Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Survey of local authority integrated children’s systems

2,564 views

Published on

In spring 2018, Ofsted asked all local authorities (LAs) some questions about their integrated children’s system (ICS). This presentation contains the survey findings.

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

Survey of local authority integrated children’s systems

  1. 1. Survey of integrated children’s systems October 2018 Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 1
  2. 2. The context of the survey In spring 2018, Ofsted asked all local authorities (LAs) some questions about their integrated children’s system (ICS). Data on this area is rarely collected. We wanted to establish what systems LAs have, what they cost, and what issues LAs have in getting and using data from those systems. This is to better understand the challenges that LA face in this area of work. The ICS, originating in the wake of the reports and legislation following Victoria Climbié’s death in 2000, is a conceptual framework, a method of practice and a business process that supports practitioners and managers in the tasks of assessment, planning, intervention and review of children in need. Such was the detail and complexity of the information needed, an electronic case record system was specified to support it. These case record systems, which follow workflows – the sequential way that social workers do their work – later became referred to as ICS databases, or ICS for short. Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 2
  3. 3. Responses to the survey We asked all 152 LAs questions about:  their ICS  the costs of ICSs  the software that they use to extract, analyse and report data  the challenges they faced with systems and reporting. We received 79 responses (52% of all LAs). The responses came, in the main, from data, analysis, performance and/or IT professionals. There is no comprehensive data on ICSs in England to compare with and to establish precisely the extent to which the results are representative of all LAs or of all ICSs. Nonetheless, other information shows that at least one provider was not referenced in the responses and that the market share of one of the companies was far greater than this survey indicates. Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 3
  4. 4. Main findings (1)  Extracting, reporting and analysing children’s social care data are not straightforward.  This is true regardless of which ICS an LA uses.  The respondents stated that these issues hamper LAs’ work with vulnerable children.  There are difficulties even in the core work of providing statutory data to government.  The responses about costs were not clear enough to be able draw any conclusions about how much is spent on buying and running the systems. Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 4
  5. 5. Main findings (2)  The main problem areas that LAs have are:  difficulty reporting data  need for considerable internal resource  a lack of expertise in social care data  issues with the suppliers  poor user experience  the functions of ICS processes and workflows.  Based on the survey results, two companies have a sizeable proportion of the market: LiquidLogic and CoreLogic.  Most respondents (80%) stated that they were not intending to change to a new system within six months of the survey. Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 5
  6. 6. Which ICSs do LAs use? Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 6
  7. 7. What are the main problems that LAs face?  Reporting: Almost three quarters of the LAs that responded said that they had difficulties with reporting data. This included problems producing statutory (mandatory) reports for the Department for Education (DfE). This impacts on the main data collections on children in care and children in need.  Resourcing: Over two thirds of respondents highlighted resource issues. For example, staff had to implement ‘workarounds’ and do extra work to make up for what the system could not do.  Relationship with the supplier: Half of LAs that responded cited issues or difficulties with the ICS supplier.  Poor user experience: Half of the LAs that responded mentioned negative experiences using their ICS. They reported, for example, the consequences from a poorly implemented system or the system not working as intended.  Processes and workflows: Workflows within ICSs are usually designed to mimic the sequential order in which social workers carry out their work. However, two fifths of the LAs that responded mentioned problems with how the databases were set up. In some cases, even when systems were customised to local practice, they did not capture data well. Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 7
  8. 8. How reliable are the ICSs? 62 of 79 LAs reported at least one issue with their ICSs. Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 8
  9. 9. What sort of issues do LAs face? Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 9
  10. 10. Responses: data reporting Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 10 In-built reporting functions never work and you cannot usually confirm how data is pulled and therefore can’t guarantee accuracy. (about Supplier 4) The provider is late making statutory changes needed. (Supplier 2) Data structure does not facilitate reporting. (about Supplier 1) The data validation from stat returns (Cin/903) are not mirrored in ICS, so workers can do things in the system which cause errors in submission. Supplier is not responsive enough when issues arise e.g. report issues or requests to amend reports not resolved for months or years, resulting in the LA having to create self work arounds to extract data. (about Supplier 5)
  11. 11. Responses: internal resource Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 11 It takes two staff around 15 working days just to pull out all the data and update the tables. Then another day for all staff to QA the data. Then we issue PDFs of all the scorecards in the last week of the month. Social work heads of service complain that is issued too late for them to be proactive addressing poor performance, but we have no access to dashboard software to speed the process up... Stat return required significant amounts of additional SQL to pull together and submit. (Supplier 1) Data analysis skills combined with business knowledge are few and far between and make all the difference to extracting and analysing relevant useful data. (Supplier 4) …combine this with our limited business objects skills and we often end up doing data dumps in to Excel and then trying to create the information we require from there! (Supplier 5)
  12. 12. Responses: relationships with suppliers Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 12 Currently have outstanding reports query with supplier that's taken them two years to resolve and they still can't promise it will be fixed prior to year end. (Supplier 5) Reporting support is appalling (Supplier 4) Change requests can be costly and can also take a long time for implementation. Often have to wait for the next update which can be six to 12 months away. (Supplier 4) Supplier is not responsive enough when issues arise, e.g. report issues or requests to amend reports not resolved for months or years, resulting in the LA having to create self work- arounds to extract data. Functional change requests are not actioned timely. (Supplier 5)
  13. 13. Responses: user experience Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 13 Users find it clunky and often get confused due to a lack of a process led flow through the system, which leads to a lot of data quality being completed before returns can be submitted. (Supplier 3) Poor hardware, inadequate RAM - hard drives regularly crash. Reports have to be delivered via the BO XI platform which is very unpopular with social workers. Very limited graphical capability. No access to MicroS365, Tableau etc. (Supplier 1)[Problems with]…integrati on with other softwares especially education systems. (Supplier 4) Difficult to implement key functionality such as chronology, group working, etc. due to system bugs or insufficient development by supplier (Supplier 5)
  14. 14. Responses: ICS processes and workflows Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 14 The system also has no inbuilt workflow to it and therefore there is no anticipation of the users’ needs or any enforcement of how processes should work. (Supplier 3) Prebuilt system workflows are not always compatible with best practice or evolving government requirements. Managing subsequent, frequent, system configuration changes through a shrinking resource envelope is challenging. (Supplier 5) Doesn't currently meet the needs of the service and it restricts workers time with lots of duplication. (Supplier 1) The pathways are very good in terms of tracking cases and ensuring accurate recording/processes are followed - however it can cause many issues if something is recorded wrong, as the whole case has to be rolled back and all recording deleted and then re-input. (Supplier 4)
  15. 15. Thanks to: Adam King, Emily Moreton, Jean Mallo, Neil Powling, and Judith Swindell. Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 15
  16. 16. Ofsted on the web and on social media www.gov.uk/ofsted http://reports.ofsted.gov.uk www.linkedin.com/company/ofsted www.youtube.com/ofstednews www.slideshare.net/ofstednews www.twitter.com/ofstednews Survey of integrated children’s systems Slide 16

×