Evaluation of the

Access Centre Project

Community Area 7
Prepared for Mary O’Loan
Access Centre Manager

Coinneach Shanks
January, 2006
 2

Acknowledgements
The consultant would like to thank the following persons who assisted in the
compilation of the study.

Firstly, Frances Chance, formerly Principal Social Worker in Community Area 7 was
responsible for the development of the initial project concept. In taking this initiative,
he showed considerable foresight. Frances Chance is now a regional director with
Barnardos.

Mary O’Loan and her staff, Shirley and Anita, are to be congratulated in pursuing the
project’s development with dedication and commitment. Thanks go to Principal
Social Worker Carol O’Flynn and Child Care Manager Colman Duggan, who
oversaw the project over all the stages outlined in this document.

The study would not have been possible without the generous participation of the
parents, foster carers and children who are the customers of the project. In particular,
the children were most cooperative and tolerated research inquiries with equanimity.
Many thanks also go to the social workers that responded to requests for information.

The consultant hopes that this document will be of value to those developing access
centres in other areas.

Coinneach Shanks
Virtual Image Research Consultants
 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................2

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION............................................................................7

1.1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................7

1.2 THE EVALUATION PROJECT CONTEXT. ................................................................7
1.3 PROJECT ENQUIRY COMPONENTS ........................................................................8
1.4 MODEL EMPLOYED ...............................................................................................8
1.5 THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY ....................................................................................9
1.6 TERMS EMPLOYED IN THIS STUDY ....................................................................10
1.7 ACCESS CENTRE: STRUCTURE OF REPORT: CHAPTERS...................................11

CHAPTER 2: POLICY CONTEXT FOR THE ACCESS CENTRE ................13

2.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................13

2.2 THE NATIONAL LEVEL - IRELAND .....................................................................13
2.2.1 SUMMARY OF HEALTH BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES .............................................13
2.2.2 IDENTIFIED NEED ..............................................................................................13
2.2.3 DEVELOPMENTS ..............................................................................................14
Chart 1: Likely state organisational structure for children responsibilities ..............15
2.6 THE EUROPEAN LEVEL.......................................................................................15
2.7 THE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL .............................................................................16
2.8 CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS FOR THE ACCESS CENTRE...................................17

CHAPTER 3: THE COMPARATIVE DIMENSION. .......................................19

3.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................19

Table 1: Case study display ......................................................................................19
3.2 CASE STUDY 1: AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND.................................................19
Table 2: Vigilance levels display..............................................................................20
3.2.3 PRINCIPLES .......................................................................................................21
3.3 CASE STUDY 2: THE UNITED KINGDOM ............................................................22
3.3.1 CONTEXT .........................................................................................................22
3.3.2 USAGE ..............................................................................................................22
3.3.2 GUIDELINES FOR USE ........................................................................................22
Table 3: Contact guidelines display.........................................................................23
3.4 CASE STUDY 3: UNITED STATES.........................................................................23
3.4.1 CONTEXT ..........................................................................................................23
Table 4: Visitation plan standards display ................................................................24
3.5 CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS FOR THIS PROJECT...............................................26
Chart 2: The visitation flow in current practice ...........................................................27

CHAPTER 4: PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT ...................................................28

4.1 INTRODUCTION:..................................................................................................28
 4

4.2 PHASE 1: THE INITIAL IDEA AND PROPOSAL ....................................................29

Table 5: Visit stages display ....................................................................................29
4.3 PHASE 2: DEVELOPMENT PERIOD FOLLOWING THE APPOINTMENT OF THE ....30
COORDINATOR ............................................................................................................30
Table 6: Original position of access work in Community Area 7 display................31
Table 7: Anticipated remedial intervention display.................................................31
4.4 PHASE 3: APPOINTMENT OF MANAGER ............................................................31
4.5 PHASE 4: OCCUPYING THE PREMISES................................................................32
4.5.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................32
4.5.2 THE BUILDING AND PHYSICAL RESOURCES ......................................................32
4.5.3 STAFF................................................................................................................33
Chart 3: Current Organisation of the Access Centre ................................................34
4.5.4 SYSTEMS ...........................................................................................................34
4.6 PHASE 5: OPERATIONAL COMMENCEMENT ......................................................34
4.6.1 THE PREMISES IN USE ........................................................................................35
4.6.2 TRANSPORT.......................................................................................................35
Table 7: Transport criteria display............................................................................35
Table 8: Travel and supervision time display ...........................................................36
4.6.3 BOOKINGS .........................................................................................................36
Table 9: Bookings and completed hours display ......................................................37
4.6.4 CANCELLATIONS ...............................................................................................37
Table 10: Cancellations by year display ...................................................................38
Table 11: Non-attendance analysis display...............................................................38
4.7 PHASE 6: PLANNING AND OCCUPATION OF THE PURPOSE BUILT CENTRE ......40
4.7.1 THE NEW SITE ...................................................................................................40
4.7.2 THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT...........................................................................41
4.7.3 INTERIOR OF THE NEW BUILDING.......................................................................42
4.7.4 ENTRY TO THE PURPOSE BUILT PREMISES ..........................................................43
4.8 CONCLUSION AND OBSERVATIONS .....................................................................43
4.9 CRITICAL INCIDENTS ..........................................................................................44
4.9.1 TECHNIQUE .......................................................................................................44
4.9.2 CLIENTS WITH ADDICTION PROBLEMS ...............................................................44
4.9.3 CLIENTS WHO ARRIVE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL AND DRUGS ..........45
4.9.4 CLIENTS WHO ARRIVE AT THE CENTRE ACCOMPANIED BY UNAUTHORISED
PERSONS:.......................................................................................................................45
4.9.5 FAMILY MEMBERS WHO “ACT OUT” WITHIN THE CENTRE .................................45
4.9.6 THEFT ...............................................................................................................45
4.9.7 LESSONS ...........................................................................................................46
4.10 FLOWCHARTS ...................................................................................................46
Chart 4: Current Access Referral flow.....................................................................47
Chart 5: Access Centre Project - phases of development .........................................48

CHAPTER 5: APPLICATION OF A CONSUMER MODEL...........................49

5.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................49

Table 12: Consumer-orientated indicator system ........................................................49
5.2 INDICATORS IN CONTEXT:..................................................................................49
5.3 INDICATOR 1: ACCESSIBILITY ...........................................................................50
Table 13: Criteria for the exterior of the building display ........................................52
 5

Table 14: Criteria for the building interior display...................................................53

5.4 INDICATOR 2: CHOICE .......................................................................................53
Table 15: Improvement criteria display....................................................................54
5.5 INDICATOR 3: VOICE ..........................................................................................55
5.6 INDICATOR 4: ACCOUNTABILITY.......................................................................56
5.7 THE PURPOSE BUILT PREMISES: ACCESS ...........................................................57

CHAPTER 6: SYNTHESIS –AN ASSESSMENT OF QUALITY IN

PROVISION 59

6.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................59

6.2 PROVISION OF USER-ORIENTATED SERVICES ....................................................59
6.3 PROVISION OF QUALITY SYSTEMS THAT ARE FLEXIBLE AND ADAPTABLE ........61
6.4 PROVISION OF SYSTEMS THAT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE DIFFERENTIAL NEEDS
OF USERS ......................................................................................................................61
6.5 PROVISION OF FRAMEWORKS THAT RESPOND TO ORGANISATIONAL
FLEXIBILITY .................................................................................................................62
6.7 INTRODUCTION OF QUALITY THAT LEADS THE ORGANISATION, RATHER THAN
COSTS ...........................................................................................................................62
6.8 ADOPTION OF PERFORMANCE TARGETS THAT ALLOW FOR QUALITATIVE AND
QUANTITATIVE FEEDBACK. .........................................................................................63
6.9 DEDICATION OF TIME AND RESOURCES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF USER-
ORIENTATED SYSTEMS .................................................................................................64
6.10 PROVISION OF CONTINUITY OF SERVICES AND FUNDING ................................64
6.11 ENGAGING IN PARTNERSHIPS OF SERVICE PROVIDERS ...................................64
6.12 DEVELOPMENT OF A CULTURE OF INNOVATION, RESPONDING TO NEED AND
REQUIREMENT .............................................................................................................65
6.13 ENGAGING OF HIGHLY QUALIFIED STAFF ABLE TO RESPOND TO USER NEEDS
AND DEVELOPMENT .....................................................................................................65
6.14 INVESTMENT IN TRAINING AND TRAINING PARTICIPATION OF WORKERS ......66
6.15 ENSURING EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN ARE NOT
NEGLECTED ..................................................................................................................66
6.16 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................66
Table 16: Assessment of quality in provision – summary display ..........................67

CHAPTER 7: FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS.......................................................68

7.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................68

7.2 PROCEDURES AND PROTOCOLS [A]....................................................................69
7.2.1 REORGANISATION .............................................................................................69
7.2.2 TRANSPORT.......................................................................................................69
7.2.3 ORGANISATIONAL INTEGRATION.......................................................................70
Chart 6: Proposed organisational structure for access work ....................................70
7.2.4 ANCILLARY SERVICES ......................................................................................70
7.2.4 EXTENDED FAMILY VISITING .............................................................................71
7.3 PHYSICAL RESOURCES [B].................................................................................71
7.3.1 SAFETY .............................................................................................................71
7.4 STAFF RESOURCES [C]........................................................................................72
7.4.1 ACCESS MANAGER ...........................................................................................72
 6

7.4.2 RECEPTION/ADMINISTRATIVE WORKER .............................................................73

7.4.3 PORTER .............................................................................................................73
7.5 EVALUATION AND MONITORING [D] .................................................................74
7.5.1 PROCESS EVALUATION .....................................................................................74
7.5.2 OUTCOME MEASUREMENT................................................................................74
7.6 DEVELOPMENT OF THE SERVICE [E] .................................................................75
7.6.1 DEVELOPMENT..................................................................................................75

CHAPTER 8: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................77

CHAPTER 9: RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................82

APPENDIX “A”: DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE .................................................84

APPENDIX “B”: DRAFT CODE OF PRACTICE ............................................85

APPENDIX “C”: PARENTS’ QUESTIONNAIRE...............................................88

APPENDIX “D”: FOSTER CARERS’ QUESTIONNAIRE................................94

APPENDIX “E”: SOCIAL WORKERS QUESTIONNAIRE.............................100

 7

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Introduction

Definition of the Access Centre: A centre through which parents may meet
their children who have been placed into care and where external professional
supervision is necessary, such that enduring familial ties, parental and social
skills may be developed in a positive atmosphere of safety and support.

1.2 The evaluation project context.

The Access Centre evaluation commenced in 2000 and continued over its period of
introduction. At the outset, research questions were framed in the likelihood that the
centre would be operational within a year. However, various unforeseeable problems
arose during the implementation period. These will be covered later in this report. The
implementation period expended over a considerable period necessitating a reframing
of the evaluation project.

Staff members and consultant agreed that the evaluation project adopt an alternative
orientation whilst retaining the original enquiry methods. The project reoriented to
provision of a watching brief. This brief covered the period of introduction,
acquisition of temporary premises, operationalisation and the relocation of the project
to a purpose built premises.

The evaluation spans several specific periods as follows:

1. The initial period where no dedicated premises existed.

2. The following period where premises existed prior to access visits being
possible
3. A period of running the access centre whilst recruitment of staff commenced
4. The period where a minimum of two staff were in place. This period,
immediately prior to relocation, includes negotiation and planning for the
layout of the purpose built centre.

This evaluation is therefore unusual in that it spans a long period. However, there are
various advantages associated with the approach. Firstly, it offered an opportunity to
examine the project from the standpoint of innovation. Secondly it offers an
opportunity to provide guidelines for the introduction of similar projects. The
evaluation therefore adds value in terms of offering a Vademecum element.

A Vademecum (literally, “go with me”) is a European approach, which entails

instruction and advice to those who follow. Using the experience offered by
innovation, particularly in development and decision-making, this document aims to
offer advice to those that follow the introductory process. In this manner, it is
intended that other such developments may take advantage of the positive experiences
encountered, whilst avoiding the pitfalls encountered in project innovation.
 8

1.3 Project enquiry components

1. Consultation: Interviews and discussions with (formal and informal)

management and key service delivery workers, foster carers, and adult centre
users/customers
2. Observation: observation of centre practice; adult users and children
behaviour, transport arrangements and effects
3. Self-completion questionnaires for social workers, foster carers, adult centre
users. The direct engagement of service users is herein referred to as
“consultation”)

1.4 Model employed

The consultant utilises a formal model of assessment developed for welfare
consumers. This model, developed at EU level, examines social provision from the
point of view of the customer. In this case there are several different types of
customers: adult centre users, children and foster carers. The model has been adapted
for use in this project as follows:

• Access: Recent orientation to service-users privileges the idea of “customers”,

which in turn raises notions of choice. In this case customers may be seen as
anyone who uses the service (and who is not a member of staff of the Health
Board). Customers are adult users, the children (usually the subject of a care
order) and foster carers (in the service of the Health Board but at arms-length
from decision making). Access itself includes a crucial dimension of physical
access. How difficult or easy is it for customers to gain access to the service at
the physical level? Geographical location, available transport, approachability
and any confidentiality problems inherent in the physical location all form part
of this level.

• Choice: In the introduction of such a service there are clear limitations in

choice for customers. The first constraint is a legal one. The adult users of the
service are not at liberty to exercise choice in differing services. Yet there are
clear personal choices available to them. They may decide on the manner in
which way use the service, no matter their self-interest. They invest time and
energy in using the Access Centre. The key policy objective of the Department
of Health and Children is to maintain family ties between children in care and
parents and is of vital importance to this study. For example, does the service
encourage independence rather than reinforce dependency? Similarly foster
carers are constrained by service limitations. Visitation rights impact greatly
on their lives, yet they appear to have few choices as regards their
implementation. Children are currently being invited to exercise more choice
then hitherto envisaged. This tends to be age-appropriate. In visitation
arrangements, they can and do express views – their compliance in
arrangements for example may be observed.

• Voice: Voice is the means by which customers assert their desire to shape
their own role in service delivery. Of vital importance here is their ability to
influence the development of a new programme. In this case, they may have
experienced different arrangements prior to the introduction of the Access
 9

Centre. They are thus able to make comparisons. Foster carers often feel
excluded from welfare developments - yet they are crucial to the security and
well being of the child or children in their care. Their contribution is
significant in the care system, especially where foster rather than institutional
care is dominant. Access arrangements make a difference to their lives
because they manage the preparation and aftermath of visits. Their
contribution may be very specific and this is important to encourage. Children
can be regarded as the end-users and the main priority in the service. Their
voice tends to be neglected simply because of their age. We pay special
attention to any contribution they may make even if it is not articulated in an
adult manner. It may be articulated through play or behaviour.

• Accountability: Accountability spans several areas. The service provider (The

Access Centre) is responsible not only to customers but also to a government
department and ultimately to tax paying citizens. Resource allocation falls into
this category such that we must pay close attention to the appropriateness of
inputs, resource use and outcomes. But ultimately the service must be
accountable to children at the levels of:

1. Child protection
2. Child development
3. Future choice (as regards association with family members)

• The service is also accountable to the neighbourhood in which it is located –

especially since adult service users (parents) may not always be able to sustain
conventional or acceptable behaviour when visiting the centre. Finally, the
project is a function that services “internal customers”. In this case, social
workers avail of the access service, whilst remaining accountable in the same
manner as that specified above.

1.5 The scope of the study

The scope of the study is necessarily wide, because of the following factors:

1. The service deals with several customer groups with differing and often
conflicting goals or aspirations.
2. The service must achieve satisfaction with a variety of internal and external
actors including social work staff, legal representatives, parents, children,
foster carers and neighbours.
3. The service process involves not merely protection and supervision but must
also operate a multi-objective system, which includes socialisation and
development of children and adults.
4. The service must provide adequate staff resources to provide for supervision
and observation and maintain a suitable level of organisation to enforce a
range of interventions contingent with child safety.
5. The service must live with and manage the element of danger inherent in
dealing with an adult client group for whom supervision is necessary.
6. The service must provide a range of physical resources and materials
appropriate to the task above. This includes the necessary facilities for visits
 10

such as cooking and play facilities combined with hardware such as play
materials.
7. The service must be responsible for maintaining a suitable environment within
which the objectives are carried out. This includes not only matters of
observation and safety but of process and development.
8. The service must maintain a robust method of case recording compatible with
field operations in the social service arena.
9. The service must maintain a practical ethical base, which ensures protection
for a wide range of actors.
10. The service must maintain a knowledge of and conformity with best
international practice.

All of these factors have, as far as is reasonably practicable, been taken into account
in the study.

1.6 Terms employed in this study

There exist many terms for centres that accommodate the application of access or
visitation rights. This will be covered in greater length later in this report. In this
report, the Access Centre is the recently introduced centre/project under study. It
comprises of a centre where parents who have been the subject of a Care Order may
visit their children in the presence of a third party who is a representative of the
Health Board.

The terms “access” and “visitation” are synonymous. The latter term, more common
in the US, is often used for third party visiting locations where parents are separated
or divorced. In these cases, parents may be mutually hostile or have no suitable
accommodation wherein to meet their estranged children. Here, parents are not
necessarily suspected of domestic violence, drug abuse or other activities rendering
children “at risk”. Such centres exist for the application of visits as have been
permitted or ordered by a court. Such centres share the objective of providing a
conflict-free visiting environment. Recently there has been an attempted replacement
of the terms “visitation” and “access” by “parenting time”. This, however, appears to
exclude grandparent and sibling access.

