MANAGING CHANGE: IMPLEMENTING LOOKING AFTER CHILDREN Raymond Lemay Prescott-Russell Services to Children and Adults August 2006.

MANAGING CHANGE: IMPLEMENTING LOOKING AFTER CHILDREN

Raymond LemayPrescott-Russell Services to Children and AdultsAugust 2006

Who are our clients? Children (0 à 16 yrs) Abused or neglected Children (0 à 18 yrs) Developmentally

handicapped Children (0 à 18 yrs) with emotional or

behavioural problem Children (0 à 21 yrs) living in residential

services Women (17 yrs +) Victims of spousal

abuse Men (18 yrs +) Spouse abusers Adults (18 yrs +) Developmentally

handicapped Homeless Adults

Lemay, R. Byrne, B. & Ghazal, H. (2006), Managing Change: Implementing Looking After Children at Prescott-Russell Services to Children and Adults. In R. J. Flynn, P. M. Dudding, & J. G. Barber (Eds.) Promoting Resilience in Child Welfare, (pp. 316-336). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.

Presentation plan

History of Implementation at PRSCA Context of change

Lessons Learned Impact of introducing LAC Strategies for implementing LAC

Context of Change Société de l’aide à l’enfance de

Prescott-Russell Children’s Aid Society Founded in 1935 Rural francophone community (75%) Preference for Foster Care (95%) Board of directors very interested in

service quality indicators and partnership with University for research

Bitter 15 week strike in 1995

Evaluating Child Welfare Outcomes (ECWO) project

1993-1994 Dr. Robert Flynn (U of Ottawa) meets Dr. Parker and hears about LAC;

Proposal prepared: Assessing outcomes using 4 tools LAC NLSCY (HRDC & Stats Canada) PASSING (Wolfensberger) Costing evaluation (Knapp)

1995 bitter 15 week strike 1996 Implementation starts

Current status of LAC at PRSCA

Amalgamation with 4 other service programs on January 2001;

Residential service sector includes 5 supervisors and 29 front line staff;

Data continues to be reviewed and use of AAR continues;

Agency leadership in the province; All supervisors are involved in LAC training; Front line staff retreat on resilience; 5 staff were involved in writing up 5 resilience

case studies.

« Let there be LAC! » and you could see the resilience for miles

Where implementation happens first

Implementation requires that frontline workers, supervisors and caregivers make time at the front end of the service delivery process for the Assessment and Action Interview

Implementation requires that other competing activities be abandoned

Why change is difficult? There is a vast managerial litterature on change in

organisations Change is viewed as difficult organizational inertia

1. Comfort levels with habitual processes2. The known vs the unknown3. People equate different work = more work

– Learning curves VS established practice4. Complexity = hierarchy, many people, many interests

– Hierarchy, formality and authority (Hage & Aiken)5. Cynicism and complacency

– « We’ve tried this or something like it before »

Assessing the need for change

Senior managers, and the board have to be sensitised to the need for change

Children and youth who have experienced/are experiencing adversity (personification not theoretical problem)

Assessing current outcomes Numbers and case stories We can do better

Need for Compensatory action/justice We must do better

Always a better way Developmental improvement

Dissatisfaction drives change and improvement

A developmental model of implementation Communications: Sensitizing people about the need for

change Highlighting current problems

Poor outcomes Lack of data

No easy fixes Planning, but a preference for action

Patton’s law: « A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow. »

Small successes lead to big successes Talking up success Developping competence and mastery

Initially involve the committed, then the willing and finally everybody else

Top down…

From the TOP: LAC is a change of direction that requires authorisation Change leadership is not for the faint

of heart or naive There will be opposition Planning can only get you so far

It will get no where without authorisation

Obstacles need to be removed (time, paper and opposition)

… and bottom up

From the BOTTOM: Championing Frontline support: Workers, foster parents

and youth in care need to be involved and support it

Personifying change Making room for a champion Chosing the right person(s) A working group

Choosing a champion and organizing change

Choosing the right person: talent and know-how Project management Front line supervisor Influencing others Enthusiasm and engagement

Creating a Working group Composition (senior manager, front line staff, Foster

parent and youth in care) Stakeholder representation Training the leadership group

A leadership group Terms of reference Mandate and Empowerment

Making noise Not the property of the chosen few but an organization

project

Piloting: Starting small Piloting a time limited practice run with clear

objectives and clear timeframesUnderstanding the vagaries of complexity (What can go wrong will go wrong)Ensuring that it is doableCutting one’s teeth : competence and mastery

Starting with the already committed and willingTraining Guaranteeing success

Celebrating beginning and ending Evaluating, Learning the lessons Publicising success, identifying (publicly)

problems, if any

The importance of Training:LAC is about doing it differently

Proactive vs reactive No assessment without action Involving the child / youth and foster parent (other

caregivers) They are the 1st concerned Informal conversation about present and the future

Developmental vs medical models Strengths and assets vs deficits and pathology Parenting vs treatment Resilience VS damaged goods Serves the accountability purpose (workers and foster

parents finally know what`s expected of them). The training has been well received

The resilient agency

Agencies, their staff and partners may go through adversity, but the aggragate potential of the people involved suggests that much can be done to make the organisation and its clients thrive. LAC can help bring this about.

