1

The Higher Education Academy with

The Joint University Council Social Work Education Committee

The Role of Higher Education in Continuing Professional Development for Social Workers in England

Round Table Conference: 2nd April 2014

Hilary Burgess, Higher Education Academy (HEA), welcomed participants to the event, commenting

The event was planned as a result of a forum held in 2013 for HE delegates to reflect on what was happening to CPD provision in HE, following the end of the PQ framework. This indicated a mixed picture with real problems in some areas, whilst in others HEIs were finding ways forward by reframing previous programmes and modules into new awards or into stand alone modules in response to employer need. With support from the HEA and the Joint University Council Social Work Education Committee (JUC-SWEC) this event has been possible. With so much recent attention given, in England, to qualifying education for SWs, CPD has slipped in priority, but there are indications of resurgent interest nationally, to be explored during the event. Lyn Romeo, Chief Social Worker for Adults opened the conference, making the following points HEIs play an important role in the education and training of social workers. At qualifying level many changes have been made and work is now in hand to consider how this might be consolidated. The ASYE is bedding in and provides an essential first step into professional practice. However we also need to get a framework for CPD in place – a nationally recognized structure to help and encourage links between research mindedness and practice.

Annie Hudson, Chief Executive of TCSW gave a presentation in which she made the following points

o There have been a number of barriers in terms of the development of robust

CPD programme (weak professional status, false starts, thinkers Vs doers paradigm, ivory towers and anti-intellectualism and varied professional discourses)

o This has impacted on: retention rates, morale, the evidence-base, muddled career pathways and outcomes for service users and carers

o Need to build on current platforms (e.g. PCF, HEI engagement, best practice, HCPC re-registration, employers standards, reviews of SW)

o Possible construction of a flexible climbing frame for CPD (sideways and up) o Some key ingredients for this identified, including CPD as a ‘conduit of

learned practice’; ensuring portability and progression; considering impact; partnership; assessment; QA

2

Marion Brandon, professor of SW at University of East Anglia (and representing APSW) gave a presentation in which she made the following points Key themes are

• Partnership planning • Models of HE provision, including flexibility • Funding – who pays - commissioning • Workplace support for staff undertaking CPD • Shared modules/programmes with other professionals • Accrediting and assessing in-house provision • Academic levels • Links to PCF and career planning • Priorities for CPD in HE • Meeting changing needs • Growing the next generation of SW researchers and educators

Following the demise of the old PQ framework o Some HEIs are adapting, changing, surviving and finding new markets for

CPD, others have struggled. Most are unhappy with the lack of a clear CPD framework. It is important to establish the ASYE as platform for further CPD.

o Some tensions have emerged (1) between training as opposed to assessed learning; (2) HEIs are sometimes used only for QA rather than educational provision; conversely elsewhere there is a diminution of direct agency involvement; (3) funding

o Some HEIs have developed new academic frameworks linked to the PCF; others bespoke modules or ‘shell’ modules, with flexibility of provision (on-site teaching, distance/blended learning), and collaboration with other disciplines.

Bridget Robb, BASW made the following points There are useful and divergent developments in CPD across the 4 nations, from which lesson can be learnt

- NI has a profession-led PQ partnership (HEIs and employers), now managed

by NISCC. This incorporates common practices across HEIs such as APEL, individual learning programmes, transferable modules and a dissertation. Modules from health, law, counselling can also be credit-rated and included.

- In Wales, the CCW has established a CEPL framework, linking CPD to career

progression. 4 levels: consolidation, senior, experienced, consultant.

- In Scotland the CLF (Continuous Learning Framework) is for the whole social services workforce. Some recognised CPD programmes in HE at M level including the MH award. HEIs tend to specialise in different areas. Most modules run for people across Scotland.

We also need to consider

- the position of independent SWs who work across the UK - links to European and international norms for academic awards - the needs of SWs who qualified with only Dip HE level awards - How the CPD framework for SW is seen in relation to that for other

professions

3

Mary Keating, Skills for Care, made available a handout and made the following points - The ASYE provides a firm foundation for CPD and a possible model as to how

this might be done at higher levels. It has been positively evaluated – see http://bit.ly/1bJH3JV. We need to learn from this. A longitudinal study of NQSWs undergoing ASYE is now under way FFI see http://bit.ly/1e52UO5

- Core principles for CPD are at http://bit.ly/1ik4Wpt. There is enthusiasm for CPD - It is essential to develop ways in which the value and impact of CPD can be

measured (see S4C tools on their site) http://bit.ly/1gD2itJ - When considering priorities for CPD it is important for employers to look at how to

embed into systems (e.g. Performance Appraisal). Academic accreditation of CDP may form part of this.

