen set up to carry out Connexions
work. However there were long delays while DCSF apparently raised concerns
about the independence and legal status of this proposal

Staffordshire did not go out to tender but sought volunteers from existing social
work staff willing to set themselves up as a separate company. There were
originally going to be two teams involved, but one pulled out

Kent awarded a contract to a voluntary sector organisation which was already
providing children and young people’s social care services to it. We have no
information on the tendering process
Who got the contracts?
Liverpool:
Liverpool Personal Service Society
Charity providing a range of social care services including family support,
counselling, adult placement, community care www.pss.org.uk
Hillingdon:
In the Spirit Ltd
Private limited company providing management training consultancy. It also runs
accommodation for young people in care www.inthespirit.info
Sandwell:
Foster Care Co-operative named preferred bidder
Not-for-profit co-operative providing foster care services.
www.fostercarecooperative.co.uk
STOP PRESS: Sandwell has put its pilot ‘on hold’ following an Ofsted
inspection report on the authority’s safeguarding and looked after children
services, which rated many elements inadequate. The inspection report called
on the authority to review its participation in the pilot and identified that the
children affected had not been fully consulted. It is thought that the advice to
the council amounted to 'get your own house in order first.'
Blackburn:
Council to run on in-house basis
Following the issues raised by the tendering debate (see above), CXL is no longer
involved and the council plans to proceed on an in-house basis “as this is in the best
interests of the council and its young people and poses less risk for the council”.
Blackburn intends to pilot a social work practice within the local authority. It will be
set up to give the social workers involved more autonomy and delegated powers. It
will be a multi-agency, multi-disciplinary team. The council feels this will allow
enhanced consultation with partners and stakeholders. It is expected that the DCSF
will now withdraw pilot funding from Blackburn as this does not match any of their
three models
SharePoint/Local Govt/Social Care/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
k/local govt/social services/private social work/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
4
Staffordshire:
Evolve Young People Ltd
Private company, limited by guarantee, not-for-profit. Set up by former Staffordshire
CC social workers. According to Community Care (communitycare.co.uk, 9 September),
there will be 10 staff – 4 social workers and 4 personal advisors with plans to employ
4 other staff, one of whom will be a social worker. Governance is through a board of
partners informed by a young persons’ group.
Kent:
Catch 22
National charity formerly known as Rainier, Catch 22 provides services for young
people who find themselves in difficult situations. www.catch-22.org.uk/ The charity
already had a contract with Kent.
Evaluation
The evaluation is being carried out by independent researchers from the University
of Central Lancashire, Institute of Education and the Social Care Workforce
Research Unit. The main bulk of the research is due to take place in 2010, with a
final round of data collected in 2011, and a final report submitted in 2012.
The main research questions are: strengths and weaknesses of private practice
model; impact on children and families; impact on social care workforce; impact on
social work practice in the local authorities.
Blackburn, with its in-house version, will also be included in the evaluation. UNISON
believes this is good news because it will allow an in-house model to be looked at
as an alternative to outsourcing.
The researchers plan to compare the 6 pilot sites with 6 other authorities.
Staff transfers
The DSCF guidance made it clear that TUPE would apply to any staff transfers out
to social work practices, and back in again if the pilots are not continued. But it also
stated that with many local authorities carrying vacancies, there would be scope for
staff who did not wish to transfer to be redeployed, or for local authorities to look at
secondments.
In the event, it does not look like any of the pilots are going to involve staff transfers
or secondments. In part, this reflects UNISON’s work to raise awareness among
members of the potential concerns around employment security, ways of working
etc.
Liverpool and Hillingdon have not transferred any staff and the organisations they
are contracting with are providing their own staff. We assume they are able to do
this because they are carrying vacancies or have posts covered by agency staff.
Sandwell intended to do the same prior to the decision to put the pilot on hold.
Blackburn is keeping the practice in-house.
SharePoint/Local Govt/Social Care/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
k/local govt/social services/private social work/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
5
We do not have a clear picture of what might happen in Kent but we are not aware of
any staff transfers to date.
The Staffordshire CC staff who have formed Evolve Young People Ltd have agreed
to terminate their contracts of employment with the council. UNISON has expressed
concern that this does not appear to be TUPE-compliant. Evolve is offering local
authority pay rates, terms and conditions. The Council has offered them a ‘work
break scheme agreement’ which effectively says every effort will be made to find
individuals a job in the local authority if a decision is made at the end of the pilot not
to roll it out. If the council is unable to offer them a job at the end of the pilot, the
‘agreement’ says that Evolve will make the person redundant. On the face of it, this
raises the possibility that length of service will only include the time spent working at
Evolve, whereas TUPE would require continuity of all contractual terms.
Other employment issues
Pensions
We know that Evolve has joined the LGPS via admitted body status. We do not have
any information on what pension provision is being provided by the other (now) 3
providers.
Consultation with UNISON
The extent to which the six authorities consulted with UNISON about their plans has
been variable. There was good consultation and involvement in Staffordshire and an
openness about sharing papers – although the council has not heeded our concerns
about its ‘work break’ agreement. In Liverpool there has been some dialogue and
sharing of information, but the branch has had to chase to get it. The other
authorities have been reluctant to divulge information citing commercial
confidentiality. One branch commented that when a service such as refuse collection
is proposed for outsourcing the branch has been fully consulted, but when a
sensitive service such as social work with children in care is proposed to be
outsourced there was very little information or consultation!