Access is understood as planned contact between a child or children and his or her
family with the specific aim of maintaining family relationships. In this case the
access takes place where the child has been removed from its home through agency
intervention, usually in the case of neglect or abuse and placed (in order of numbers
placed) with:

a foster carer

a voluntary placement with a relative

a children’s home

Specifically, supervised visitation therefore refers to contact between a non-custodial

parent and one or more children in the presence of a third person responsible for
observing and seeking to ensure the safety of those involved. "Monitored visitation",
"supervised child access", and "supervised child contact" are all terms with the same
meaning (Reineger, 2000). This study will mainly refer to supervised child access.
 11

In this study “the best interests of the child” refers to an overriding consideration as
to how the child will benefit from interacting with his parents. Although the Access
Centre seeks to improve child-parent interaction through socialisation, role modeling
and development activities, the determining courses of action taken always relate to
child benefit. Given the inherent lack of objective criteria, the best interests of the
child are almost always determined by subjective criteria derived from the Centre’s
experience, knowledge and practice on a case-by-case basis.

In common with the Children Act 2001, 'relative', in relation to a child, shall mean a
grandparent, brother, sister, uncle or aunt, whether of the whole blood, half blood or
by affinity, and includes the spouse of any such person and any person cohabiting
with any such person.

Within this report, capitalisation of “Access Centre” or “Access Centre Project” refers
to the project under review, whereas “access centre” (small letters) is a general
reference to access, contact or visitation centres either existing elsewhere or in future
developments.

1.7 Access Centre: Structure of Report: Chapters

1. The introduction deals with the scope of project. It outlines the adopted methods
and approach. It additionally outlines the changes to methods that were necessitated
by factors influencing changes in the planned development of the project itself.

2. This is followed by a review that places the project in context of policy and
legislation.

3. A comparative dimension is introduced, which includes international experience. It

introduces development of access centres in the UK, Australia and New Zealand and
the United States.

4. The history and development of the project is outlined, examining positive and
negative factors in organisation and development. Factors such as funding and staff
resources are examined in so far as they affect the operation and development of the
project.

5. The experiences and views of the key players and stakeholders are reviewed. The
consumer model outlined above is applied to the clients (children and parents)
necessarily examining positive and negative factors that arose during the course of
development. Much of this section relies on the observation of parents and children
carried out over the course of the evaluation. This section goes on to look at views
and experiences of foster carers. In this case foster carers fall between clients and staff
since fosterers are contracted to carry out a custodial and care role for the child at the
behest of the agency. The experience of access centre workers themselves is
examined, as are the views of social workers prior to introduction. This section
utilises graphics and displays to offer a structured visual picture of the relationships
between actors.
 12

6. A thematic synthesis looks at the introduction of the access centre in a structured

manner using an EU model in which various indicators are employed to evaluate
quality of service.

7. The study ends with recommendations that include suggested changes in approach,
improvements to the environment, liaison relationships and suggestions for extension.
An operational code of practice is appended to the report.
 13

Chapter 2: Policy context for the Access Centre

2.1 Introduction
The introduction of the Access Centre occurs within the context of services and policy
in the areas of children, families, residential and fostering services and social welfare
generally in Ireland. More widely, Ireland has responded to the European and
international framework generally. The Access Centre works within a number of
criteria covering child protection, out of home placements, and support for children
and families. The context of this report falls within the remit of the Child Care Act of
1991, Section 8, Paragraph 3c, to review the adequacy of child care services.

2.2 The National level - Ireland

Responsibility lies across several departments, themselves subject to change in the
current period. These departmental objectives and responsibilities can be found in The
Statement of Strategy 2005-2007 in regard to the Children’s Strategy. Children
responsibilities are currently divided across three departments, currently working
together to ensure coherence in the overall strategy as follows:

1. The Department of Health and Children

2. The National Children’s Office
3. The Ombudsman for Children

Key Legislative Areas regarding residential and foster placing of children, and all
arrangements thereof, fall under The Child Care Act 1991, the Adoption Acts 1988
and 1991, and the Children Act 2001. The latter is under continued implementation. A
Childcare Advisory Committee was established in accordance with the Child Care
Act of 1991. This committee agreed that the development of child-centred services
was required to respond to domestic violence in conjunction with other supports at
local level.

2.2.1 Summary of Health Board responsibilities

Under the Child Care Act of 1991 it is the responsibility of the Health Board to
promote the welfare of children in its area who are not receiving adequate care and
protection. The Board must take such steps as it considers requisite to identify
children who are not receiving adequate care and protection. It must co-ordinate
information from all relevant sources relating to children in its area, having regard to
the rights and duties of parents. It must regard the welfare of the child as the first and
paramount consideration and in so doing must have regard to the wishes of the child,
given the child’s age and understanding. It must give due regard to the principle that it
is generally in the best interests of a child to be brought up in his own family. The
Health Board shall provide child-care and family support services, and may provide
and maintain premises and make such other provision it considers necessary or
desirable for such purposes.

2.2.2 Identified need

The Review of Child Care and Family Support Services of 1988 stated - as an
identified need - that the time spent by social workers in supervision of access visits
may not be the most effective use of their time and should be reviewed. This ongoing
programme investigates a development designed to release at least part of that time
and to place access in a more appropriate milieu.
 14

Around 88% of children in care in the Eastern Health Board Region are in foster care,
the majority being in long term care. The remainder are housed in residential group
homes, many of them administered by voluntary agencies. The Review identified
children’s rights as requiring policy development. Although this has occurred at a
national level, the evidence for local implementation remains slight.

2.2.3 Developments
Pertinent to the development of the Access Centre is the development within the
wider community for the prevention and early identification of neglect, abuse and
exploitation of children through the expansion of family support services. The
strategy emphasizes that there will be full implementation of Children First1 by
health boards and all organizations providing services to children.

The Irish Social Services Inspectorate is to be expanded so that it can monitor the
quality of all aspects of childcare services and provide guidance on standards and
good practice for service providers. Treatment and counselling services will be
developed to try to minimise the trauma for children resulting from abuse. A
comprehensive child care information system will be developed to improve the
efficiency of services at a local level and to allow evaluation of the effectiveness of
services at regional and national level.

Expanding and supporting foster care is based on a major review undertaken by the
National Foster Care Working group. This group is reviewing domestic adoption law
in the light of the recommendations of the Constitution Review Group and the
conclusions of the All Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution.

The Final Report of the Commission on the Family, Strengthening Families for
Life2, published in July 1998, contained a number of policy recommendations on
family life. A Family Affairs Unit was then established within the Department of
Social, Community and Family Affairs with a range of responsibilities in relation to
coordinating and developing policy and services to support families. The proposed
overall Ireland structure for children will take the following shape:

1
Children First; National Guidelines for the Protection of Children and Welfare of Children, Dept of
Health and Children, The Stationery Office, Sept, 1999
2
Commission on the Family, Strengthening Families for Life, Stationery Office, 1998
 15

Chart 1: Likely state organisational structure for children responsibilities

2.2.5 National Children’s Strategy

Finally, central to the Access Centre under study is Objective L of Ireland’s National
Children’s Strategy3. This states that children will have the opportunity to experience
the quality of family life. This objective also addresses the needs of children who
either have no family, or are out of the family and in-state care with the aim of the
providing these children with as good a family experience as is possible. This extends
the task of the Access Centre beyond that of compliance with general principles of
maintaining contact with parents to that of catering for the extended family of
siblings, grandparents and so on. It additionally implies that the activities resources of
an Access Centre should extend to areas associated with good parenting.

2.6 The European level

2.6.1 Statutes:
The following conventions are important for the establishment of the Access Centre:

1. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental

Freedoms (Council of Europe)
2. European Convention on the Adoption of Children (Council of Europe)
3. European Convention on the Legal Status of Children born out of Wedlock
(Council of Europe)

3
Dept of Health and Children, National Children’s Strategy – Our Children their Lives, Stationery
Office, 2000
 16

4. European Convention on recognition and enforcement of decisions

concerning custody of children and on restoration of custody of children
(Council of Europe)
5. European Convention on the exercise of children's rights (Council of
Europe)
6. Convention on contact concerning children (Council of Europe)

The Convention on Contact concerning Children, Strasbourg, 15.V.2003 (No 6 above)

ensures the right of the child to maintain contact with both parents: Article 4 sets out
the procedures for contact between a child and his or her parents as follows:

1. A child and his or her parents shall have the right to obtain and maintain
regular contact with each other.
2. Such contact may be restricted or excluded only where necessary in the best
interests of the child.
3. Where it is not in the best interests of a child to maintain unsupervised contact
with one of his or her parents the possibility of supervised personal contact or
other forms of contact with this parent shall be considered.

2.7 The International Level

2.7.1 Context
Various agreements, conventions and protocols exist at the international level.
Signatories (nation states) are technically obliged to introduce legislation, which
complies with the legislation adopted.

2.7.1 Statutes
The following conventions are important for the establishment of the Access Centre:

1. Convention on the Rights of the Child (United Nations)

2. Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in respect of
Intercountry Adoption (Hague Conference)
3. Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (Hague
Conference)
4. Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement
and Co-operation in respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for
the Protection of Children (Hague Conference)

The international level offers more developed statements regarding children in care
and family life to which the Access Centre orientates. International statute recognises
that, in all countries in the world, there are children living in exceptionally difficult
conditions. Such children need special consideration. Signatory states undertake to
guarantee child protection and ensure that services and facilities exist for their care
and protection. Furthermore, all actions concerning children, regardless of whether
they are undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law,
administrative authorities or legislative bodies, shall always be in the best interests of
the child as a primary consideration.
 17

Under Article 9 of the UN Convention, states are held to respect the responsibilities,
rights and duties of parents - or, where applicable, the members of the extended
family or community- to provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities
of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of the
rights recognized in the present Convention.

The Declaration on Social and Legal Principles relating to the Protection and Welfare
of Children, with Special Reference to Foster Placement and Adoption Nationally and
Internationally (3 Dec. 1986) offers general principles outlined in Resolution 41/85.
Articles 1 to 8 state that any child should be in the first instance be cared for by his
own parents. Where for reason of inappropriate behaviour by the parents, foster,
adoptive or institutional care should be considered. The best interests of the child are
paramount.

Of particular importance for the introduction on the Access Centre is that for those in
“out of home care such as fostering or institutional care”, the child should have
knowledge of his own parents, who should be appropriately involved in matters
regarding the child. Direct contact is mentioned under Article 9. This states that where
it is necessary to separate the child from the parents, usually due to neglect or harm,
all states must respect the rights of the child to maintain direct personal relations and
direct contact with both parents on a regular basis except where it is not in the child’s
best interests.

2.8 Conclusions and lessons for the Access Centre

The introduction of the Access Centre lies formally within policy regarding:

1. The objectives of state care for children, with particular reference to those who
are subject to a care order and are placed out of home.
2. Ensuring the rights of the child with particular reference to the maintaining of
contact with their parents and to respect and encourage the rights and duties of
the parents
3. The introduction of child centred services or transformation of existing
services into child centred services.

To a major extent, the Access Centre also seeks to assist in the normal development of
the child in terms of experience. It does this through facilitation of the use of
educational and play resources and also the encouragement of meal preparation.
Where parents have access to their children under supervision, the overall system
should seek to provide a good development experience that does not place undue
strain on the child. Whatever system is in place, it should always seek to act in the
child’s best interests.

The introduction of the Access Centre also acts to support families in line with the
broad range of legislation. Whilst it is not in a position to respond to local demand as
is specified in recent policy developments, it does seek to offer development for
families in terms of role modeling. Inappropriate behavior is identified and dealt with
in situ. In extremis, training can be recommended in a number of specialist centres.

Recent changes in Irelands demography, particularly the changes made by

immigration at the EU and international levels, suggest that the question of custody
 18

and inter-state travel will have an impact on social welfare. The Centre may be in a
position to address the issue of abduction, so that planning can be carried out prior to
any incidence of such cases.

Finally, the introduction of the Access Centre seeks to release social work resources
currently dedicated to supervision visits, in line with various recommendations of
Department of Health and Children working parties.
 19

Chapter 3: The comparative dimension.

3.1 Introduction
The objective of providing Access Centres for the purpose of supervised visitation has
been pursued in a wide range of states in the English-speaking world. It appears to be
most developed in the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, in that clear
guidelines exist. As far as can be determined, Australia and New Zealand exhibits the
most organized, homogeneous expression of standards. The United States is typified
by uneven development which may be in consequence of a neo liberal approach to
service providers. However, statutory funding is now being introduced and applied by
an increasing number of federal states. The United Kingdom can be regarded as being
in development and as volunteer agency-led. That is, the lead has not been undertaken
by the state and guidelines have been established post hoc. Within the UK however,
the Scottish Executive has instituted a consultation process4 on children, which
includes supervised contact.

Table 1: Case study display

State Development Features Lessons

Associations of Well-developed notions
NZ and High: cohesive, contact centres. of vigilance for contact
Australia organized, involved> High-level state centres. Well developed
Highly articulated support and body of practice-based
guidelines practitioner knowledge
involvement is high
Government Reactive rather than
United Kingdom Medium: agency-led. appointed NGOs proactive. Guidelines are
Unevenly applied advising agency- grafted on to existing
led network. system
Contact centre
Network appears
under-developed
and under-funded
Medium: Long term Charitable and Despite charitable-
development period voluntary sector-led voluntary basis, research
United States but fragmented and and now receiving and evaluation provides
uneven federal funding grounding for evolved
standards and guidelines

In the case studies that follow, the author has selected sets of standards and protocols
as providing particularly useful guidance for this project. These sets, shaded in orange
below, should be considered as material for integration into Access Centre conduct. It
is recognized that parts of this material have received a de facto introduction over the
period of development of the Access Centre

3.2 Case Study 1: Australia and New Zealand

3.2.1 Context
Australia and New Zealand began to identify the need for supervised contact at the
general (separation issues) and the specialised (Care and Protection Orders) levels in

4
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/06/30150004/00059
 20

the mid 1990s. Child contact services have occupied an important place since they
were set up as a pilot program early in 1996. Family Services Quality and Information
Systems project (FAMQIS) is now a contract organisation. The funding for the
contact services sub-program in 1998-99 was $1.3 million (Aus) and was set to
increase by an additional $4 million each year over the following four years. The
emphasis is the same as that behind the Australian Government's reforms to the
Family Law Act. Resource constraints constituted the major factor in restricting the
frequency, duration and nature of contact and represented a key problem in the field.

3.2.2 Management of Risk (Vigilance)

The following pertains to childcare and protection. In the case of identified child risk
becoming evident the child becomes subject to a care and protection order. At this
stage the issue of management of contact between the child and the child's parents,
siblings and relatives arises. Several levels of supervision models therefore evolved as
follows:

Table 2: Vigilance levels display

LEVELS OF VIGILANCE – N.Z. AND AUSTRALIA

1. Low vigilance supervision: appropriate for cases where risk factors are
minimal. The service may be provided on site or off site and may include
supervision of changeovers or supervision of contact. The service consists of
general monitoring and facilitation. The aim is to promote healthy
relationships and improve or develop an ability to independently manage
contact arrangements. The service may work in close cooperation with other
services such as counselling services.
2. Vigilant supervision: Subject to intake assessment, this type of supervision
may be appropriate in cases involving: high conflict; poor parenting;
manageable abduction risk; low risk violence cases; parents with manageable
substance abuse or psychological problems. The service may be provided on
site or (less commonly) off site. The service may include supervision of
changeovers and supervision of contact. The service aims to assist to ensure
the safety and welfare of the child; to ensure the safety of the vulnerable
parent and to facilitate parent/child interaction during contact. In some cases,
the parties will see independent management of contact as a desirable and/or
viable mid or long-term goal.
3. Highly vigilant supervision: where contact is to occur where there are more
serious risks or difficulties than those noted above, and where the service is
equipped to deal with such cases, the service provides on site highly vigilant
supervision. The primary concern is the safety and welfare of the child and of
other relevant persons. In most cases, at this level, independent management
of contact will not be a viable goal in the mid or longer term. These types of
supervision are resource intensive, highly skilled and the risks and needs are
such that supervision at this level is unlikely to be feasible for many services.
Where such cases are undertaken, the service closely monitors and facilitates
the parent/child contact during contact and the appropriateness of providing
the service remains under constant review.
 21

Although a single children's contact service may offer the three levels of supervision,
vigilance, resources and expertise are significant determinants of the services offered.
The way services operate and the aims of supervision depend largely on the type of
cases the service accepts.