- Assessment must be relayed to practice – this might entail work-based

assessment, HEIs and employers working together. Brian Walsh on behalf of ADCS and ADASS made the following points

- HEIs must be aware of the restrictions on forward planning for LAs imposed by the Comprehensive Spending Review Cycle - 3 years max.

- Lessons can be learnt from the implementation of the ASYE in both Adults

and Children’s Services, and how good practice can be built upon. There seems to be an improved quality of NQSWs now in terms of intellectual ability.

- Retention of social workers, and fluidity in the labour market are key issues

(SWs moving from LAs to health, voluntary, private sectors or to agencies).

- Major employers, especially LAs need to be mindful of succession planning for senior management, especially Directors (42% turnover in Directors of CS lat year). This is a challenge for middle and top tier managers. Note 48 out of 152 LAs have a common Director for AS and CS.

- There is a concern about the recent reviews of SW education conducted

separately – there has to be synergy in development and planned change.

- The constellation of services in LAs need to be understood – AS and CS may be in ‘People’s Directorate’, including other services (e.g. libraries).

- Some councils are moving towards generic commissioning across different

services on areas such as personalisation.

- HCPC re-registration offers an important opportunity for employers and SWs to engage with CPD.

- The PSW networks have an important role to play in bringing people together

to share practice. The significance of the role needs to be explained.

4

Wendy Allen, Learn to Care made the following points - HEIs need to liaise with WF Development leads and Directors. WFD leads submit

plans to Directorate but these are subject to change as operational priorities evolve. Some WFD leads no longer hold budgets – can only bid to centre.

- Most employers see CPD as a means of retaining and developing their

experienced social workers. Employers who do invest in full CPD programmes for experienced social workers are more likely to retain them. But traditional programmes take lots of time away from the workplace, so are less attractive. CPD should link to career progression

- Good feedback from employers in active partnerships with HEIs, working

together to address challenges. Some employers run in-house programmes accredited by HE; this keeps costs down and maintains QA through HE involvement. Others maintain good collaborative working, and the partnership is effective in addressing curriculum changes.

- Funding a real issue: employers look for creative ways of supporting CPD. Some

local arrangements resolve this by running accessible workshops/offering twilight teaching sessions. Financial picture inconsistent; some employers have made the case for continued funding whilst others now commission. Most employers continue to invest in NQSWs and some have established academies.

- Budgets decreasing and grants reducing. Most employers have spent all of their

CWDC funding and have limited opportunities to access additional funding. AYSE comes with £2,000 per candidate, but with no match funding from DfE there can be an inequitable offering in places. CPD is increasingly dependent on LA base budget allocation which is rapidly diminishing in most areas. The challenge is: what can the HEI offer that is innovative/creative/low cost but also viable to deliver, and how can LAs release staff (when demand is increasing demand and staffing reductions taking place).

- TCSW membership is viewed as supportive with some employers committing to

corporate membership so SWs can access additional learning resources. Some employers support organisations such as Research In Practice and Community Care inform, where membership allows access to research.

- Success in some areas is demonstrated when the CPD offer is modular and

focused on practice and the skills required (e.g. a modular PG cert in practice education that can be studied in its entirety or as single modules, with direct benefit for both the employer and the social worker).

- May need to review the number of courses/programmes on offer: the most

successful seem to be those developed in partnership. - Most employers are focussing on the benefits of improved contact with service

users through new web sites/digital contact methods. Learning and development needs to mirror this (without routeing everything through e-learning). Webinars, Face time, and blended learning are successful additions to traditional methods.

5

Debbie Blackshaw, CAFCASS (now part of the MoJ) made the following points - CAFCASS are major employers of social workers

- In past 8 years only 8 of their staff completed the full Higher Specialist/Advanced

awards under the old PQ framework – these were seen to be too complex and inflexible.

- Their preferred route is the completion of specific stand-alone modules that focus

on research mindedness and recent knowledge. CAFCASS will pay the fees but cannot free up study time/leave.

- There is an important role for Practice Educators/Assessors in looking at the

SW’s practice, and this contributing to the assessment of academic modules. - CAFCASS is looking more towards e-learning, blended learning and distance

learning for CPD provision - HEIs need to make explicit what is required of students in terms of the

programme, and make registration systems more user friendly - HEIs need to understand the needs of CAFCASS as an organisation (e.g.

including private law arena) - For some practitioners who qualified with a DipHE there may be a significant

step-up in terms of study/ability. For some this may mean undertaking academic work (Return to Learn). It may also mean hard messages for some practitioners.