Conditions
We have limited information so far about the terms and conditions of the staff that
are being provided by In the Spirit, Liverpool Personal Services or Catch 22. Evolve
are currently offering the same pay and conditions as Staffordshire CC, although out
of hours working will be standard
Other key area of concern
1. Consultation with children – it is not clear how much consultation has taken place
and whether children were given a choice – this was picked up by Ofsted in the
case of Sandwell see above
2. Impact on the role of the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) – there is a clear
suggestion already in some pilots that there will be additional burden and
bureaucracy placed on IROs in terms of having to collect evidence about the
private practice’s performance against outcomes for children. UNISON believes
SharePoint/Local Govt/Social Care/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
k/local govt/social services/private social work/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
6
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
this is a dangerous distraction at a time when IROs are overstretched and facing
extended responsibilities as a result of the Children and Young Person's Act.
Potential conflicts of interest – some providers may have links or relationships
with placement providers. Could this incentivise their decision making around
selecting placements?
Conclusiveness of evaluation – because of the delay in getting the practices set
up and the timescales for the pilot, the evaluation will be based on less than a full
year of operation. Conclusions are likely to be tentative but decisions about rollout will be made on the back of them
Impact of profiteering and payment by results – providers will be measured
against 27 outcome indicators and as much as half of their funding could be
based on payment by results. We do not believe that promoting the profit motive
has a place in social work with children in care. What impact will this have on the
practices’ business model, stability and service priorities?
Access to continuing professional development (CPD) – will staff have good
access to CPD where providers do not have access to the economies of scale a
local authority has in providing training and development. Will the business model
prioritise investment in CPD?
Private sector waiting in the wings? – the experience with many social
enterprises has been that the private sector waits for them to get into difficulties
and then swallows them up
Impact of efficiency savings targets – councils have ever increasing demands
placed on them to generate efficiency savings. Will they pass this requirement on
to the private practices to deliver their share? If they don’t, then the private
practices are ‘gold plated’ compared to in-house services
Why it matters
This small group of pilots may not appear significant now but it has certainly
attracted a lot of interest from the Tory front-bench. Tim Loughton, their children’s
spokesperson is expected to visit Evolve in newly Tory Staffordshire.
We understand that Julian le Grand, the LSE professor who sold the idea to Labour.
is now advising David Cameron and the shadow Cabinet.
So privatised social work practices could soon be coming to a council near you!
UNISON needs to be ready and armed with the facts to stop this latest attack on
public services.
CONCLUSION
Outsourcing in itself does nothing to beat bureaucracy
But it does create another form of bureaucracy – tendering, contract monitoring,
payment by results, complicated protocols and procedures and ‘interface
arrangements’. UNISON is campaigning for a social work reform programme that
takes a system-wide approach to bureaucracy-busting so that ALL social workers
can freed up to work in new ways.
SharePoint/Local Govt/Social Care/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
k/local govt/social services/private social work/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
7
Prioritising profit has no place in social work with children in care
Social workers are not frustrated entrepreneurs and they do not need a profit motive
to do their best for children. The introduction of private profit is a distraction, a
potential drain on resources and could skew priorities.
Privatised practices in the current funding climate are potentially unstable, and
prone to take-over
These contracts are relatively small and the staff who work on them may find
themselves having to worry about contract renewals, take-overs or mergers when
the financial going gets tough. The prospect of ‘payment by results’ adds another
layer of uncertainty to their business plan, as outcomes for looked after children are
difficult to measure, affected by lots of factors, and subject to interpretation.
Privatised practices are small and will have weak bargaining power with local
authority commissioners
Smaller providers of other services such as homecare and foster care complain
bitterly about the difficulty of negotiating fee increases with local authorities which
allow them to cover their costs. Privatised practices are likely to face the same
problems. The only way to increase bargaining power is through mergers and
acquisitions to form very large companies – see above
There is a better way
There is an alternative set of pilots being run by the Children’s Workforce
Development Council based on remodelling children’s social work teams within local
authorities. They are seeking to improve recruitment and retention, promote early
intervention work, and tackle bureaucracy. If successful these pilots could develop
good practice throughout the system, rather than seeking to hive off part of it off into
a privatised model.
Early reports are promising and indicate that improvements can be achieved within
the local authority where there’s a will and a willingness to work with staff and trade
unions. Initiatives include small teams supported by a dedicated social work
assistant and practice administrator with a dedicated caseload which they work with
throughout the life of cases ie mix of child protection, looked after and children in
need. These have similarities to the idea behind the private practice but do not
require all the extra bureaucracy involved in outsourcing and contract management,
and do not prioritise a misguided profit motive.
And Blackburn is showing that it is not necessary to privatise in order to allow social
workers to test out alternative ways of doing things.
SharePoint/Local Govt/Social Care/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
k/local govt/social services/private social work/Attachment to LG/SS/3/2010/UNISON Social Work Briefing
8