3.2.3 Principles
Children's contact services, what ever form the service takes, should be as follows:

1. Independent: services should be independent from the parties, the dispute or

difficulty and from other bodies or individuals involved in the dispute or
difficulty. Contact services should independently determine whether they are
prepared to take, and able to accommodate each case.
2. Accessible: services should aim to be as location-appropriate and as
linguistically, culturally and financially accessible as possible. Services should
aim to be accessible to adults and children with a disability. The diversity of
client needs should be recognised and, as far as possible, accommodated. The
preferred language of the parents and the child should as far as possible be
respected and this should be taken into account in designing supervision
arrangements.
3. Safe: where safety is an issue, services should aim to provide as much
assistance as is reasonably possible to attempt to ensure the safety of the child
and the safety of the vulnerable parent, at all relevant times. The safety of all,
including supervisors should be treated as a prerequisite and not as something
to be balanced, negotiated or compromised one against the other or against
other considerations. The service should report child abuse and criminal
offences to appropriate authorities.
4. Pleasant: services should aim to ensure that the contact experience is as
pleasant, comfortable and satisfactory as possible for the child and the parties.
Supervisors should model respectful and courteous behaviour.
5. Welfare of the child: subject to the precondition of the safety of all relevant
people, the emotional and physical welfare of the child is the principle concern
of contact services. The intervention of the service should benefit the child and
not expose the child to harm or danger. The welfare of the child has, amongst
other things, implications in relation to confidentiality and the limits to
confidentiality.
6. Facilitate parent/child interaction during contact: services should aim to
facilitate positive parent/child interaction during contact. This is not to say that
contact services are actively or tacitly advocating contact- as pointed out
above that is a decision for others. In cases where independent management of
contact is a viable goal of the parties, facilitation of the parent/child interaction
during contact is clearly appropriate. Where independent management may not
be, or is not, a viable long-term goal, but the service accepts the case, the
purpose of facilitation is to attempt to ensure that the child benefits as far as
possible from the contact.
7. Facilitate resolution of parent/parent interaction issues: in cases where
independent management of contact is a viable goal of the parties, services
should aim, where possible and appropriate, to address the practical aspects of
parent/parent interaction which adversely impact on contact, while remaining
within the bounds of the services role and expertise. The process, however,
 22

should not be forced and it will generally be inappropriate to place a time limit
on the availability of the service.
8. Special problems such as alcohol or drug use, violence, inadequate parenting,
mental illness, post-separation grieving, depression, and child abuse are not
things that the parents can remedy together because the solution may lie with
one, not both. Services must be realistic and be aware of the difference
between issues where there may be a possible solution through joint effort and
issues where the solution lies with one of the parties. Staff training will be of
crucial importance.

3.3 Case Study 2: The United Kingdom

3.3.1 Context
The UK is typified by a large number of contact centres, primarily administered by
voluntary agencies on a contract basis. The Children and Family Court Advisory
Support Service (CAFCASS) is the key body advising the courts on family and
children matters. It has initiated several studies of which the most important is the
work of Aris, Harrison and Humphreys (2002). Their analysis of contact centres is the
key document outlining the condition and problems of contact centres in the UK.

It is argued that child contact centres provide safe and comfortable venues and
environment to encourage contact under difficult circumstances. They are most often
used when no suitable alternative exists and are considered to be of benefit in
establishing and maintaining contact whilst safeguarding the children concerned.
Referrals are from social workers, solicitors and occasionally the family itself.

3.3.2 Usage
The majority of these centres (CAFCASS refers to around 150 centres) are grant
aided. However, an ONS (Office of National Statistics) survey indicates that they are
used by les than 1% of children. Furthermore, a shortage exists for centres dealing
with high-risk cases where vigilance is required and there is also a lack of clarity over
their usage. Inappropriate usage has been identified where resident parents use centres
maliciously to deliberately impoverish the relationship between a child and a non-
resident parent. The National Association of Child Contact Centres (there are 350
members) has developed definitions of supported and supervised contact and has
agreed with CAFCASS a protocol for mutual co-operation in safety, information
exchange and liaison arrangements with centres.

3.3.2 Guidelines for use

The definitions which guide referrals clarify whether contact is supervised or
supported and whether any additional elements are required to meet identified needs.
In this case we are interested in supervised contact because the child has been
determined to be at significant risk of harm during contact. The emotional well being
of the child is to be ensured whilst promoting the building and sustaining of positive
child relationships with non-resident members of the family.
 23

Table 3: Contact guidelines display

CONTACT GUIDELINES - UK

Contact demands individual supervision with the supervisor in constant sight and
sound of the child, which in turn requires the support of an additional, nearby
colleague.

There must be a high commitment of resources including continuity of supervision

and professional oversight of staff

The supervisor and the Centre should have access to all relevant court papers

Contact is to be closely observed and recorded in a manner appropriate to the purpose

of protecting children and working in a planned way with parents

Venues shall provide privacy and confidentiality to each child and family and
structured to provide maximum safety and maximum stimulation for children

Contact must be time-limited with a planned aim to assess and review not only
progress but also the possibility of a safer future outcome.

USE OF CENTRES –UK

When suggesting the use of child contact centres, ensure the court and the family
understand the definitions of contact and what is proposed

When making a referral, clarity and understanding over precise arrangements must be
shared between practitioner, parents and the centre co-coordinator.

Practitioners must ensure that information concerning potential risk to the child,
parent, centre worker or public is provided to the centre at the point of referral via an
agreed risk assessment and/or referral form.

Where possible, arrange for the family to have an introductory visit to the centre.

In the cases and related standards of conduct described above, supervisors must be
skilled and confident enough to intervene firmly where appropriate during contact
visits.

3.4 Case study 3: United States

3.4.1 Context
This case study is restricted to provision for social welfare families, as is the Access
Centre in this evaluation. Child contact and associated centres have been the subject
of continuing discussion and development in the United States over the last twenty
years. A significant body of professional published debate has emerged during that
 24

time and contact centre introduction has become a mainstream news item. Articles
such as "Centres Provide Neutral Ground for Parents: State's Family Visitation
Centres Are Safe Places for Visiting or Exchanging Custody." (Charleston Gazette
1C, December 26, 2000) are typical. Some state legislatures such as Louisiana are
currently drafting legislation, which sets standards for referrals, operational
requirements and funding. Centres, however, tend to be small non-profit organizations
whose grant dependent status renders them vulnerable.

3.4.2 Standards
The Child Welfare League of America has developed standards that guide thinking on
visitation. These standards are based primarily on the rights of children and parents to
continued connection (unless contraindicated for reasons of safety). Children have the
rights of opportunity to maintain contact whilst parents have the rights and the
responsibility to maintain regular contact. Foster carers, social workers and any
agency involved in the care of the child should respect the parent child relationship
including visitation. Visitation is to be encouraged only where the experience is a
positive one for the child. Courts and Federal governments have added to or made
more specific the practice around children visitation, especially in the case of
violence. The key element of state guidelines draw on the body of work created by
Hess and Proch (1993) and refers to the visitation plan and its close connection with
outcomes.

Table 4: Visitation plan standards display

VISITATION PLAN STANDARDS – UNITED STATES

The visitation plan should be a written part of the overall case plan

The visitation plan should address the full logistics of visit frequency, time spent and
who may visit.

The visitation plan should be developed with the full co-operation of parent and child
to the appropriate extent.

The visitation plan should be distributed to all involved: parent, child, foster carer,
relatives and providers

The visitation plan should be regularly reviewed

Support of visitation should be a requirement for foster carers

Guidelines for child safety should be provided. Return home is not permitted until the
family’s ability to safely manage unsupervised visits has been clearly established.

The agency should articulate clear prohibitions around withholding visitation for
reasons of punishment

Expectations of parents, fosters, children and workers in terms of supporting visitation

should be clearly set out.
 25

3.43 Cases
In order to examine concrete practice in the U.S., this case study focuses on several
organizations. (1) The Supervised Visitation Network is an association of agencies
providing services for separation and divorce but also for child protective cases. This
organization has developed standards that inform practice. (2) The Californian
Professional Society on the Abuse of Children provides information and guidelines
where sexual abuse is involved. (3) In addition to provision of supervision, the
Catholic Charities Therapeutic Supervised Visitation Program in Buffalo, New York,
provides treatment to those families involved with child welfare. This latter project is
of particular interest to this evaluation since it has expanded its service appropriately.

(1) The Supervised Visitation Network formed in 1992 responding to the rapid pace
of development of centres without appropriate written standards for practice. The
organization developed standards for types of service offered, security, staffing,
intake, termination and recording. The organization addresses special precautions for
safety and suggests training and recommends therapeutic support for those in sexual
abuse situations.

(2) The Californian Professional Society on the Abuse of Children pioneered the
introduction of guidelines to assist decision-makers as to when monitored contact
visits were appropriate. It now seeks to provide a model for desirable professional
practice. The organization addresses conduct applying to monitored rooms, visiting
parties, the specify language that parents should use during visits and transportation
protocols. It offers suggestions for involving the child in planning, how to talk to the
child and how to involve the child in determining the content of visits.

(3) Catholic Charities of Buffalo, New York operates a wide variety of services. Its
Therapeutic Supervised Visitation Program deals with families involved with child
welfare services and draws on the child and family’s strengths. Supervised visitation
aims to ensure ongoing contact between parent and child when safety is an issue to
prevent (further) maltreatment of children. The program works towards unification by
focusing on attachment issues and it provides a healing environment to assist the
unification transition. Therapy is integrated into the service and all involved are
encouraged to participate. Ultimately however, responsibility for cases lies with the
Department of Social Services (DSS) case manager. The centre is located centrally
with bus transport available. Visitation rooms are specially designed, secure spaces
with age-appropriate furniture and a variety of play resources. Rooms are large
enough to allow distance between the supervisor and parent-child and have video
camera and microphone equipment. The centre employs security personnel. Visits are
allowed on weekdays from 9 a.m. until 8.30 pm and at weekends from 9 a.m. until
4.40 p.m. The foster carers provide child transport, whilst parents provide their own
transport.

All visitation centres in the United States appear to suffer from instability of funding.
Whilst they benefit from set-up costs granted by federal governments securing
operational costs is more difficult (receipt of capital costs are always easier to achieve
whilst running costs - especially for wages - tend to be problematic). Centres have
long waiting lists and referral criteria tend not to be rigourously observed by social
services practitioners. If they like the work of a centre, social workers refer too many
clients and this results in higher costs for centres. Additionally, US evidence suggests
 26

that stand-alone centres should be integrated with other community services

(Thoennes and Pearson 1999).

3.5 Conclusions and lessons for this project

United Kingdom case study information suggests that the project under review is well
placed within the Health Board structure. Here, the state has taken the lead rather than
subsume pre-existing voluntary and NGO activity. The project is in a good position to
develop guidelines that suit the specificity of Ireland. The Access Centre may wish to
suggest the adoption of the UK system for research-based consultation in determining
the views of children, parents, fosterers and other involved parties.

The project can usefully draw on the New Zealand and Australia material for
vigilance levels. The determination of vigilance level or case intensity can assist in
drawing up care plans, planning the work of the centre, adjusting staffing levels and
using time resources. The case studies suggest that it should also be used in all aspects
of the referral process.

The United States experience suggests that long-term funding is crucial. Key
characteristics emerging from the US are a commitment to staff training and an
emphasis on the therapeutic aspects of access visits. Child contact not only offers the
chance of maintaining family contact but also presents an opportunity for role
modeling, parenting lessons and therapeutic interventions that aim to resolve
attachment difficulties. The adoption of visitation plans are be a useful tool in the
resources available to the Access Centre under study. These may be usefully
expanded in line with the above case.

The United States experience usefully points to the importance of awareness of

anticipation and aftermath for the child. The chart below (Chart 2) displays the
process and actors involved in the current process in the project under review.

All the states under review pay attention to the community level and urge the
integration of access, contact or visitation centres into pre-existing services. Whilst
this more properly applies to contracted services outside the statutory sector, it should
be noted that where an access centre’s “locationality” offers a discrete catchment, it is
useful to generate links to community services (which may also be serving the Access
Centre customer or client). For example, where transport is problematic for parents,
this might be offered by a community-based service to a client with a chaotic lifestyle.
 27

Chart 2: The visitation flow in current practice

Child has to endure

Child is
Child is expectant parting
in new situation
1. Child may be 1.Child
1. Parent may be
ambivelant may be upset/tearful
nervous
"I don't want to go." 2. Parent may be upset
"Will my child remember
2. Foster carer may or tearful
me"
be concerned 3.Foster Carer has to
2. Child may display
cope with emotional
attachment difficulties
aftermath in family

ANTICIPATION VISIT AFTERMATH

ACTORS
ACTORS 1.Child
ACTORS
1. Child 2. Parents/s
1. Child
2. Foster carer 3.Access Worker
2.Parent/s
3. Access./Transport 4.
3. Access
Officer Access/Transport
Worker(s)
Officer
5.Foster Parent
 28

Chapter 4: Phases of development

4.1 Introduction:
The following chapter outlines the phases of development in the life of the Access
Centre. This follows development from the initial idea to the operationalisation and
administration of the project. The approach used in this chapter is to examine the
stages of development as signposts for those wishing to introduce a similar project. It
therefore stresses not only good practice but also outlines the pitfalls and unpredicted
obstacles which may occur during the process

As has been noted in a previous chapter, the development of the Centre is unusual
since it was generated from within the state structure. In many other states,
development has generally relied on voluntary organisations to provide centres to
which statutory services then refer. It must be recognised that this dynamic is atypical.
As can be seen from the previous chapter, voluntary or NGO bodies have generally
taken the lead and have for the most part provided responsible for setting up codes of
practice and operational guidelines. In this case, development and operational
developments are entirely internal to the Departmental social work function. Referrals
are made by social work officers working within the statutory service. The Centre
therefore lies outside any partnership structure and relies entirely on internally
generated resources. Whilst partnership working may offer an area for further
development, it is important to acknowledge that the growth and development of the
centre lies within the necessary constraints of a government department with statutory
responsibilities.

This chapter sets out to chart the Centre’s development in a linear fashion. In this
way, more centres can be developed in other locations using the current one as a
model. The study therefore attempts to locate important developmental points. It
additionally locates the exact points where delays are likely to occur. In this manner,
such delays can be anticipated and minimised in the future. Naturally every location
will have difficulties, some of which are a product of local circumstances. As far as
possible therefore, the chapter attempts to examine problems that may be generic to
the operationalisation of equivalent organisations in similar circumstances.

It is also important to acknowledge the starting point. The default position for access
in the area concerned was one where social workers provided or arranged contact
opportunities. It was acknowledged that this placed undue stress on social workers
and demanded considerable resources. In addition to supervision time, social workers
expressed considerable frustration due to the amount of time spent in arranging
transport. The position was recognised in 1996 and remained a priority in annual
development plans. The proposal can therefore be identified in 1996.

Workload research indicated that in Community Area 7, some 59 children cases

involved access visits, which averaged 5.4 per worker. A total of 79 children were
involved in these visits of whom 37 required supervision and 49 needed transport. Of
the total number of case, 47 (80%) were considered suitable for Access Centre
services.

In the period 1996-2000, the level of Court Ordered Access (COA) saw a significant
increase. This reflected a growing attention to children’s needs and child centred work
 29

in that period. Although some of the orders were felt to be in excess of an appropriate
response to the child’s best interests, resource issues dominated. The projected
demand for 2000 was estimated at 110 cases for Access Unit provision. A proposal
for an Access Unit was drafted in June 2000. Central to the idea was the contention
that the service would separate social workers from the necessary adversarial role,
fulfilled by them in court cases. Through distance from the social worker, in both
location and role, an Access Service would offer natural parents a better forum in
which to promote healthy contact with their children.

4.2 Phase 1: The Initial Idea and Proposal

The initial idea identified the purpose of an Access Unit. The unit would provide “an
environment for children in care to have healthy contact with their parents in a safe
and child centred environment”. The original proposal stressed the role of social
workers. Cases would be referred to the Unit by social workers. Frequency, duration
and supervision level would be determined by the referring social worker. Issues of
child safety would be identified and clarified at time of referral.

Initial consultation with social workers during this review indicated the perceived
need for an access centre. Social workers indicated that access supervision could take
up to 40% of total hours worked (two out of 5 days). In addition to acknowledging the
need for more appropriate venues for visitation, social workers identified travel time
as the biggest drain on their resources. This represented time, which could be
allocated to preventative work. Social workers felt that all Community care areas
should initiate access centres as a priority.

The following steps in a visit were identified as represented in the following panel.

Table 5: Visit stages display

1. Making of arrangements
2. Preparation of child
3. Transport to visit
4. Supervision and support
5. Return of the child
6. Support to child after the visit (aftermath)
7. Feedback to carers
8. Recording of visit
9. Feedback of social worker.

The proposed physical design originated in 1996. The design specified a bungalow
style purpose-built unit with the possibility for expansion. Key elements included two
access rooms adjoined by observation rooms for unobtrusive monitoring of family
interaction. The rooms offered access to garden areas for play and included kitchen
facilities to allow families the opportunity of cooking and eating together. The
proposal included nursery and changing areas, waiting areas and administrative and
meeting space. The proposal further specified wheelchair access for the building and
toilets. The proposal specified a dedicated minibus, which would replace the use of
taxis.
 30

The proposal specified a manager with childcare or social work training and
supervisory experience together with appropriate administrative and clerical
assistance. Anticipating two access visits taking place simultaneously the proposal
further specified three trained child access workers. Given the importance of transport
the proposal further specified a full time specialist Transport Officer who was fully
able to deal with responses, reactions especially in relation to aftermath.