- The transferability and lack of streamlining of academic awards can be

problematic (standard modules varying from 15 to 20 credit points for example) - HEIs have an important role in QA of CPD (with External Examiner system etc) - Social Workers may now be seen as having more personal responsibility re CPD

through re-registration etc. In the future social workers may need to be prepared to pay towards their CPD

- There is interest in how social workers might evidence a career pathway towards

becoming advanced practitioners. - CAFCASS’s procurement processes mean that contracts of more then £10,000

have to go through a formal complex process. Below this amount, direct purchase is possible.

6

In discussions during the day, and in the final plenary, chaired by Jane McLenachan (JUC-SWEC) the following key points were made

1. There is a need for a clear and simple national framework for CPD, that nonetheless enables flexible regional partnership across stakeholders. Social Workers need the opportunity for measured development throughout their careers: it would be an investment for the quality of future practice. In comparison with other professions, SW is way behind in terms of CPD expectations and opportunities (e.g. GPs).

2. There is support for the notion of a CPD framework as a flexible climbing

frame, rather than the former complex and rigid framework. The ‘old’ model of full awards only is unlikely to work; the QA needs to be of outcomes rather than the content or input.

3. There is a need to find a way of ensuring portability of CPD across

agencies/employers. Academic credits provide one way, but these may be differently measured/counted. Would the notion of ‘professional credits’ help?

4. The PCF provides a good scaffolding for CPD (Note the 360 degree tool for

managers’ learning), but CPD also needs to link to career progression. Some employers have already found ways to do this.

5. Suggestions were made that CPD might comprise 3/4 strands

- Specialist practice - Leadership and management - Practice education/professional development - Research skills (for pathways to research posts)

Note: OFSTED highlighted leadership and governance as a key issue across 11 LAs in recent reviews. Agreed that a strong focus should be supervision and management (especially first-line managers); however it is essential that the focus for these is the SW context – generic management programmes are not applicable. Supervision and PE training and support should be linked.

6. We need to gather evidence of the outcomes/impact of post-qualifying

programmes (collating research already undertaken, and guiding approaches for new research).

7. The role of HE in CPD has great potential/value in terms of

- providing QA, some standardisation and benchmarking - added value of expertise - knowledge generation, research and evidence building - contributing to the definition of the problems and shaping the solutions

that agencies need to address (consultancy), rather than just providing CPD modules/programmes

8. The best CPD in organisations is based on a systemic approach 9. All parties (HEIs, agencies) need to review their stakeholder relationships

(who goes to what meetings, with what purpose and authority), build relationships constructively, enabling dialogue to take place about professional needs for CPD. The relational aspects of partnerships were

7

stressed. Within regional partnerships there is a tension between collaboration and competition that has to be managed.

10. People working on CPD programmes in HEIs must understand the

organisational structures within which they are working (constraints, frameworks, QA procedures, how to make arguments for flexibility where needed). HEIs face challenges in mounting CPD programmes - APEL of work-based learning is time consuming and expensive; HEIs may have complex processes to accept an agency as a partner; HEIs are bound by financial plans/ targets and a different financial year; HEIs have their own regulators. Managers in agencies liaising with HE need to understand HE systems. Conversely HE representatives must get a good grasp of the agency/LA structures, system, people and budget/expenditure cycles, with their constraints and possibilities. Where Academies and/or Advanced Training Organisations are being developed they will have a role to play.

11. We need to be clear who is commissioning the learning – is it the employers

(who may want training), or social workers (who may want education)? It may be both. We do not want to return to a situation where social workers are told they have to attend.

12. A continuing problem with CPD is SWs getting time to do this – this links to

overall resourcing, case-loads etc.

13. Development of CPD should be linked to that of ASYE, which provides a strong platform for CPD (several examples of HE engagement here)

14. It is essential to build the research, knowledge and evidence base in SW, and

promote the communication of findings. The Research and Knowledge Exchange, Research in Practise, SCIE and NSPCC should help. Need to ensure practitioners are able to, and do access these. Platforms for sharing practitioners’ knowledge also needed.

15. The variation in style and methods for commissioning was noted, both

between Children’s Services and Adults Services and between LAs. Some models not seen to be fit for purpose and there is a need for clear commissioning models and flexible HE costing models.

16. HCPC re-registration provides a catalyst to focus on CPD and its impact on

service users. This can help build a learning culture in the organisation. For employers and SW’s re-registration presents a challenge.

