moved Amendment No. 7:
7: After Clause 4, insert the following new Clause—
““Social work providers: university partnerships
A provider of social work services must seek to establish a partnership with an appropriately located university with a view to—
(a) providing placements for student social workers with the provider;
(b) providing opportunities for continuing professional development for qualified social workers.””
The noble Earl said: This amendment is on social work providers forming partnerships with universities. Thankfully, I have found my notes for this. The purpose of the amendment is to probe Her Majesty’s Government on whether they are taking steps to promote partnerships between local authorities and universities to raise the quality of degree placements and post-qualifying training. There has long been concern at the quality of degree placements. In the past, I have heard of a student having one of her placements at ChildLine, so having no direct contact with children in that part of her course.
I am told that the most important experience is placement in an actual local authority social services department, but that can be the hardest to find. I understand that there have been improvements in the quality of placements, and I know that the Government have been working on that. I was most grateful to the chief executive of the General Social Care Council for writing to me following Second Reading to lay out the range of experience that is required.
On a recent visit to a social services department in London, we were told by the deputy director that he very much wanted to provide placements for students, but that it was difficult to do so given the pressures on his service. He suggested that securing relationships with universities would be of benefit. Is that already being considered? What role might central government play in promoting such partnerships?
I remember visiting a Centrepoint hostel for young homeless people, Buffy House in Olympia, nine years ago. The institution had a close relationship with the Tavistock Clinic, part of the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust in north London. The staff and manager were supported by weekly consultations with a clinician. All the staff had undertaken qualifications with the Tavistock, and the manager was doing an MA there. Buffy House had the most needy and challenging clients that Centrepoint dealt with, yet it had the lowest sickness absence rate in the whole Centrepoint organisation. It had an excellent reputation for success among the rough sleeper outreach workers, who were keen on sending their young people to that particular place because they felt it likely that they would remain there and not return to the streets.
Research indicates that outcomes for children’s homes improve where the staff and the children’s home share a common philosophy of practice. Partnership with universities would tend to support such a common philosophy in social work departments. I look forward to the Minister’s reply and to hearing what work is going on there or what might be possible.
Children and Young Persons Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Earl of Listowel
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 8 January 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Children and Young Persons Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
697 c316-7GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:38:43 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_431739
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_431739
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_431739