The report specified appropriate resources in terms of appropriate fixtures and fittings
including television and video, nursery equipment, toys and kitchen equipment. In
addition the proposal recognised the necessity of security equipment. It was
additionally recognised that full compliance with health and safety, having special
consideration for children, was necessary.

Overall, the proposal demonstrated an awareness of the potential of Access Centres

and their role and function. Anticipating the focus on children safety, it sought to
provide for families a safe and bounded environment in which parents could not only
maintain contact with their children but also, for a short period, join mutually in
aspects of family life. Whilst the proposal sought to separate families and children
from the element of coercion introduced by the courts and to provide more effective
use of social work resources, it also provided for a learning experience for both
parents and children. In this way, it anticipated future legislative and administrative
arrangements pertaining to children and families.

4.3 Phase 2: Development period following the appointment of the

Coordinator
The appointment of an Access Centre co-ordinator in 2000, allowed for the further
development of the proposal, prior to implementation. The remit of the co-ordinator
was to consolidate and update information, disseminate recent findings, provide an
operational structure and accompanying guidance, to administer the development
period and to generate the specificities of a job description and person specification
for the post of Access Centre Manager and Access Workers, policies, procedures,
guidelines for all projected staff, code of practices and all written work. The co-
ordinator also performed cover for existing access casework during this period
allowing for increasing familiarity with the territory and the testing of opinion on
projected innovation.

The co-ordinator immediately conducted research by surveying social work teams in

two areas covering Ballymun and the North Inner city. Research findings confirmed
and superseded the position projected in earlier documents. The original table is
reproduced below.
 31

Table 6: Original position of access work in Community Area 7 display

Position at September 2000 Actual nos. Estimated nos.

Cases involving access visits 109 140
Total no of children involved 193 250
Cases involving supervised access 67 90
Cases requiring transport 78 100
Cases suitable for an Access Centre 78 100
Cases requiring security officer on premises 9 12

The figures in the second column have been factored up by 1.32, to represent the total
number of social workers with access responsibilities, who could not be surveyed.
This gave an overall indication of current demand and confirmed previous
projections. It elicited additional information on transport and security requirements.

In addition, the coordinator’s report emphasised the findings of current literature and
noted the uneven nature of development in most EU states. In particular this allowed
the project to assess additional benefits of Access Centre provision. The most
important findings indicated that long-term children benefits include improved coping
skills and a reduced likelihood of emotional disturbances in later life. The coordinator
refined the original proposal to include remedial intervention effects as indicated in
the display below.

Table 7: Anticipated remedial intervention display

To ensure children receive important information about their own origins

To clarify for a child why parents he or she no longer lives with are unable to care for
him/her

To ensure that a child’s self image is not damaged by losing touch with someone who
has been important for him/her

To assure a child who is anxious about the well being of his/her family
To ensure that children do not develop unrealistic and potentially harmful fantasies
about their absent parents

Roulston and McClogan (1997)

This was an important addition in the child-centred development of an ethos for the
Access Centre and formed an important foundation for development.

4.4 Phase 3: Appointment of Manager

The Manager post is an important milestone in the development of an Access Centre.
Most statutory bodies work to specific protocols regarding posts. They must have due
regard for equal opportunities so it is customary for the person carrying out
development to be asked to apply for the post which she or he has created. This can
 32

create a certain amount of unavoidable stress for the existing post holder, and at worst
it can irritate applicants who are unlikely to succeed. It is, however, an extra resource
demand that the sponsoring body must factor into its financial projections.

This can be avoided by appointing a Manager in advance of development. Yet if the

introduction of an Access Centre is a pilot project, this must be accommodated
through an appropriate time bounded contract. The advantage of early appointment is
to avoid the significant expense of the recruitment process. The disadvantage is the
allocation of a permanent post for a project, which may not come to fruition.

Some space occurred between appointment and the entry to existing premises. The
manager utilised this period for placing of advertisements and commencement of staff
appointments. The staff appointment procedures took place through liaison between
Centre Manager, her line manager and a representative from Shared Services.

Court action slowed entry to the premises until February 2002. The selected premises
was already occupied by a tenant – a client in the care of the Department for whom it
had statutory obligations. Entry could not take place until this person had vacated.
Delay occurred principally because the Department experienced difficulty in
obtaining suitable premises for decantation. It must be noted that the Courts share
some responsibility for delay since it insisted certain conditions being met.

Further delay took place due to necessary reinstatement of the premises, which had
suffered from neglect and damage, principally due to the action of the existing tenant.
It is felt that the difficulties in which the client found herself exacerbated the problem.
Further damage occurred during the period of court decision-making. By default, this
became the technical and financial responsibility of the Access Centre.

4.5 Phase 4: Occupying the premises.

4.5.1 Introduction
The various attributes of the premises will be covered in the following chapter. Safety
is a major concern in setting up an access centre. The interim premises were generally
found to be generally adequate for the introduction of the service.

4.5.2 The Building and Physical Resources

Much of this section is devoted to child safety and the prevention of accidents. In this
phase of development the occupation of an empty building allowed time for all
problems related to safety to be addressed. This cannot be stated too strongly. It
should be noted that there is a strong direct relationship between child accidental
injury and social class. A report on injuries in Ireland states the following:
“The relationship between social class or social deprivation and Accident & Emergency
attendance, injury admissions and injury mortality is well documented. (Walsh et al.
1996, Walsh and McCarthy 1988, McFarlane and Fay 1978). The relationship between
fatal injury and social class has been found to be particularly strong. These
relationships are particularly true of childhood injury. [Scallan, Staines and Fitzpatrick
(2001)]
 33

It is important to point out that most domestic premises are not purpose-built and will
require remedial work in order to satisfy:

1. Operational suitability
2. Conditions ensuring heath and safety at work
3. Conditions rendering the premises safe for children and
parents.

In the case of the introduction of the Access centre, this required:

1. Alterations to doors
2. Removal of mirrored wardrobes
3. Removal of sharp objects and furniture at children height
4. Installation of gates on stairs for protection of small children

Whilst the existence of kitchen facilities can prove beneficial to improved interaction
between children and parents, this places extra responsibility on project staff in terms
of planning and operational surveillance. Yet it also provides a useful area for
children education in accident prevention. A diagram can be found at
http://www.juniorcitizen.org.uk/kids/homesafety/kitchen.php. This matter will be
developed later in this report.

Physical resource allocation demanded installation of telephone, alarm system,

computer, Internet and intranet, improvements of internal and external play areas and
the addition of play resources for children. Departmental authorisation prior to
installation of all resources caused delay. A particular problem was that of play
resources for which only a small budget allocation was made. Appropriate build
quality in terms of both construction and material can be an expensive item that is
easily overlooked. Sponsoring organisations should budget ahead appropriately and
should ensure that budget heads accommodate items such as toys and educational
resources. Those introducing a new access centre could usefully seek community
partnership in the provision of play equipment.

Child safety aspects also presented difficulties for observation and conventional
rooms and circulation space initially presented some hazards for children. Childproof
gates had to be introduced for stairs and doors. It is important to note that it is not
possible for visits to commence before at least two members of staff are in place. This
is a fundamental aspect of child safety. The parent and child cannot be adequately
supervised where only one person is on the premises. Events as simple as a phone call
or caller at the door can disrupt the supervision process. Thus visits may not
commence until another member of staff takes up the appointment and is physically
present on the premises. Those initiating a similar project must remember to
programme the start of work accordingly.

4.5.3 Staff
The Access Worker appointment took more time than expected due to delay in the
recruitment process. The problem lies in the length of time in the staff appointment
and selection process. Those initiating an Access Centre should acknowledge the time
required. It is likely that somewhere between the advertisement publication through
interviews to a letter of appointment being issued, the selected person may take up an
 34

appointment elsewhere. This is exacerbated where there is shortage of suitably

qualified applicants as was the case for the project under review. Despite these
problems, an Access Worker was eventually appointed and took up her post in July
2002. A further post was transferred from the Santry social work office. This fulfilled
the pre-existing remit but was conditional upon added contact facilitation and
transport provision outside the centre.

A further access worker post was relocated from the Santry office in 2005, again
under the same conditions as described above. Although this assisted in maintaining
safety protocols and allowed the Access Centre Manager the necessary space for
administrative and supervisory duties, the original remit was subject to alteration.
Staff transport commitments have considerable impact on the usage of the building.
(This may also impact considerably on building developments as described in
Development Phase 6.) The current position and status of workers remains unclear
however. The following chart represents the current situation as of January 2006.

Chart 3: Current Organisation of the Access Centre

ACCESS
CENTRE
MANAGER

ACCESS ACCESS
CENTRE CENTRE
WORKER WORKER

The evaluation notes the problems connected with the appointment of staff and
uncertainty concerning the exact function of the staff at the Access Centre –
especially with regard to transport duties. The final chapter will examine the staffing
position and suggest ways in which the Centre can be reorganised and developed for
maximum advantage.

4.5.4 Systems
During this period, the manager developed casework monitoring forms and set up
spreadsheets to record throughput data. This proved a valuable contribution to the life
of the Centre. In consequence the Centre is in possession of accurate records
regarding the status of all cases and can demonstrate its use of operational time.

4.6 Phase 5: Operational Commencement

 35

4.6.1 The premises in use

The following data refers to the period from January 2003 to the time of writing –
November 2005 and covers approximately three years of operational practice. During
this period, the Centre was administered by the Manager and one Access Worker.
When leave of absence was granted to the access Worker, another worker was a
seconded. It must be re-emphasised that no access visits may take place when there is
only one member of staff present. The manager, and two access workers currently
staff the centre. Both access workers provide services for visitations taking place off-
premises under the remit of the Social Worker, based at offices in Ballymun. The first
phase of operations took place at the start of 2003.

4.6.2 Transport
Transport for children was arranged by taxis pending the introduction of a dedicated
vehicle. There were both advantages and disadvantages to this approach. Advantages
were as follows.

Taxi use left the access worker free to engage with the chid en route to the centre
and on return. In a dedicated vehicle the access worker has to give her main
attention to driving. Depending on age, the child is likely to be alone in the rear of
the vehicle.

Taxi use provided a non-institutional framework for the child since the various
drivers engaged well with the task and were able to provide a friendly service. It
was noted that informal banter helped put the child at ease.
The disadvantages however, outweighed the advantages for the flowing reasons.

Taxis required advance booking.

Taxis were unable to provide the same driver. At first, the same drivers were
employed and this gave the child a sense of stability. However, in order to spread
the work fairly amongst drivers, the taxi company was forced to vary the drivers.

Taxis do not have child safety seating. In consequence, portable child seating had
to be temporarily installed to the rear seat of the taxi prior to each visit, then
uninstalled when the visit was over.

The following chart examines criteria for cars, taxis and other forms of transport.

Table 7: Transport criteria display

Using Transport This Centre

Is there a dedicated secure car parking space for a centre vehicle? Dedicated but not
secure
Can a taxi or other vehicle draw in without danger to children and Yes
parents?
Is there a bus stop close to the premises? Yes
Is there a train service close to premises? Nearest station is 3km
Is it a frequent service? No: Low - medium

The introduction of a dedicated vehicle for transport offered great improvements for
the Centre in terms of flexibility and control. However, workload demanded that the
 36

taxi service be retained for some of the work. The importance of transport was
stressed by a foster carer who said the following:

My children give a lot to the cared children and they have to share attention, their toys
and their rooms. But they don’t like to be with me when I am picking up my foster child
after a visit – there’s a lot of clinging and screaming and they find it very distressing. So
a pick up and delivery service makes a big difference to all of us. [Foster Carer]

The process of locating and retaining a vehicle however, proved less than adequate. A
vehicle no longer utilised by another department was identified and the vehicle
transferred for use of the Access Centre. Whilst this was useful and demonstrates
good interventionist skills on behalf of the Access Manager, the importance of Access
Centre transport appears undervalued by the Department as a whole. This suggests
that transport is seen as an operational function only. However it is vital that the
emotions of the child be taken into account during the transport period. The
anticipation, expectations, likely disappointment and distress of the child during this
process must be taken into account. It is fundamental that the psychological well
being of the child is recognised. This demands care in the process of moving the child
from its foster home to supervised access and back again.

As may be seen from the table below, the number of transport hours is almost
equivalent to the number of achieved supervised hours. Although this relationship
changed slightly in the most recent year under review, as the Centre staff brought
travel time down to below that of supervised time, this may be due to the presence of
a dedicated vehicle in addition to taxi use. Those setting up an access centre must
closely examine their catchment area and monitor transport time carefully.

Table 8: Travel and supervision time display

Year Supervised hours Travel hours Total time per visit Supervision as %
of total time
2003 530 643.5 1173.5 45%
2004 436 510 946 46%
2005 431.5 379 810.5 53%
Total 1397.5 1532.5 2912.0 48%

However, the general tendency to regard the transport function as neutral lowers its
value in the eyes of workers outside the Access Centre. In consequence there is a
pressure from social workers to use Access Centre staff as transport personnel for
case of lower vigilance levels. The matter of transport must be considered as
important and deserves a review, which examines planning, and the possible
introduction of dedicated transport personnel. This review should identify all transport
duties of social work and ancillary personnel with a view to the introduction of a
managed departmental transport function. The review should be child centred and
regard the well being of the child as paramount.

4.6.3 Bookings
The Access Centre’s first phase of operation represents a full immersion in necessary
visits rather than one of building up bookings and referrals. There were more
bookings in the first year than in either of the next two years. 2003 can be regarded
therefore as the “pilot year” when the booking capacity may be tested. It is also the
most likely period for difficulties to arise and these should be monitored carefully.
 37

Table 9: Bookings and completed hours display

Year of No of Visits No of Supervision Average supervision

Operation completed hours hours per visit
2003 182 530 2.9
2004 245 436 1.7
2005 260 431.5 1.7
Total 687 1397.5 2.0

The average number of supervision hours per visit was relatively high in the first year
of operation. This dropped and stabilised over the following two years. The Access
Centre sought to establish a balance between the number of visits it could
accommodate and the period of contact time that can be facilitated between parent
and child.

Those initiating an access centre should, through careful planning, seek to establish a
balance between the following actors:

1. Child – taking the age, health, development and maturity of the child into
account, what length of visit can be accommodated and is best for the child?
2. Parent – given the capacities of the parents and the relationship with the child,
what contact time is suitable?
3. Fosterer/carer – what are the demands on the carer which must be
accommodate with reference to his/her own children, household schedule etc?
4. Centre – what contact time can be accommodated given the number of staff,
safety requirements, physical resources and case intensity?

The evaluation notes the drop in average contact time after the first year and
recognises the limitations of child contact. Contact time is constrained by the ability
of the parent to maintain concentration in an environment which he or she may find
alien. This area requires further monitoring to judge the most effective contact time
period for certain parents. Their ability to respond to the centre environment should be
taken in to account.

The evaluation recommends the use of dedicated software to assist with visit
planning. This would take account of resources and analyse bookings, seasonal
fluctuations, cancellations and outcomes. A package such as Cubistx may be suitable
and can be found at http://www.cubistix.com/child_welfare_services.cfm. This type
of programme takes into account transport options and offers caseworkers a useful
planning tool.

4.6.4 Cancellations
Cancellations ran at a high level for the first few months - almost equal in number to
completed visits. These should be considered closely to determine sources of and
reasons for cancellations. (Included in cancellations are parental “no shows” or non-
attendance). Access centre statistics are available for the three full years of operations.
These reveal that cancellations have gradually been reduced as a percentage of
bookings. This reflects a service development in relation to client tolerance levels.
 38

Protocols were put in place that located significant non-compliance of the visiting
parents. Having due regard to the well being of the child and to the objectives of the
centre, a boundary is established. More than three missed bookings will trigger a
review of supervision arrangements.

Table 10: Cancellations by year display

5
Year 2003 2004 2005

Cancellations 111 87 73
Bookings 293 332 333
Cancellations as % 38 26 22
of bookings

Over the total period the average cancellation figure is 29% of bookings. The Access
centre has worked hard to reduce the overall levels of cancellations and has reduced
these gradually over the period of operation. A further analysis shows that
cancellations may arise from the following five areas. Responsibility for cancellations
lie across the key actors within the operational system

Table 11: Non-attendance analysis display

Responsibility 2003 2004 2005 All

Non-attendance - 18 20 28 66
parent
Parent 29 27 17 73
Child Carer 7 17 12 36
Social Worker 19 10 14 43
Access Centre 38 13 2 53
All 111 87 73 271

The tables above show that the main responsibility for cancellations lay with the
parent group. Although this reduced in the third year of operation, it nonetheless
remains the key problem group when combined with “no-shows”. The Access Centre
itself shows a high level of cancellations but this needs to be examined across the time
period. The cancellation rate in the first year of operation clearly reflects the
difficulties encountered at that time. Access Centre cancellations dropped
dramatically in 2004 and were nearly eliminated in 2005. This shows that the Centre
recognised the difficulties and worked hard to improve scheduling. Nevertheless, a
foster carer who made the following contribution identified a lack of adequate staff
cover:

I hate the cancellations because it’s very frustrating for the child and me. I have my
plans disrupted and on top of that I have to cope with the child who is disappointed and
tearful. I understand the difficulties but it seems to me that the staff at the Access
centre need more cover. [Foster carer]

Interestingly, parents consulted also noted this aspect. Staff maintained regular
contact with parents and worked with other parties to reduce cancellations. This
produced an across-the-board drop in all categories. The evaluation found that reasons

5
Does not include November and December figures
 39

for cancellations primarily arose from the same kind of family problems that caused
the care order. So those initiating an access centre need to bear in mind the likelihood
that certain difficulties will affect the clients’ ability to maintain a visiting schedule.
Once specific reasons are determined the centre may work towards minimising them.

