Stakeholder views on
institutional capacity for
training
Helen Rainbird & Elspeth Leeson, Birmingham Business
School, Anne Munro, Napier University, Edinburgh
Presentation to the SCWI, London, 18th November, 2008.
Institutional and organizational capacity
for skill development
Focus: The extent to which individuals, organizations and wider
social institutions contribute to the development of the skills,
knowledge and competence of workers in the care sector
Policy context
 Options for Excellence (2006) – vision for supervisors,
managers, leaders; improving HRM practices; whole systems
model; professional workforce; integration of service users’
views
 Leitch Report (2006) need to increase adult skills, increasing
employer engagement & investment in skills
 Platt Report (2007) recommendations for raising status of social
care workforce & services, proposal for a Skills Academy for the
development of leadership, commissioning & management
 The Future Regulation of Health & Adult Social Care: Response
to consultation (2007)
 Putting People First (2007) vision for personalised adult care
system
Institutional and organizational capacity
for skill development









Association of Care Training &
Assessment Networks
Assn of Directors of Social
Services
Birmingham City Council
workforce development officer
Commission for Social Care
Inspection
General Social Care Council
Care Services Improvement
Partnership
Improvement and Development
Agency
Local Learning & Skills Council
Local Government Assn









National Care Association
National Care Forum
Registered Nursing Homes
Assn
Skills for Care
Social Care Assn
Social Care Institute for
Excellence
Stoke on Trent City Council
UK Homecare Assn
UNISON
PLUS consultation with users
The institutional framework
Regulations concerning the
provision of social care
 Regulatory agencies
 National Minimum Standards
& individual registration
 Role of interest
organisations
Changes to the funding and
delivery of social care
 Local authorities: shift from
providers to commissioners
of services > private &
voluntary sectors
 Different markets: nursing &
residential care, homecare
 Personalisation agenda
The training system
 LSC > UKCES
 Workforce development
planning – Skills for Care
 Availability of funding for
different types of training
from different sources
 14-19 curriculum reforms,
foundation degrees,
apprenticeship
Coordination at local level
 Extent of cooperation:
agencies and employers
 Extent of cooperation:
between employers
Stakeholder views
Business & regulatory framework
 Funding of social care, business viability, implications for wage
bills & ability to invest in training
 Employers’ use of resources will be influenced by performance
assessment & regulatory targets
 Compliance becomes more important than workforce
development. Emphasis on outputs rather than inputs
downgrades learning - need to maintain pressure on employers

Induction standards - problem of addressing ethos of care

Sanctions for failing to reach targets
Individual registration. Length of time between attainment of
NVQ2 & need to reregister (6 years) – message about
professional nature of workforce.
Changing date for introducing targets


Stakeholder views
Assessment
 Capacity of sector to provide NVQ assessment – City & Guilds reports
high drop out rates of those training as assessors
 Problem of emphasis on assessment rather than training & support for
knowledgeable practice
 Workers’ strategies for avoiding assessment
Staff turnover
 High staff turnover > disincentive for employers to invest in training (but
if they do….?) Cause & effect
 Service users want consistency and reliability
Absence of career structure
 Different markets for nursing care, residential care & domiciliary care
services: implications for workforce planning
 Absence of rewards for skill acquisition
 Problem of creating career & learning progression pathways as an
incentive
Stakeholder views
Supporting learning & development
 LSC resources for training are distributed through training
providers rather than direct to employers or staff – this may
encourage opportunism & discourage whole organisation
approaches
 Need to support reflexive practice through a holistic approach to
learning, through supervision by knowledgeable practitioners
rather than emphasis on assessment
 Who can access infrastructural support through consortium
arrangements
 Different cultures & management styles in voluntary, public &
private sectors. Significance for development of in-house
capacity & ability to access resources – need to understand
needs of small employers in particular.
Institutional framework




Key message: many aspects of institutional framework are
changing – how do small home owners/managers keep pace
with developments? Case studies of regional consortia
arrangements suggest that sharing knowledge of changes in
sector are significant in planning for, identifying & sharing
resources to support change
Emphasis on compliance with regulations – concerns about
promoting whole organisation approaches and collaboration
between agencies & employers, scope for greater integration of
services & the development of a more strategic approach to
workforce planning
Concerns about who has strategic overview of the sector &
where the boundaries are
Constraints of availability of funding – concerns relating to
incentives and disincentives for skill development created by
different funding regimes for services/for training
Institutional framework




Shift from employer compliance to worker registration:
implications of workers becoming responsible for their own
training and development, when employers are unable to
comply. Who provides support for workers’ skill development?
Issues around the creation of a two tier workforce: regulated and
unregulated. Already affects assistant roles in social care/health
care. Implications of individualisation of services for shifts
between regulated & unregulated sectors. Impact on quality of
care.
Opportunities & threats to providers of services resulting from
shift to personal budgets
Changes in some areas have a potentially negative impact on
training and skills development & workers’ voice in the sector.