17. Learning Reviews (‘what do we need to know’) and OFSTED inspections

provide a challenge and opportunity for consideration of CPD. The new CS lead (Debbie Jones) is receptive to feedback/suggestions. The door is also open to links with the CQC re CPD with their new model of inspections. There will be specific issues when OFSTED/CQC identify agencies that are struggling. HEIs may have a role to play in supporting these.

18. SW doctorates play an essential role, both in building the knowledge and

evidence base for SW and in establishing a link to careers as SW academics

19. Secondment, shadowing and study sabbaticals are other paths for CPD.

8

20. Links may be to be made to the Law Commission report/draft bill (published on the day of the event) on the Regulation of Health and Social Care Professionals. This includes recommendations for regulators to determine standards/amounts/types of continuing professional development.

21. We need to keep the changing needs of service users and carers at the

centre of CPD provision.

22. Important that employers do not regard working with HEIs as a deficit model, in that HE CPD provision is used to respond to difficulties or ‘weaknesses’ within the organisation. Need to recognise the employer’s role to bridge the skills gap within the organisation and HE CPD provision should be more focused upon enhancement role.

Possible action/messages to other bodies

o Strong message to TCSW about need for a clear, yet flexible CPD structure. Need for this to be constructed with support from key stakeholders including HE, employers, professionals, Chief Social Workers etc. Portability and recognition are two key concepts (Note difficulty of BASW involvement in this if led by TCSW). Seen as being important for the profession to respond to this need, rather than being led by Government, who may impose their ideas.

o The Employers Standards provide an important lever in terms of clarifying

employers’ responsibilities for CPD, so links should be made with the LGA. Also links to the LGA Task and Finish group on Recruitment and Retention were suggested (this involves HR, workface development. CEO’s and Chief Social Workers) – a theme has been the potential of CPD to support retention.

o The response to the two reviews of SW education (Narey and DCA) provide

an opportunity to promote the need for CPD

o A message could be sent to Pro-Vice Chancellors (for Learning & Teaching) to emphasise need for flexibility in provision of CPD (e.g. via the HEA PVC network)

o The Principal Social Worker networks provide another channel for

discussion of these issues (though limited somewhat by their fledgling nature)

o ADCS/ADASS has a potential role is addressing the variation in style and methods for commissioning. Some models not seen to be fit for purpose.

o Local and regional networks for HEIs and employers should discuss CPD,

and the programme for this day might provide a model that could be replicated (NB some areas like Pan-London group already doing this)

o There may be value in mapping HE-based CPD programmes across

England (see for example the Pan-London group, although some programmes may be created but they were not run due to lack of uptake).

o Linking CPD expectations with OFSTED/CQC’s new and evolving methods of

inspection.

9

o Agreed that it was important to build the evidence base for the impact and outcomes of CPD – linking the work being done by Skills for Care with work that has been and will be undertaken by academics (JUC-SWEC) on the impact of CPD. There is a task here for some collation/review.

o The DH/DfE might consider a more transparent process for the development

of the DfE and DH research strategies, and better coordination between the 2 departments about research and development priorities.

Hilary Burgess April 2014

10

Participants Name Organisation

Lynn Romeo Chief Social Worker for Adults (England)

Annie Hudson Chief Executive Office, The College of Social Work

Brian Walsh Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS) and ADCS

Mary Keating Skills for Care

Brigit Robb British Association of Social Workers

Deborah Gordon Learn to Care

Wendy Allen Learn to Care

Tony Stanley Principal Social Worker Network for Children and Families (T. Hamlets) unable to attend

Andy Butler Principal Social Worker Network for Adults (Surrey CC)

Debbie Blackshaw CAFCASS

Kate Johnson Education Advisor, The College of Social Work

James Holden Department for Education

HE

Marion Brandon Association of Professors of Social Work / UEA

Samantha Baron Manchester Metropolitan University

Joe Smeeton Nottingham Trent University

Claudia Megele Middlesex University

Jane Lindsay Kingston University

Ric Bowl University of Birmingham

Marilyn Frost Southampton Solent University

Anne Hollows Sheffield Hallam University

Keith Brown Bournemouth University

Mandy Schofield University of Chester

Danielle Turney University of Bristol

Jeanette Neden Northumbria University

Sharon Lambley University of Sussex

Jane Maffey Teesside University

Janet Melville-Wiseman Canterbury Christ Church University

Kish Bhatti-Sinclair University of Chichester

Jane Mclenachan JUC-SWEC

Hilary Burgess Higher Education Academy

Vida Douglas Higher Education Academy

Geoff Glover Head of Health and Social Care, Higher Education Academy