1. Of these drug and alcohol abuse will play a part in the cancellations. The
later can be minimised by paying attention to the parents’ duties and
responsibilities. For example, Monday mornings are difficult for anyone in
methadone-assisted recovery and this should be avoided by not arranging
visits on a Monday morning or at a time when a visit to the methadone clinic
for urine samples are scheduled.

2. Difficulties around separation and divorce constitute another reason for

cancellation. The parent/s may be in the process of establishing a new
relationship or be in the aftermath of an old one. The parent taking prime
responsibility for visits (there is usually one that takes the lead) may attempt to
bring the new partner – a situation that should be avoided. The new partner (1)
may not be known to the child concerned or (2) may attempt to sabotage the
visits through control of the visiting parent.

3. Difficulties around court appearances and other welfare responsibilities may

interfere with schedules. The parent must respond to court-initiated demands
and give them priority. There is little choice and the centre must adapt.
Similarly for social workers, there are other duties which may coincide with a
scheduled visit and must take precedence

4. The time of year has an effect on clients’ predisposition to make a visit.

Summer periods are vulnerable to cancellation, especially if related to aspects
of (2) above. Conversely, parents may wish to see their children at the
Christmas period when a centre is working with reduced staffing.

5. Difficulties can be presented where parent/parents are working or obtain

employment during the period where their child is in care. Although most
parents in this study were not working or were doing casual work (possibly in
the informal economy), employment is generally seen as a beneficial and
stabilising influence on clients. However, this presents an obstacle to visits.
Extension of visiting hours would therefore increase accessibility for parents.

6. Family responsibilities present problems for larger families or where one

child is in care and a sibling or siblings remain with the parent. School
problems, ill health and family dysfunction can all contribute to the likelihood
of cancellations. Where family dysfunction can be expected, large families
present many problems associated with disruptive behaviour and a chaotic
attitude to appointments.

7. Client vulnerability is possibly the main reason for cancellation. The parent
may not be in a position to respond because of personal problems around self-
esteem, anxiety and depression. If the parent is worried about the visit, he or
she may prioritise other duties and responsibilities as a defence against anxiety
about the visit and his/her relationship with the child. During this evaluation,
 40

Access Centre staff made considerable efforts to determine the problems and
talk them through with parents. Those initiating a service should be aware that
“emotional monitoring” might help to reduce cancellations.

All of the above problems have been experienced during the introduction of the
Access Centre. Given the characteristics of this client group, the likelihood of
completely eliminating cancellations is unlikely. But cancellations can be minimised
by the appointment of an adequate staff complement with capacity for cover and a
dedicated administrative specialist with knowledge of the client group. The latter
would work to maintain contact with the parent/s and to raise the capacity for visiting.
The bulk of scheduling and rescheduling work currently undertaken by the Manager
should be devolved to this appointment. Extension of the centre’s available hours to
evenings and weekend would assist working parents and extend choice. Finally, the
staffing complement of Access Centres should be such that emergencies, periods of
pressure, and training duties can be managed correctly. Visits must be scheduled
within the capacity of the Centre rather than at its capacity.

Those initiating an access centre should bear in mind that clients may cancel because
of one or more of the above factors and adopt systems that identify and reduce non -
compliance. Cancellations are emotionally distressing for children and may trigger
(further) feelings of abandonment. This involves developmental work with parents.
Although some developmental activities take place in the normal course of visitation,
it may be necessary to refer the parents for counselling and related activities to
increase their likelihood of maintaining their part of the visiting plan. The service may
like to consider the appointment of an on -site counselling service similar to those in
the US case study identified in Chapter 3. This service would seek to help the parent/s
in areas of priority building, maintenance of boundaries, relationships, and child
development, parenting skills. Discussions with clients in relation to their own
experience of parenting may be helpful in this regard.

4.7 Phase 6: Planning and occupation of the Purpose Built Centre

4.7.1 The new site

The objective of a dedicated site and a purpose built premises built on a dedicated site
was in existence from inception of the project idea and the original plans are part of
the first proposal.

The planning of the purpose built centre takes however, place contemporaneously
with the commencement of the operational phase whilst working from the temporary
centre. The evaluation recognises that this takes place within the overall planning
environment of the Health Board. As such it must take in to account the following:

1. The financial resources available

2. The current land values and land availability at a suitable location
3. The existence of existing Health Board sites suitable for development
4. The potential leverage capacity in attracting developers and obtaining value
for money (VFM).
 41

Current economic dynamics within the Dublin region have promoted an escalation in
land values. Whilst this may have a negative effect on purchasing a dedicated site, it
increases the options for the use of a pre-existing site with scope for development.
The Board chose to develop an available site, bordering parkland in the Ballymun
development Area. This site was already occupied by another child care service.

It is important to recognise that this site lies close to Ballymun centre and as such
comes under the planning process of Dublin City Council Development Plan and the
Ballymun Rapid Action Plan (http://www.dublin.ie/ballymun_rapid/). The City
Development Plan contains options for urban development, transport links etc

Under the Regeneration Programme, over €1.8bn has been made available for
regeneration of the physical infrastructure of Ballymun. Alongside this RAPID offers an
opportunity to develop a new, area-based and integrated approach to tackling social
exclusion and cumulative disadvantage in the area. [RAPID web site]

Regeneration details are available from http://www.brl.ie/wnew.htm Those initiating

an Access Centre should remember to check all development plans since in the life of
a new centre, since development initiatives will change the nature of the environment
for all actors. In this case, improved transport links will serve parents, fosterers and
Access Centre staff. Improvements to the spatial environment will bring local parks
and within the physical environment provide new resources in the community
infrastructure. The latter should prove a useful improvement for the Access Centre
and further developments in community welfare services will provide options for
working in partnership.

4.7.2 The physical environment

The development of an existing site brought both advantages and disadvantages. In
retrospect, the opportunity for a dedicated site was a possibility given the existence of
various bodies charged with area re-development. This may have offered partnership
potential. As such, it is to be regretted that this option was not given more attention at
Departmental level.

(1) The site selected for development was one of the Health Board's existing sites, set
in woodland. Some of this woodland had to be removed to build the Access Centre.
Although it is accepted that some site development is necessary, woodland would
have improved the environment and offered resources for parents and children in
visitation.

(2) Leverage in this case, demanded ceding a portion of land to the developers. The
advantages of this action for the Access Centre remain unclear.

(3) The selected development site was in occupation. Since the work entailed
redevelopment of existing accommodation, staff had to be temporarily decanted into
the new Access Centre; in addition to enduring a deleterious change to their woodland
environment. This slowed entry to the new premises and caused additional
refurbishment work to be necessary prior to the Access Centre staff taking
occupation. At the same, disruption to the existing occupants of the site gave rise to
some resentment. Site development conditions, decantation and re-occupation of their
 42

premises naturally proved disruptive. Liaison with existing staff was necessary in
order to preserve future working relationships

4.7.3 Interior of the new building

The building’s interior and curtilage offers clear improvements on the existing
premises. The design, for the most part, follows the original proposal and includes
observation rooms, and additional office and administration space. The entrance leads
to a reception area with administrative space lying to the rear. The building presents
onto an adequate car park and is south facing.

The three access rooms (with attached observation rooms) have kitchen facilities and
a rear garden, which cannot be overlooked either by neighbours or by other families
in adjacent rooms. One-way mirrors and video cameras6 offer adequate observation
facilities. The premises offer more sophisticated security arrangements than the
existing premises. Video cameras linked to a central display have obvious benefits,
although this feature requires adequate personnel to monitor and control the premises.
Those introducing such features to an access centre should also have due regard to
safety features around the exterior of the premises.

The building offers a light and airy corridor featuring natural lighting from skylights.
This corridor links the reception to the observation rooms. However, the observation
rooms are north-facing and suffer from a lack of natural light. Situating the
observation rooms on the front of the building would have improved lighting but
obviated access to the private gardens. This is something to be considered early in the
planning process, whilst recognising that every site will exhibit certain physical
problems. There is adequate storage space for toys and games. Storage space allocated
to toys and games should allow for the child to be able to find his favourite toys in the
same place as they were, when tidied at the end of his or her visit.

Some difficulties were encountered during the building phase following first and
second fix carpentry, electrics and lighting. These were mainly related to specialist
aspects of the access centre function as follows:

Work surfaces were inappropriate for use by children. Generally the ergonomics
of access rooms were adult-orientated.

Siting of boilers and geysers presented safety hazards and were unsuitable for the
purpose of the centre

The position and type of lighting were unsuitable for visitation. Lighting is a
specialist area and is related to both visibility and mood. It requires careful
forethought.

Private space for the manger was not taken into account in the completed building,
leaving only an open space behind the reception area. All service buildings require
a quiet space, which can always double as meeting accommodation. In general, all
files should be held securely in a closed-off space that may not be accessed by
clients.

Most of the problems encountered during this period indicate a failure on the part of
the architects to adequately manage the specialist demands of a building of this kind

6
At the time of writing, cabling had been fitted but hardware was not in place.
 43

and is fundamentally related to the understanding of the purpose of the service. There
is a need for the building to convey a feeling of safety, containment, warmth and
privacy. This should be adequately understood by all involved with the planning of a
new building – especially architects and building supervisors. The need for an
empathetic awareness with the building’s future users – children, parents and staff - is
paramount.

The demands on the access rooms are as follows: The rooms must offer a generous
circulation space in which the parent and child may move around as if in a domestic
setting. There should be adequate space for play and games. Rooms must be brightly
but not harshly lit. There must be an unobstructed view between two-way mirrors and
the circulation space. The primary consideration of safety must be observed such that
children are not exposed to hot surfaces, scalding water, projecting work surfaces and
electrical outlets.

The problems in this period appear to relate to the needs of the decantation period. In
consequence, the building seemed primarily designed to accommodate adult staff
rather than the end user. Those introducing an access centre should try to ensure that
temporary accommodations do not influence the final shape of the accommodation,
since alterations after the completion of building work can be more expensive. It is
useful to employ a childcare professional to “snag” problems contemporaneously with
this phase, such that post hoc alterations are minimised or eliminated.

4.7.4 Entry to the purpose built premises

It must be noted that at the time of writing, Access Centre staff have not yet relocated
to their new building. The building is currently empty and awaiting refurbishment
following the return of decanted staff to their original premises. No firm date is
available for Access Centre entry to the new premises, although it appears likely that
this will take place in early 2006. As such, this phase remains incomplete. All stages
of this development took longer than anticipated. Those seeking to develop access
centres should strive to reduce delay since it has a knock on effect on staff
(demoralisation) and clients (disruption). Clients who’s lives are marked by chaos
require stability and some level of certainty. At the same time, open government
demands that they be fully informed of developments. It is useful to note that delay is
not fully understood by younger family members - especially teenagers.

4.8 Conclusion and observations

The chapter tracks the development of the Access Centre from proposal through
implementation until the period prior to entry to the purpose-built premises. It sets out
both the outcomes (in terms of throughput) and the difficulties encountered during
implementation.

In terms of evaluation, the focus remains on the purpose of the Access Centre, which
is fundamentally offers the opportunities for children and parents to maintain contact
where the child is out-of-home for legal reasons associated with child protection.

The development phases were constrained by scarce resources in the following areas:
staff resources (access workers, drivers) and physical resources (premises, equipment
and dedicated transport). In every phase, systematic delays and obstacles hindered
 44

development. These lay outside the control of the staff members that were
implementing the developments. In consequence, project implementation took much
longer than envisaged. An overall examination of Health Board systems associated
with recruitment, building control and general resourcing would assist in reducing
these delays - all of which have a cost implication.

In particular, two major issues remain – those of (1) Staffing and (2) Transport. Both
these areas require a major review. In order for the centre to function safely,
additional staff members are required. The work of the Centre is clearly strained if
there is staff absence because of limited cover. In this development period, the
manager has provided cover where necessary. But this reduces her capacity to
perform the main duties of the post. Additionally, overseeing the development of the
new building has involved significant time. Much of this could have been avoided had
project control proved tighter than was the case.

Many successes were registered in this period. Staff members were able to initiate and
develop systems exclusive to the centre and to develop codes of practice appropriate
to the sensitivity of the tasks involved. Consultation with foster carers and clients
(parents) demonstrated a satisfaction especially in comparison with pre-existing
systems. Observation of children showed that they were safe and well cared-for. Staff
worked well to provide supervision. They maintained boundaries and coped well with
resource limitations.

Throughput and casework monitoring are well developed. Throughput data

demonstrates that staff members are engaging with the component parts of the work
in a thoughtful and flexible manner. Casework data is accurately recorded. Although
it contains a wealth of qualitative data, it would in this period benefit from a
computerised approach to allow analysis to take place. Staff would also benefit from
the use of software that would allow for systematic scheduling. The development and
application of vigilance levels (as demonstrated in Chapter 2) would assist in planning
the multi-client visits that the new centre can accommodate.

4.9 Critical incidents

4.9.1 Technique
Critical incidents are used in business planning and represent a technique where staff
members are asked to identify specific incidents which they experienced personally
and which had an important effect on outcomes. The emphasis is on incidents and
context rather than vague opinions. In the operational period of the access centre,
several critical incidents influenced the way in which the project addressed certain
problems. It is necessary to deal with these in a short review, categorising them by
type.

4.9.2 Clients with addiction problems

Project staff members have learned to deal with clients (parents) suffering from
addiction problems. The key aspect of this problem is to protect the child concerned
from further harm. Staff members have been able to identify the signs of continuing
drug abuse and have instituted protocols, which deal with issues such as this one. For
example, a client using the toilet for intravenous drug use was quickly spotted and the
issue was then raised and boundaries enforced.
 45

The client had a history of drug abuse and had an early pregnancy. Following the death
of her mother, she made a suicide attempt. Her first child was found to have non-
accidental injuries due to her partner. Now homeless and a heroin user, she was
strongly suspected of using (illegal, unidentified) drugs in the premises toilets when
visiting with her second child. It was explained to her that she such behaviour could not
continue and that she risked cessation of visits [data from centre case notes]

The Access Centre environment provides a container for observing this kind of
behaviour, which might otherwise go unnoticed. The onus for adhering to
standards of behaviour in this case lies with the parent concerned.

4.9.3 Clients who arrive under the influence of alcohol and drugs
In common with the issue raised above, clients who arrive at the centre, who are
discernibly under the influence of alcohol or drugs are excluded from that
appointment. The issue is reported to the appropriate social worker and the visiting
plan revised. The issue is explained to the parent who must comply with basic visiting
requirements. In extremis, any parent found using drugs on the premises must be
warned that this is an offence and may be reported to the appropriate authorities.
4.9.4 Clients who arrive at the centre accompanied by unauthorised persons:
Given the chaotic aspects of some clients it is likely that an unauthorised third party
may arrive with the parents and seek to join the access visit. This is unacceptable and
falls within security protocols. For example, a client’s new boyfriend attempted to
join her access visits but was excluded. Thereafter he would stand around the corner,
out of sight. Subsequent domestic violence to the client necessitated a hospital visit,
which had to be supported by the Centre staff. This reinforces the need for good
security protocols. In this case, the front door was adapted such that clients (and
others) could not see inside the building, but could be identified from within. Whereas
this is difficult in a neighbourhood domestic setting, a purpose build centre will offer
more protection.
4.9.5 Family members who “act out” within the Centre
A problem associated with large families is the presence of siblings who are tempted
to act out. Faced with this conduct, the parent is requested, encouraged and assisted
by the centre staff in dealing with the problem. Yet in so doing she may become
distracted from the task of improving contact with her child. This type of conduct may
be impossible to eliminate but it is very time consuming and demanding of staff
resources. The presence of a large number of siblings may place heavy safety
demands on the premises. A solution is to make a space where numbers visiting can
be appropriately controlled. Play diversions are a useful resource in this regard and
should be considered when allocating resources to a centre.
4.9.6 Theft
Given certain aspects associated with the client group, the occasional security breach
is likely. This is more likely to come from associates of the visiting parents who have
perhaps identified valuable objects as saleable. It is therefore necessary to locate
office resources in a discrete, bounded space, which demonstrates that certain security
measures are in operation. Casework documentation (paper) must be secured in
locked cabinets and client information held on computer should be subject to
encryption. However, it is also necessary to avoid an overt display of security that
may threaten the atmosphere of the centre. For example, resources located within
parent-child visiting space should not appear secured.
 46

4.9.7 Lessons
The project seeks a balance between the needs of the child and the value of family
permanence. Currently, a short case history and a copy of the Care Plan should
accompany referral requests. The study supports the adoption of risk assessment
protocols prior to the commencement of access visits for any particular case. These
should form part of the visiting plan for individual cases. Clients should be not only
assessed for violent behaviour characteristics but also for likelihood of substance
abuse and any demonstration of criminal proclivities. Often these may be related to
each other. An enhanced safety-risk assessment7 for each client should be integrated
into both care and visiting plans. For this reason, it is advisable that the Centre
Manager has full access to computerised social work records (Social Work
Information System – SWIS8) such that arrangements may be put in place to protect
the child from any further harm in the course of visitation. Further, it is necessary in
cases where harm may result to children that the other agencies shall be included in
information sharing.