Using AAR data

PM3 & Looking After Children (LAC)

Flynn, R. J., Lemay, R., Ghazal, H., & Hébert, S. (2003). A performance measurement, monitoring, and management system for local children=s Aid Societies. In K. Kufeldt & B. McKenzie (Eds.), Child welfare: Connecting research, policy, and practice (pp. 319-330). Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.

Lemay, R., & Ghazal, H. (2004). Looking After Children in Canada: A Practitioners Guide (experimental edition). Plantagenet, ON: Valor Institute.

Lemay, R. Ghazal, H. & Byne, B.-A. (2005). Looking After Children in Canada: Curriculum Guide for Front Line Staff, Foster Parents, and Senior Management Staff, 3rd revised edition. Plantagenet: Institut Valor Institute.

PM3 Performance measurement, monitoring,

and management systems are designed to permit organizations to evaluate the outputs and outcomes of their programs on a regular, ongoing basis, in order to improve program management, effectiveness, and efficiency (Rossi, Freeman, & Lipsey, 1999). Outputs are the products, services, or activities

that a program delivers to its clients. Outcomes, on the other hand, are the benefits

that clients experience during or after their participation in a program, such as improvements in children’s safety, mental health, school performance, or self-care skills.

THE ASSESSMENT AND ACTION RECORD

EDUCATION

Statistics on youth absences from school

0 days 1-3 days 4-6 days 7-10 days 11-20 days More than 20 days Not in school during the last 12 months

10%38%26%8%8%9%1%

9%36%25%12%8%9%1%

12%40%23%11%7%7%0%

38%46%10%3%2%1%0%

Comparing outcomes of children in care with outcomes of children in the general population

AAR IndicatorsAbsences from school:How many days, if any, was … absent from school during the last 12 months?

Prescott-Russell

CAS (10-20)

N = 79

Ontario CASs (10-20)N = 551

Ontario CASs (10-15)N = 395

NLSCY (10-15)N = 5991

Statistics on reasons for absenteeism

Health reasons Problems with transportation Problems with weather Family vacation Fear of school Problem with teacherProblem with youths at schoolDifficulty with childcare arrangementsOther

59%3%1%3%0%4%2%1%

27%

54%2%9%2%0%5%3%0%25%

59%2%9%2%0%4%3%0%21%

Not applicable.(Question found only in the Assessment and Action Record.)

Comparing outcomes of children in care with outcomes of children in the general population

AAR IndicatorsReason for absenteeism: What was the main reason for … being absent from school?

Prescott-Russell

CAS (10-20)

N = 75

Ontario CASs (10-20)N = 520

Ontario CASs (10-15)N = 363

NLSCY (10-15)

Present the data to staff and foster parents;

Establish a policy which prevents children from missing school to meet with child welfare workers and other professionals unless absolutely necessary.

Managerial implications for absenteeism

CAS sample(Youth aged 10-

20)N = 81

Ontario CASs(Youth aged

10-20)N = 549

Yes 46% 33%

No 54% 67%

Repeated grade(age group 10-20) (Yr 2)

CAS sample(Youth aged

10-20)N = 83

Ontario CASs

(Youth aged 10-

15)N = 397

NLSCY(Youth

aged 10-15)

N = 5939

Yes 51% 52% 7%

No 54% 48%% 93%

Special help and resource(age group 10-20) (Yr 2)

CAS sample(Youth aged 10-

20)N = 82

Ontario CASs(Youth aged 10-

15)N = 398

NLSCY(Youth aged 10-

15)N = 5941

Yes 17% 27% 4%

No 83% 73% 96%

Special help and tutoring(age group 10-20) (yr 2)

CAS sample(Youth aged 10-20)

N = 79

Ontario CASs(Youth aged 10-15)

N = 356

Yes 25% 21%

No 69% 77%

Not applicable

6% 2%

School changes(age group 10-20) (yr 2)

CAS sample(Youth aged 10-

20)N = 83

Ontario CASs(Youth aged 10-

20)N = 391

NLSCY(Youth aged 10-

13)N = 3421

Everyday 24% 32% 30%

A few times a week

27% 24% 30%

Once a week 7% 8% 10%

A few times a month

8% 11% 12%

Less than one a

month

10% 7% 4%

Almost never

24% 18% 14%

Reading for pleasure(age group 10-20) (yr 1)

The agency has a school-based program that has developed very positive ties with the school board and schools;

Establish a permanent committee to review on a monthly basis, school support and situation of children with very high needs;

The children and youth in care teams organized meetings with the school-based program in order to develop strategies to improve educational outcomes for children and youth in care;

Disseminate LAC results to the school boards.

Managerial implicationsfor education

Pursue more aggressively a volunteer tutoring program for children and youth in care;

The agency decided to free up money to pay for peer tutors where foster parents thought this to be warranted;

Staff agreed that it was important to emphasize the Education dimension during the yearly assessment and in writing up plans of care;

Emphasize the importance of book and periodical buying at all times but especially at birthdays and Christmas;

The agency reiterated its policy of reimbursing such expenditures liberally.

Managerial implicationsfor education

Raymond LemayRaymond LemayExecutive DirectorExecutive [email protected]