For example, following the Protection of Children Act 2003 (Scotland), the following
statement from the Scottish Office makes explicit the following:
(In) acting to protect a child, including making inquiries into allegations that a child has
been harmed, agencies should avoid causing the child undue distress or adding
unnecessarily to any harm already suffered by the child. Agencies should make
sure that children who may be at risk of significant harm receive the highest priority and
a speedy response to their problems. All agencies providing services and support to
children and their families should have an understanding of the other agencies’ roles,
responsibilities and legal powers, and should share information about the
9
circumstances and needs of any child and the family where necessary . [author’s
emphasis]

This duty is all the more important for internal agencies that adhere to the protocols of
the HSE and having a duty to internal customers (social workers) within the
department. Additionally, Children First10 states quite clearly that the willingness to
exchange information promptly will be required from all professionals who are
involved with the child.

4.10 Flowcharts
The following charts show the current referral flow and the phases of development in
the life of the Access Centre Project:

7
Social workers generally carry out a risk assessment as part of the child welfare approach. This kind of
assessment should be restricted to dealing with on premises safety and risk. Conceptual models which attach a
numerical value to various aspects of the supervised visitation process are available such as described in Sylvia J.
Ansay and Daniel F. Perkins, Integrating Family Visitation and Risk Evaluation: A Practical Bonding Model for
Decision Makers, Family Relations: Vol. 50, No. 3, pp. 220–229.
8
SWIS has seen considerable difficulties within the last few years and this is examined in the Review of
Adequacy of Child and Family Services, Northern Health Board, 2004. Primary problems are the ageing computer
server and staffing shortages. www.hsenorthernarea.ie/docs/Adequacy_Report_2004.pdf . Compliance with the
Action Plan for Implementing the Child Care Framework in the Northern Area is essential.
9
Details can be found at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library/documents-w3/pch-05.htm.
10
Children First; National Guidelines for the Protection of Children and Welfare of Children, Dept of
Health and Children, The Stationery Office, Sept, 1999
 47

Chart 4: Current Access Referral flow

Informal 35% of total

Child Placed in Residential 10% of total

Care
Fostered 55% of total

Access
Visiting Plan
Care PlanDevised requirements
formulated
formulated

Outline Vigilance Outline

Visiting Visiting Visiting
plan Plan plan

Closely Supervised
visits deemed
necessary

Operational Operational
Access Centre
Responsibility of Responsibility of
deemed necessary
Access Workers Social Workers

Work with child(ren)

Work with parents/s
Work with fosterers
Liaise with staff

Close supervision
no longer
appropropriate
 48

Chart 5: Access Centre Project - phases of development

WITHIN BOARD St affi ng& Pr em ises

OUTLINE PLAN
FORMULATION r eq uir em ent s est abli sh ed

Coor dinat or wor ks 1. refines referral protocols

COORDINATOR fr om exist ing 2. sets out criteria
APPOINTED social servi ces 3. staffing levels
p r em ises

PREMISES
LOCATED
Pr em i ses exam i ned for DELAY
su it abi lit y and m odifi cat i on Decant existing
MANAGER needs tenant
APPOINTED
1. Reinst at em ent : r ep air dam age DELAY
MANAGER 2. Bui ldi ng m odi ficat ions st ar t ed Ext. restrictions
MOVES IN TO 3. Resou r ce al locat ion st ar t s halt staffing
PREMISES 4. St affing p rocess com m ences process

STAFFING: FIRST
APPOINTMENT
TAKES UP POST

1. Transport protocols initiated & tested

ACCESS VISITS 2. Resource levels improved
START 3. Caseload & referral system established

1. Dedicated vehicle refines transport

STAFF EXPANSION -
2. New protocols implemented
TEMP COVER

1. Liaison with architect & premises

PURPOSE BUILT management Placed in
CENTRE PLANS 2. Modifications reviewed and accepted recruitment
UNVEILED 3. Further appointments identified. process

1. Decanting initiated DELAY

PURPOSE BUILT 2. Modications to completed unit necessary
UNIT Decantation
3. Problems identified and resolved
CONSTRUCTED

PURPOSE BUILT
UNIT READY FOR
MOVE
 49

Chapter 5: Application of a consumer model

5.1 Introduction
In this chapter the consumer model as outlined in Chapter 1 is applied to the Access
Centre introduction. The indicators below are displayed in tabular form as a reminder.
A fuller explanation is outlined in Chapter 1. In this case the key service user is the
parent or parents. Children also use the service and will be considered given age
appropriate criteria. Fosterers form the remaining service users – although their role
as service users is bounded by the needs of the child and parent. Although in some
respects social workers are service users (they refer on to a service within a broader
service structure), this model locates Health Board staff as service suppliers. As such
they are not part of this model. Their needs shall be considered later in this chapter.
Necessarily, this approach examines the service user’s point of view and attempts to
hear their voice. 11

Table 12: Consumer-orientated indicator system

Indicator Explanation
1 Accessibility How difficult or easy is it for customers to gain access to the service
at the physical level? Geographical location, available transport,
approachability and any confidentiality problems inherent in the
physical location all form part of this level.
2 Choice What choices are available to the service users? Have they any
choices over conditions of access, time periods available, available
resources, activities during access visits. Finally are there any
alternative services of which they may avail
3 Voice How easy or difficult is it for the service user to express and opinion?
Is the service user consulted about the service in terms of
usefulness, accessibility, and the way in which the service is
delivered to them?
4 Accountability Where does accountability lie and how easy of difficult is it for
service users to hold the provider accountable for delivery
conditions. Can the service user see what is happening
transparency in decision-making concerning the service? Can the
service user complain and how is that complaint dealt with in the
service structure?

5.2 Indicators in context:

Accessibility: The legal process fundamentally underwrites the position of parents and
children within this setting. Where the children are subject to a court order, children
are in the care of the Health Board. Parents can then avail of the service and may
encouraged so to do. How does this affect service accessibility? Parents are not forced
to see their children following care proceedings, although they generally voice a
desire to maintain contact. They may or may not exercise their rights to contact. Thus
accessibility in this context concerns the ability of the parent to respond to contact
facilitation. The desired outcome is contact maintenance, with a view to the
permanent return of the child to his/her parental home.

11
A UK governmental response to this approach may be found at
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/ pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmpubadm/49/49i.pdf
 50

Choice: The choice that can be extended to parents and children within this setting is
also bounded. The alternatives available to parents are limited. Children and fosterers
have little choice but to comply with the service delivery system. Choice will be
explored with regard to the overall community and voluntary escort provision. The
exercising of parental choice through non-compliance lies outside the service -
objective. It is a choice that requires investigation because of the personal and
psychological consequences
Voice: The parents and children are subject to legal considerations, which limit the
impact they may make on service delivery. Yet it remains important that parents,
children and fosterers can make recommendations about how the service is delivered
and what it means to them. The study will particularly focus on the voice of the child
since in general this tends to be neglected. Current policy demands that the voice of
the child be recognised and integrated into service delivery.
Accountability: There are clear links of accountability associated with the service.
They may, however, be unclear to the parents. This question is related to open
government. How aware are parents, fosterers and children of accountability criteria
within the state system? Are they in a position to find out? If not, how can this be
made more accessible?

5.3 Indicator 1: Accessibility

In this study, access is gauged by:

1) The manner in which the parent, child and fosterer can access (be admitted to)
the service.
2) The manner in which the parent, child and fosterer can physically access the
site or sites where the service is delivered.
3) The manner in which accessibility is promoted through the service’s physical
location within a wider context.
4) The manner in which the service is accessible at the psychological-emotional
level.

Access to the service is fundamentally determined by the social worker responsible

for the case - either personally or through a designated Access Worker. Formerly,
access has either taken place on social work premises or at an independent location
selected by the caseworker in liaison with parent and fosterer. The parent must fit into
the legally sanctioned procedure. The study finds that provision of an Access Centre
has extended choice to parents. Prior to Access centre service introduction, parents
either:

1) Responded to an appointment at a Health Board office where the social worker

would supervise contact. This could include accompanying parents and
children to resources outside the office such as shops, public sector provision
(parks, gardens, zoos, swimming pools) or private sector leisure provision
(cinemas, entertainment centres). Merely going for a walk could provide the
focus for this provision.
2) Responded to a visit by a caseworker at an independent location at some
distance from a Health Board office. This option demanded considerable
caseworker resources in terms of travel hours and associated expenses.
 51

Parents and foster carers consulted during this study expressed general satisfaction
with the service and exhibited a clear preference for the Access Centre service.
Dissatisfaction was expressed regarding visits located at Health Board offices such as
Mountjoy Square because they were regarded as austere, slightly threatening and too
visible. The latter point is important because of perceived stigma and non-
confidentiality. Perhaps because of a lack of personal transport and experience of
delays in the public system, the parents’ group regard travel arrangements as
complicated and any change of location and travel induces anxiety. The permanence
and perceived stability of the Access Centre was therefore regarded as rendering the
service more accessible and “usable”. One parent commented:

The Centre is OK but the service came too late for me and my daughter. It will probably
help some other people, I hope. [Parent]

Children clearly enjoyed going to and using the Centre. Although their visits could be
traumatic this was generally confined to the aftermath of a visit when partings create
emotional suffering. It is unlikely that this can be avoided and its management is one
of limitation of distress. The provision of the transport system for picking up and
delivering children to and from the foster carer’s home clearly offers emotional
accessibility to the child in care.

It was clear that the introduction of a centre-sponsored transport system improved

accessibility for foster carers. Consultation with foster carers revealed anxieties
connected with the collection of their foster children - particularly where their own
children had to be present (e.g. after school). In the aftermath situation, the distress of
the child in care caused by parting with the birth parents, proved extremely upsetting
to the fosterer’s own (birth) children. Those introducing an Access Centre should be
aware of the delicate nature of the aftermath period. Foster carers and their children
can be removed from the aftermath scenario through availability of an independent
transport system, a provision that offers emotional protection for the children of foster
carers. In consultation, foster parents identified this aspect as beneficial for their foster
children

An examination of the current building in terms of location is necessary since the

study does not cover the period of entry into the new building. The purpose built unit
and its (projected) accessibility will be examined at the end of the chapter.

Location and exterior: The location, look and layout of the selected premises can be
advantageous or disadvantageous for visitation. Any introduction of a centre must
seek to balance both. The main benefit of the premises under review was its setting.
As a traditional house in a suburban street, it offered a sense of normality to clients.

The house can be accessed without fear of stigma. The parent appears to the outside
world as an individual calling at a house. This feature was highly regarded by parents
consulted. The house had the advantage of lying on a bus route. Despite a poor to
medium service, it is possible to reach easily in a single journey from the Quays in
central Dublin. For the most part, the maximum number of changes en route would be
limited to one. The district in which the centre is located is relatively free from heavy
traffic. The centre lies at a junction served by traffic lights. Pedestrians can cross
roads in relative safety.
 52

The proximity of shops, cafes and other resources offer an accessible visiting
framework. Using the centre as a base, parents and children can be accompanied to
the shops for brief periods. This gave parents the chance to shop with their children
and purchase small items or food. Additionally, the position of the Centre within a
small but vibrant neighbourhood allows for chance activities, which proves beneficial.
For example, the local community centre occasionally provides premises for market
researchers and on one occasion (observed by the consultant) a parent and child
accompanied by the access worker were able to take part in market research. This
provided an element of social training for the parent concerned and she welcomed the
small fee provided. Organisations seeking to establish an Access Centre should ensure
that it lies close to a judicious mix of public and private facilities.

Table 13: Criteria for the exterior of the building display

Criteria: Exterior This Centre

Does the Centre look accessible? Yes
Does the Centre look institutional? Yes
Does the area have decent street lighting? Medium
Is there heavy traffic close to the centre? Some -varies
Are the premises easily accessible by public transport? Mostly
Can the parent be easily identified as a “welfare client” No
Does the Centre have any dedicated parking? Some
Does Centre offer any defensible space? Some
Can staff easily see the surrounding area? Limited
Can client callers be seen by staff? Yes
Is the centre near shopping facilities? Yes
Are there nearby facilities offering social and learning value for parent and Yes
child?

Security arrangements were constrained. The premises were more vulnerable than a
purpose built premises. There was some defensible space in front of the building, but
the house was fairly open. Chance callers could be expected as in any street. Care had
to be taken to ensure that the caller was bone fide and not accompanied by others
(such as “boyfriends” or others with no access rights)

Interior: The house in which the Centre is currently located offers few obvious
barriers. Such barriers as do exist are unobtrusive. This (necessary) lack of “gate
keeping” appears to promote a relaxed attitude. It is regarded a “homely” by parents
and children consulted. With a traditional layout of entrance halls, leading to a
stairway, front office, rear access room/kitchen and two upstairs access rooms, the
premises were non-threatening and the lack of reception space worked well for
promoting informality. This was very favourably regarded and was most noticeable to
foster carers as follows:

1. The centre is like any other house, which seems more familiar for children
rather than an office room. It feels homely and the children are more at ease. I
feel we (all) benefit from that. [Foster carer]
2. The centre is warm and fun. All the children are together. It’s next best to being
at home with the parents. [Foster carer]
3. It is a wonderful service because it secures a family home environment for
children. It’s a secure meeting place.[Foster carer]
 53

Parents consulted said that it was like visiting a normal house. This element must be
borne in mind for purpose built premises. Organisations introducing a purpose built
centre should ensure the provision of adequate non-office space and reception
facilities should appear as non-threatening and friendly as possible such that parent/s
and children feel comfortable. The following constitutes a check list for assessing the
interior and garden of the building.

Table 14: Criteria for the building interior display

Criteria: Interior and garden This centre

Does the entrance look formal-institutional? No
Can circulation restrictions be put in place child gates etc? Mostly
Are there any breakable objects such as mirrors and glass? Removed
Are the toilets lockable (child safety)? No
Is the kitchen safe enough? Yes
Is there a supply of toys, games, TV, video and DVD, computer and Yes
games?
Does the garden offer reasonable play area? Can ball be kicked around? Yes
Can garden be seen easily from inside – aesthetics? Yes
Does the garden have high walls to contain games/footballs etc Yes
Does the garden appear overlooked by neighbours No

Neighbourhood: It is important to remember that the neighbourhood and its residents

form an important part of accessibility. A diplomatic relationship with neighbours is
of vital importance. In this case, the Access Centre Manger took considerable care to
visit neighbours and to reassure them about the important work of the Centre. The
manager was successful in involving neighbours in keeping a watchful eye on the
building out of hours and they proved most sensitive in terms of respecting the clients.
In consequence, a visit to the Centre could be undertaken without feeling the presence
of neighbours or of feeling overlooked in any way. Those introducing an access centre
should forge relations with neighbours before occupying the premises and
commencing operations. Omitting this task may cause hostility. It is beneficial to
regard the neighbours as partners and to encourage mutual respect between
neighbours and the centre.

5.4 Indicator 2: Choice

Since this is the first centre of its kind in Ireland, choice is obviously limited. It does
represent a clear service development and the extension of provision both plugs a gap
in service delivery and provides client satisfaction. However, the consumer as
taxpayer has a clear interest in the cost of providing the service and there is every
indication that the service is cost effective in comparison with previously organised
supervision services. The key problem here is the lack of comparable provision; the
consumer or client cannot “opt out” of the current system.

All parents and foster carers consulted in this exercise expressed satisfaction with the
extension of service offered. “It’s just brilliant” was the most favourable comment
received. Fosterers were particularly approving of the service. In common with
parents they compared the service favourably in comparison with previous visitation
experiences.
 54

Yes it’s a definite improvement. I didn’t like the way things were done before. I can talk
to (staff) at the centre and they are easy to get in touch with. [Foster Carer]

The baseline service offers options of direct social work or Access Centre provision
and this stands as a state-imposed alternative rather than choice. The service user
cannot exercise options but those parents consulted who had availed of the first
(earlier) option appreciated the extension and development of the service.

I enjoy the opportunity of being able to meet up with my children – so I am glad that the
centre exists now because it offers me and my children a choice. [Parent]

Given the examples of international developments, it is likely that this service will
expand through both state provision and contracting out to private providers such as
Barnardos. At that stage, the service user may prove able to exercise more of a choice
of options than hitherto envisaged. Extended choice through partnership models are
likely to become more developed in the current period.

The introduction of the Access Centre model may therefore be regarded as the
precursor of choice in this service area. Importantly, the extension of choice assumes
the ability of the service user to respond. It should be recognised that service users are
often, due to their personal circumstances, unable to act as more than the recipient of
a service. Those seeking introduction of an Access Centre should gauge the ability of
their users to respond to provision alternatives and place the service in the wider
context of children and family services. The service should also seek to avoid the
position where the service-provider’s interests entirely dominate the system. Although
subject to legal compliance, the service-user remains a consumer. Service-providers
must recognise that the user has a personal and emotional long-term interest in
outcomes.

The following list of criteria, adapted from UK Government studies, illustrates how
choice can improve the service. Looking to the future, choice may be exercised by
proxy through the appropriate social worker or access worker. The principle remains
the same however.

Table 15: Improvement criteria display

Information: Service-users should be provided with the information and advice to

enable them to make their choice. Well-informed people will be more satisfied and
confident about service quality.

Consequences: Choice provides powerful feedback on the quality of services, and

in some cases this will be incentive enough to change and improve services.

Alternatives: For choice to be an effective mechanism, alternative providers must

be available. This report envisages a scenario where there are more providers
wishing to develop or extend the service under revue. Choice may effectively lie in
this instance within the remit of the caseworker.

Entrance and exit: Methods of encouraging new providers to emerge are required.
Time limited subsidies to new providers may offer one option.
 55

5.5 Indicator 3: Voice

In the section above attention is drawn to the ability of the service user to respond.
Unless they are offered a voice they may not be able to find a manner, which gives
expression to their autonomy as service users – even where it takes place in legal
compliance. The Access Centre has provided a framework within which service users
can comment on the service. In addition to this exercise, service users are informally
consulted during visits and following completion of supervision at the access centre.

Parents and fosterers have been consulted through the introduction of self-completion
questionnaires. These are designed to be accessible and reasonably pleasurable to
complete. Designed for low literacy levels, these have seen success with parents –
even in difficult cases where responses were unexpected. Following up on non-
completion of questionnaires also provides a space for consultation. Although privacy
can be somewhat compromised, helping the parents to complete these small surveys
offers an opportunity for social training in addition to consultation. Parents have
therefore proved able to comment on all aspects of the centre including travel,
cancellations, resources and their emotional responses to visits. The self-completion
system allowed parents to recognise their own feelings about services. All parents
responding to consultation noted both emotionally pleasurable and painful aspects of
visits.

This system also presents opportunity for information requests. One foster carer
asked:

I think I need more information on what to do- like if something happened on the visit
that might have upset the children. [Foster carer]

Fosterers play a vital role in the Access Centre system. Although they are constantly
involved through Access Worker contact during appointment making and
transportation, the questionnaire system also helps them to make a formal input and
provides a consultation record. They showed an understanding of the reasons for
questions and also appreciated that through this mechanism, staff aimed to improve
the service.

The Access Centre monitors children’s opinion through observation and play. In this
way, staff members are able to integrate children reactions into the development of
the centre. For example, it became clear to staff that children liked the stability of the
centre in comparison with previous experiences. Children expected to find their
favourite toys in the same place as they left them. Staff members were able to
introduce a system where allocating accessible storage spaces could fulfil this
expectation and ensuring that by routine, children put toys and games away in the
same place. Finding that toys remained available where they left them promoted
familiarity and stability. It is useful to remember that in matters of computer
resources, many children are very sensitive to outdated equipment.

For children of even ten years old, you need up to date equipment in computer
software, “Games Ed Interactive” for example. So it would be good for all if modern
equipment could be put in place. [Foster carer]
 56

It was suggested that equipment of this type should be updated regularly or it will be
contrasted unfavourably with schools and home resources. However it is necessary to
point out that certain popular games (accessible only through game players such as X-
Box) are only acceptable where two players are necessary, thus involving the parent.
Music should be shared rather than listened to. Individualised mechanisms such as
iPods are unsuitable. The report suggests that a games room be allocated for siblings
of larger families who tend to act out during a visit. In this case, individual games are
appropriate.

Children were also allowed a choice of toys for the centre. Introduction of recreational
resources should always be carried out in conjunction with children through the use of
colourful catalogues, which are, in themselves, pleasurable to read.

5.6 Indicator 4: Accountability

Accountability may be regarded as a "cascade” of responsibility. The Department of
Health and Children is accountable to its service users (customers), employees, the
public (and taxpayers). It may promote this accountability through monitoring, honest
explanations and careful decisions.

Currently, the ways in which the Access Centre promotes accountability is through:

1) The constant monitoring of service-user opinion in its everyday working

practices
2) The soliciting of feedback and other information through surveys
3) The provision of information to service users concerning mutual duties and
responsibilities, acceptable user behaviour, child safety and the aims and
objectives of the Centre
4) Provision of explanations to service users. For example, in certain
circumstances the centre may be unavoidably forced to cancel appointments
(staff sickness for example). When such circumstances arise, the centre offers
honest explanations to its service users.
5) Through arranging professional staff supervision – usually through a senior
social worker – such that careful decisions are made on behalf of service users
6) The promoting of child safety through constant vigilance
7) The provision of a code of ethics such that decision-making is transparent.

The Access Centre has, during its inception and operational periods, either provided
or developed accountability procedures. Most importantly, it is the clear duty of the
Department of Health and Children, through its agent, the Access Centre, to:

1) Ensure that the provision of information to service users is accurate,

understandable and routinely delivered.
2) Provide mechanisms to respond to legitimate requests for information from
service users
3) Have due regards for the rights of all involved. The right of the parent to
maintain contact with children who are out-of-home is the key right in this
arena. Its facilitation is a vital activity in ensuring both parent and children
rights.
 57

4) Provide information that specifies who is responsible for what. What is the
responsibility of the social worker vis a vis the Access Centre manager, for
example? The service needs to ensure that service user understands
information and – especially in the case of ethnic minorities – that linguistic
assistance is available from within the Health Board to facilitate
understanding.

The Centre has developed informal mechanisms for ensuring that information is
supplied to service users. Requests for information are routinely processed in a
professional manner. Thus current working practices and the subsequent creation of a
Code of Practice for the Access Centre has gone some way to providing
accountability. The Code of Practice should be made available to all service users
including parents, fosterers and social work staff. A further code of practice could be
usefully developed outlining accountability to the service user and asking such
questions as “in the final analysis where does my loyalty lie?” Does loyalty lie with
the child, parent, department, etc?12

However, in the case of (4) above, it is uncertain whether the differing responsibilities
of social workers vis a vis Access Workers have been made clear to service users and
whether service users understand them. Additionally, the study revealed that social
work staff members were unclear about duties regarding the Access Centre. Certainly,
they showed a lack of understanding of the necessity for child protection safety
procedures currently in place – in particular, the conditions under which an access
visit can take place and the number of staff members necessary to facilitate a visit.

The above constitutes an important area for development. Intra-departmental lines of

communication appear somewhat unclear and lack transparency. It is therefore
recommended that those wishing to establish an Access Centre pay particular
attention to the relationship between different departments and staff and develop ways
in which responsibilities may can be made clear to service users. They must also
develop a clear system for referrals and promote an understanding of systems amongst
staff and service users.

5.7 The purpose built premises: access

This brief addendum addresses the new premises. The premises on inspection proved
accessible enough. Its location is slightly away from neighbourhood intrusions and
offers some level of confidentiality. Transport links are much as for the pre-existing
premises. It is perhaps more difficult to reach by foot following public transport
journeys and specific instructions easily understood maps will be required for service
users. It has reasonable proximity to shops but lies near busier routes where traffic
speed demands more care, especially to ensure children safety. There is adequate
space for car parking and taxis may pull into dedicated, marked space in a car park.

There is adequate provision of external resources and the continuing development of

the nearby Ballymun Centre offers opportunities for trips to the shops. Additionally,
there is a network of community facilities nearby, offering opportunities for
partnerships to be developed. The availability of Citizen Information and Money

12
Hugman, R. and Smith, D., (1995), Ethical Issues in Social Work, Routledge, London, pp80-82
 58

Advice and Budgeting services in the town centre may benefit service-users. There is
an opportunity for links to such services in the interests of the service users (parents).

The interior of the building, especially the reception area, is light and airy - but staff
will need to work harder to provide the informal relaxed environment previously
provided. Clearly any extension of the service places extra demands on staff. Where
reception facilities are required, these may be organised such that they do not present
a barrier to service users. Naturally a reception desk is administratively necessary. But
this can be modified and presented in such a manner as to minimise the barrier.
Circulation space needs to be adapted such that the visitation environment does not
appear too institutional. Those seeking to introduce a service with a purpose built
building should pay attention to lighting, circulation space and the feel of the overall
environment. Direct liaison with architects is advisable.

Accessibility is somewhat diminished by poor lighting. The reception and resource

areas present to the front of the building and visitation rooms with observation
facilities lie to the rear. There is less light than previously and the visitation rooms
will be in the shade. It is understood that lighting is presently under review and
changes are being made. It is vital to ensure that accessibility is promoted through
attention to design. The necessity for observation rooms is obvious but accountability
demands that observation protocols must be explained clearly to service users. It is
understood that these are in development and will be formalised prior to entry to the
new premises.
 59

Chapter 6: Synthesis –an assessment of quality in

provision
6.1 Introduction
The following chapter represents a synthesis of previous information and an
opportunity to take up any outstanding issues that have arisen in the course of the
examination. The chapter follows the EU model of quality provision such that this
synthesis is grounded in a practical manner that leads to best practice. To summarise,
users of the service include children, parents and foster carers. In this orientation,
social workers (who avail of the service) are designated as joint service providers.

The key quality provision categories covered are as follows:

1. Provision of user-oriented services. Promotion of user involvement and

participation
2. Provision of quality systems that are flexible and adaptable
3. Provision of systems that take into account the differential needs of users
4. Provision of frameworks that respond to organisational flexibility
5. Introduction of quality that leads the organisation, rather than costs
6. Adoption of performance targets that allow for qualitative and quantitative
feedback
7. Dedication of time and resources for implementation of user orientated
systems
8. Provision of continuity of services and funding
9. Engaging in partnerships of service providers
10. Development of culture of innovation, responding to need and requirements
11. Engaging of highly qualified staff able to respond to user needs and
development
12. Investment in training and training participation of workers
13. Ensuring equal opportunities between men and are not neglected

The evaluation engages with service provision from the end-user perspective. The
fundamental question is whether the provision is meeting its objectives and has
positive outcomes for the customer. In this system, the outcome is difficult to locate
simply because of the lead-in time necessary to establish customer benefit. Without a
longitudinal study of parent and child relationships, an overall, lasting benefit is
difficult to predict – even though some benefits may be presently recognisable. It is
therefore difficult to assess whether the child-parent contact enabled by the service
will result in a positive outcome. The following model is therefore based on the
accepted principles of service provision, currently pertaining in the field.

6.2 Provision of user-orientated services

The introduction of Access Centre provision represents a clear improvement on
previous systems. Formerly, social workers, assisted by access workers, took
responsibility for supervised visits. They found such functions time-consuming in
terms of contact hours and the travel involved. The existence of the Access Centre
provided social workers with a referral point for cases requiring vigilance.
Additionally, they could avail of the space in the centre to fulfil visits in their own
caseload. As throughput figures indicate, travel duties entail much time that could be
 60

otherwise dedicated to casework. Over the three-year period under review, the Access
Centre has undertaken nearly 3000 hours (half of which were dedicated to travel
time), which are effectively removed from social worker direct caseload time.
Moreover, the Access Centre represents a body of specialist knowledge regarding
child parent contact. For example, it has occasionally proved necessary for Access
Centre staff to advise social workers on the handling of child-parent-interaction
during visits. This is due to the knowledge that has been built up during careful
observation of previous visits. Social work staff members may require to improve
their understanding of the new service - in terms of whom they may refer and the
protocols necessary to administer the enhanced service.

At the same time, parents and foster carers have expressed considerable satisfaction
concerning the service. Consultation with parents reveals that they appreciate the
following:

The permanent location is regarded as a stable point of reference.

The resources available within the centre help them to play with the child – there
is always something to do.

The atmosphere of the centre helps them adjust to a difficult emotional task.

The support of staff during visits is recognised as helpful and “for the client”.

Those who could compare services (both in Dublin and in the UK) said that the
Access Centre was a considerable service improvement. Although they appreciated
trips to the zoo or to MacDonald’s, this could not substitute for the availability and
support of the new service. In particular the quality of care was appreciated. In
response to being consulted on the good aspects of the centre, a client stated

I find that the services are acceptable. But the best thing about the Centre is the care
and understanding shown by staff. [Parent]

The consultation offered by questionnaires and follow ups were appreciated by those
who participated. Although return rates can be low, usually due to client movement
and change in addresses, consultation with those who were still within the service
proved welcome. Clients appreciated being asked for their opinion and stated that
they felt comfortable in raising issues with the Centre’s staff.

Foster carers were unanimous in their approval. The transport system provided was
much appreciated as an enhanced accessibility that improved their lives. Overall, the
service made a difference to the way in which they could organise family duties. In
particular, the collection and delivery of children removed their own (birth) children
from the inevitable emotional content of the foster child’s meetings and partings.
Consultation with foster carers revealed that previous systems that placed them in
contact with the institutional side of welfare services made them uncomfortable. They
saw the Access Centre as a friendly and supportive service with which they could
engage. They additionally appreciated the advisory function of the service, which they
regarded as accessible and knowledgeable. Foster carers were responsive to
questionnaires and enquiries and they felt that their opinions could influence the
service.
 61

6.3 Provision of quality systems that are flexible and adaptable

Within the parameters of access work, the Access Centre has developed systems that
seek to enhance the work of the social work service and the care system. It has
extended opportunities to parents and their out of home children and provides a
reference point for the improvement of parent child contact.

The Access Centre has over the three years of operation adapted to the existing
system. It has been constrained however, by staffing problems, recruitment delays and
bottlenecks associated with the acquisition of physical resources. Delays in planning
and inception of the new purpose built centre have soaked up considerable resources.
Nevertheless, the systems in embryo are well advanced for the developmental phase
of operation in a new and innovative service. Systems development include referral
protocols, transport provision, child parent supervision and foster carers liaison.
Cancellations and travel times have been reduced. Critical incidents have been
identified and addressed. Departmental staff supervision shows support and
dedication within the parameters of departmental organisation.

Remaining systems for development are the streamlining of the booking system,
development of vigilance levels (casework intensity), the further development of
information systems, implementation of training and update schedules for access staff
and community partnership development. All of the foregoing depends on staffing
improvements. In liaison with the Health Board, the Access Centre needs to carefully
examine staffing and organisation, specifying the exact responsibilities of each
worker. The critical factor in staff organisation is the requirement for two members of
staff to be present on the premises at all times. This limits the number of possible
sessions that can run concurrently. Vigilance levels also have an impact on the
number of possible sessions mobilised. Finally, the referral system could be improved
through further development of operational links with social workers. Issues
associated with social work liaison could be improved through education, training and
awareness sessions.

6.4 Provision of systems that take into account the differential needs of users
The Access Centre is required to deal with three sets of end users (defined as children,
parents and foster carers) and to provide an internal (customer) service to social
workers. The centre, through provision of improved transport arrangements has taken
into account the specific needs of children and foster carers. By providing a dedicated
centre, parents have been provided with a stable contact point through which to
maintain contact with their children. Staff members also provide role-modelling
examples for parents whose parenting skills require development. Some client parents
have been referred to parenting skill-training centres.

Several areas require improvement, however. Booking and transport systems would
benefit from development through the use of user-orientated software. Although the
client group’s cancellation rate is likely to remain high, it is likely that seasonal
cancellation rates can be predicted and bookings adjusted. This would not only benefit
children and foster carers but also allow for the insertion of staff training into the
overall schedule of the centre. Critical incidents reveal that some parents are not in a
position to response to contact visit protocols. The introduction of a counselling
psychology service would improve this and offer additional support to the end user.
 62

Finally, there is evidence that the extended family should be involved in contact.
Whilst this has been attempted with particular cases, it has proved difficult to
accommodate large families together at a single session. The Access Centre should
carefully examine the possibility of separate visits from grandparents and siblings
(evidence from the residential care service emphasises the importance of siblings to
the child in care). This has the obvious advantage of lower vigilance levels and would
provide the out of home child with improved social contact. This is especially
important where the child is likely to be eventually placed with another family
member, such as an aunt or grandparent.

6.5 Provision of frameworks that respond to organisational flexibility

This is one of the most problematic areas for the Access Centre since the statutory
nature of the service and the judicial framework on which it depends is by definition
inflexible. The organisational position of the Access Centre within the Health Board
demands that it complies with the regulations, protocols and procedures existing
within the department as a whole. It must also comply with initiatives determined by
the government level. The child-centred policy adopted by the Access Centre is in line
with government thinking. The possibility of organisational flexibility lies within the
framework of the social work department and its relation with community services.

European information13 suggests that a new social care system is being introduced in
several countries, which will be less controlled by the public sector. This is being
driven by two factors (1) policy changes following health sector reform and (2) a
shortage of different types of social care. Although several countries have retained
responsibility for care in the children sector, such states as the UK have contracted out
work to the voluntary sector.

Consideration could be given to the existing framework of provision within the

community and voluntary sector. The next decade is likely to see a development of
purchaser-provider relationships between the state and the third sector in Ireland. It is
not unlikely that the provision of access centres may attract the commercial attention
of community and voluntary organisations. It is therefore important that the Health
Board and the Access Centre set the standards in quality provision, which others must
follow in order to achieve funding. Such a development would require skills in
contracting out, quality testing and compliance management. The Access Centre
model is therefore seen as the in-house template for development in the sector. It will
also comprise the major source of skilled management and field workers who are
experienced and familiar with the rubric of contact work.

6.7 Introduction of quality that leads the organisation, rather than costs
Recent research in European social care provision indicates a need for services to be
led by quality rather than cost implications. The Access Centre has evolved a
reputation for quality work, based on evidence-based research and practice in the
childcare field. To some extent, the development of a quality service has been
compromised by cost implications, budget limitations and staff recruitment
curtailment. In consequence the training profile of the Access Centre remains low

13
Lethbridge, Jane, (2005) Care Services in Europe. EPSU. Based on information from the European
Foundation for the Improvement in Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, which web publishes an
on line casebook at http://www.eurofound.eu.int/areas/health/cases.htm
 63

simply because of resource problems. It is essential for service development that

training and professional updates are maintained continuously throughout the life of
the centre.

The Access Centre is currently able to present in an informal manner, which adapts
well to the client group. Underlying that presentation is a very hard-edged approach to
the efficacy of the service. Staff members are effective in drawing boundaries for
client behaviour, which is effectively monitored and dealt with quickly and
diplomatically. In consequence, there is little expressed rancour from clients because
of the attentiveness and respect they receive. Service quality is a major asset of the
Centre, as one foster carer observed.

I think it is a great service where the staff are very helpful and go out of their way to
facilitate us. They are non judgemental and deal with the children’s issues in a very
professional way. [Foster carer]

Staff members have provided this quality service despite considerable resource
limitations. The determining factor in the project is safe and constructive supervision.
This has not been compromised by costs. Any temptation to provider the maximum
number of visits at the cost of poorer quality work has been resisted. This is important
at the development stage since it sets the scene for the future of the service.

6.8 Adoption of performance targets that allow for qualitative and

quantitative feedback.
The Access Centre has maintained a significant and creditable volume of data
concerning clients. It is particularly strong in quantitative data. Although a great deal
of throughput data and casework information has been generated, performance targets
have not yet been developed. To some extent, qualitative indicators will rely on
developments in the field. It is important to note that the Access Centre work depends
on the combined efforts of several actors and it is recommended that Access Centre
staff, in conjunction with social work professionals originate a template for quality
assessment.

Although adequate qualitative information exists on a case-by-case basis, this restricts

the usefulness of information to reference purposes. Qualitative assessment could
focus on length of cases, number of visits, case improvements and case outcomes.
This should, as a minimum, be cross-referenced with age, sex, family size and reason
for supervision. Access Centre staff could also address the way in which improvement
is registered. What factors are used to assess this? A determination of the factors will
lead to appropriate indicators, which should then be applied consistently to all cases.

A recent emphasis on evidence-based material demands a new approach to targets.

Adopting specific targets allows the organisation to check if it is performing
adequately. The methodology adopted is important but stress should be place upon
maintaining the same method of checking over time. This allows the organisation to
determine whether there is any change over specific time periods. It is practically
useful where government policy is concerned since governments need to determine
change over the life of a specific administration.

A useful addition to the quantitative data would be a cost benefit check. This might
examine the money saved in social work time, through the work of the Access Centre.
 64

6.9 Dedication of time and resources for implementation of user-orientated

systems
Since the parent-user in this system does not have a choice of service and may not be
in a position to respond, the current method of engagement with clients and the use of
self-completion and other questionnaires are, in this case, adequate. It is possible that
parent groups exist in the catchment and it may be useful to engage with such groups.
This offers either a conduit through which parents might contribute or could constitute
a proxy for client parents who may not have communication skills to be involved in
this manner.

But foster carers can be more involved and the actions of the Access Centre staff
members have shown that carers appreciate involvement and participation. Foster
carers should be consulted on a regular basis to ensure that the system is catering for
their needs and those of the children whom they foster.

The voice of child is necessarily weak in the system primarily because of the age of
the children concerned. Teenage children can be engaged on a more formal level and
the Access Centre can usefully examine was in which this can be carried. This might
be carried out on a partnership basis with such organisations as Barnardos. Barnardos
regularly consults with children and may be able to offer services in this regard. This
would also save on time and resources that should otherwise be dedicated to direct
service work.

6.10 Provision of continuity of services and funding

This is an important element of quality provision since the user is assured of a
dedicated service, which is maintained over time. Certainty of funding assures the
client that the service will not be suddenly withdrawn or shifted to another service
supplier.

The funding of the Access Centre has appeared somewhat uncertain and the original
budget appeared rather tight in light of the tasks it was expected to accomplish. Users
of the service have the right, as citizens, to be assured of continuity and funding. As a
parent user commented:

My child feels safe in the centre and she gets to see the same people every time … but
what I would really like is for the same people to pick her up, bring her and drop her off,
too [Parent]

The move to the purpose built centre may reassure clients that the service is
established. Those who are aware of previous access arrangements and who
appreciate the benefits of the new service should be reassured that the service would
not be withdrawn. Users should also be made aware of any changes to the service and
given due notice of such occurrences.

6.11 Engaging in partnerships of service providers

Government policy demands that services develop partnerships in order to provide
and develop quality provision. The opportunities for partnership in this case have
been few, given the innovative nature of the service. At the informal level, staff
members have developed partnerships with appropriate organisations.
 65

Looking to future developments, the possibility of other organisations entering this

field is fairly high. In such a scenario, the Access Centre model will offer a body of
expertise. This presents considerable strength for the Centre and offers a range of
benefits for the community overall.

6.12 Development of a culture of innovation, responding to need and

requirement
Within the framework of the Department of Health and Children, the service
constitutes an innovation and responds to the needs and requirements of all the user
groups described in this report. To summarise:

1. Social workers – social workers benefit from improved use of time and
resources; provision of additional expertise through a specialised function;
access to a body of specialist knowledge.
2. Foster carers – foster carers benefit from a specialist service, which offers
greater engagement. It meets their needs and requirements through the
provision of transport arrangements, thus removing the necessity of delivery
and collection of foster children. It removes foster carers from part of the
emotional affect, which accompanies child-parent meetings
3. Children - children now have the opportunity of stability in location,
familiarity with premises and resources and certainty with regard to the
conduct of supervised visits.
4. Parents – parents have stability of location and certainty of conduct. They
have improved opportunities through which to make an input regarding
service delivery.

6.13 Engaging of highly qualified staff able to respond to user needs and
development
The Access Centre has been able to engage highly experienced staff, but not without
difficulty. A key problem is the small pool of specialist staff currently available at the
local, regional and national levels. This is unlikely to change in the short term. The
current staff complement is insufficient to provide an environment where staff
training and development can take place and there is inadequate cover for leave and
sickness. Organisational restructuring could seek to concentrate a higher number of
access workers under the management of the Centre.

Another difficulty is represented by recruitment criteria. Where a limited market for

skilled professionals exists, the length of time required for recruitment needs to be
limited. Professionals whose skills are highly valued will go elsewhere, rather than
wait for the procedures to be exhausted. Recruitment procedures should be reviewed
and streamlined having regard for securing skilled staff. Application of equal
opportunities criteria should not necessarily slow the recruitment process.

The Human Resources Department should consider this matter, such that they may
bring the system into line with the recommendations of the Department’s Quality
Customer Services Action Plan, 2005-714.

14
Download full report at:
http://www.dohc.ie/publications/pdf/quality_customer_service_action_plan_2005_2007.pdf
 66

6.14 Investment in training and training participation of workers

This is an area of deficiency in the work of the Access Centre. Training can only be
provided where there is adequate staffing to cover for absence.

Training is a vital necessity in this specialist function. New material in childcare is

being generated rapidly and within this framework, staff members need to update
their skills regularly. They should also be making a training input across the range of
social work functions.

6.15 Ensuring equal opportunities between men and women are not neglected
There are two areas of equal opportunities applicable to this case. The first lies in the
client area. In general, the female parent takes responsibility for maintaining contact.
Male clients are very much in evidence at the Centre, however. The Centre attempts
to bring male partners within the scope of the project where possible. Foster carers
tend to organise along traditional lines and the female partner takes responsibility for
day-to-day family organisation. This is unlikely to change in the short term.

The staff composition of the Centre is all-female. This is structured by the current
labour pool, which is predominantly female. It appears that this is also unlikely to
change in the short term. The Department could make attempts to attract male staff
but self-election at the training level, upstream of specialist employment, also remains
predominantly female. This presents an opportunity since observation shows that a
male presence in the centre makes a difference to some children. This is a matter for
intervention at departmental policy level.

6.16 Conclusion
The Access Centre is a quality service constrained by limited resources. Although
some aspects could be dealt with through financial inputs, organisation, some aspects
could be improved by re-organisation of staff and resources at the departmental level.
The following chapter will deal with ways in which the service can be improved.

The following table summarises the Assessment of Quality in Provision chapter.

Readers should also refer to the Customer Quality Action Plan 2005-2007, which is
the publicly stated policy for the Department of Health and Children.

Table 16: Assessment of quality in provision – summary display
Quality in Provision
Criteria
1. Provision of user
oriented services.
Promotion of user
involvement and
participation
2. Provision of quality
systems that are flexible
and adaptable
3. Provision of systems
that take into account the
differential needs of users
4. Provision of
frameworks that respond
to organisational
flexibility
5.Introduction of quality
that leads the
organisation, rather than
costs
6. Adoption of
performance targets that
allow for qualitative and
quantitative feedback
7. Dedication of time and
resources for
implementation of user
orientated systems
8. Provision of continuity
of services and funding
9.Engaging in
partnerships of service
providers
10. Development of
culture of innovation,
responding to need and
requirement
11. Engaging of highly
qualified staff able to
respond to user needs
and development
12 Investment in training
and training participation
of workers
13. Ensuring equal
opportunities not
neglected
Access Centre
Yes: Centre makes efforts to
involve users at level of
parents and foster carers
Yes: Quality systems have
been developed with due
regard to children parents
and foster carers
Yes: Accurate information
provides guidance for
different needs
Limited: Continual
development of Centre but
must conform with
departmental considerations
and mandatory regulations
Limited: Provides a quality
service curtailed by costs
No: Throughput reporting
well developed. Performance
targets are in development -
pending
No: Time limited environment
prevents
Limited: Service continues at
current level. Some
uncertainty.
No: Not appropriate or
possible in current framework
but will become necessary
Yes; Staff members adapt to
needs of users and learn
from their experiences
Yes: Current staff
experienced and well trained
No: training opportunities
poor and time off difficult
under current staffing
numbers and organisation
Limited: At client level, trend
is for woman to take
responsibility for children
67
Comments
Good - within limitations of
client ability to respond. Clear
participative strength with
expressed satisfaction of the
client group
Systems adopted are tested
and safe. Social work liaison
and referral systems require
improvement
Systems aim to
accommodate needs of users
whilst not compromising the
specialist function
Frameworks are bound by
professional, ethical
considerations. Determining
framework is that of the
Health Board
Quality direct care but overall
service limited by staff and
physical resource problems
led by cost
Targets difficult to establish
in current framework.
Requires determination of
performance indicators
Greater dedication of time
and resources are required to
implement user systems
Continuity of service and
developing framework.
Funding more uncertain.
Confidentiality of service
limits ability to form
partnerships. Evidence of
informal arrangements as
regards physical resources
Project highly innovative
within a development
framework
Knowledgeable and
committed.
Training underdeveloped and
limited by structure of tasks
and staff available
At staff level, mainly female
labour pool determines staff
structure.
 68

Chapter 7: Future Developments

7.1 Introduction
The evaluation of the centre finds that the Access Centre has achieved its current
objectives. Observation of the project development phase as outlined in Chapter 4,
and consultation with users demonstrate that the Centre is meeting its objectives for
client groups. The previous chapter locates the centre as innovative quality provision
that is somewhat constrained by lack of resources. Additionally, analysis of
throughput suggests the centre is of increasing importance for internal customers
(social workers). The importance of the latter should not be underestimated.

Within the overall orientation of access work, the centre promotes reductions in
workload within the general portfolio of social work responsibilities, which free social
workers to concentrate on casework. Although accompanying children and parents on
access visits allows useful observation to take place, general casework pressure tends
to render visitation as an ancillary role for social workers.

Child-parent access facilitation as a support service is designed to assist reunification

of families who are experiencing difficulty and are the subject of legal orders
regarding care of children. Maximisation of family links formerly took place in the
overall context of social casework, and in consequence the facilitation of access has
not necessarily been regarded as a specialist function with its own rubric of
procedures.

However, maximisation of child and family connections is now regarded as lying

somewhat outside traditional case goals of social workers. For example, child safety is
the key consideration of access work rather than the casework goal of family re-
unification. The concern of safety is followed by the objective of creating
improvements in family attachments, connectedness and parenting15. Thus our overall
examination proceeds from a perspective that regards access work as a specialist
function - as outlined in Chapter 3 on the context of introduction.

This chapter outlines areas for development and recommendations of the specialist
service. It examines changes necessary at project level, within-department level and
changes that will accommodate further expansion across Health Board provision.

Project development covers the following areas:

A. Procedures and protocols: actions necessary to improve access

casework, reorganisation, transport, accommodating, broader family
linkages, administration, accountability and transparency, ancillary
services
B. Physical resources: physical resources required to ensure
improvements in safety, parent-child interaction and development

15
Wright, E.L., (2001) Using Visitation to Support Permanency, Child Welfare League of America Press,
Washington, pp 4-5 [to be found at http://www.cwla.org/pubs/pubdetails.asp?PUBID=8080 ]
 69

C. Staff resources: staff resources required to maintain quality and to

ensure the smooth running of the service. Departmental linkages
designed to ensure the correct allocation of resources
D. Evaluation and monitoring: actions necessary to improve evidence-
based measurement of outcomes; process evaluation which improves
the project programme, and identifies progress on different levels of
goal-setting
E. Development: using the current service as a model, actions necessary
to extend the service across the Health Board; actions designed to
promote partnership working

7.2 Procedures and protocols [A]

This section is about improving access. It regards access as an integrated process and
examines this in such as a way as it might be improved

7.2.1 Reorganisation
Consideration should be given to reorganisation of all catchment access work such
that it is co-ordinated centrally. This could involve relocation of catchment access
workers to a central base provided by the purpose built centre or based in peripheral
offices but reporting to the Access Centre. There are several advantages to this option.
Access work would be fairly administrated in terms of prioritisation and distribution.
Home and other access work would be centrally coordinated. Records would be
centralised in a single office and accessed through the departmental intranet.
Knowledge about access work would be transparently available to social workers and
other stakeholders as appropriate. Compilation of data of the access function would be
enabled in am near that allowed for statistical analysis of overall practice.

It is recommended that the overall responsibility for access work should be

coordinated through a Principal Access Manager. This is in essence a developmental
change, which would require an upgrading of the current access centre manager post
rather than a new post.

7.2.2 Transport
Transport remains a complex issue since within the transport process lies a
significant area of emotional trauma for children. When the child is picked up the visit
has started. It does not end until the child is delivered back to the foster carer. In the
consultation process, foster carers identified this as a problem area and asked for the
person in charge to be maintained. Familiarity is important for the well being of the
child. The initial phase of “anticipation” which carries the emotional reactions of the
child to a forthcoming visit is contained by the worker, as is the second phase, the
“aftermath” of parting from the parent. It is recommended that the transport officer be
a professional access worker. In this case, the post holder could also provide cover for
access duties.

A new post of transport supervisor-driver should be considered. This may prove to be

both appropriate and cost effective. Taxis are costly and cannot provide continuity of
staff whereas dedicated service offers economy, efficiency, continuity and control.
Transport and visits should be coordinated such that costs are minimised. By
staggering the appointment schedule, the supervisor-driver can pick up and deliver
 70

children to the centre, maintain contact with foster carers and provide continuity and
reassurance for the children. This does require careful co-ordination and time
management.

7.2.3 Organisational integration

Taking the two items above into account, the following chart shows a developed
Access Centre framework where access work is centralised within the Community
Area overall. It suggests a new system where access work is routed through the access
centre and incorporates within it a professionalised transport function. This
framework recognises the importance of access work as a specialist discipline and
essentially changes the relationship between social workers and the access function.
In this system the social worker is an internal customer who is provided with a
service. In addition to increasing efficiency, the system outlined is designed to
improve transparency and promote accountability.

Chart 6: Proposed organisational structure for access work

ACCESS Reception
CENTRE Administration
MANAGER Appointment
chasing and
ADMIN
follow up
Anticipation & OFFICER
Information -
aftermath logging, storage
(specialist TRANSPORT
and retrieval
duties) OFFICER
PORTER Security Supvn.
Makes all
transport
arrangements
Carries out
transport
duties
ACCESS ACCESS ACCESS
ACCESS CENTRE CENTRE CENTRE
liason WORKER(S) WORKER WORKER WORKER
(Outside Visits) Centre Visits Centre Visits Centre Visits
(Permanent) (Permanent) (Permanent)

Peripatetic Remains Remains Remains

liason worker on sitefor on sitefor on sitefor
- outside supervised supervised supervised
visits visits visits visits

7.2.4 Ancillary Services

Within best practice models, ancillary services, such as counselling, welfare advice
and so on, may be attached to access facilities. This function may be arranged either
on site or through various existing welfare providers. Counselling can assist parents in
understanding their emotional reactions to the experience of the visit. It may also help
them to understand the emotional reactions of the child in the anticipation, visiting
 71

and aftermath stages. It also represents an opportunity for partnership working on a

contractual basis. It would form part of both the care and visitation plans, compiled in
conjunction with the social worker concerned.

7.2.4 Extended family visiting

Extended family visiting acknowledges that permanent connection extends to
significant others outside the parent-child dyad. These include siblings, grandparents,
aunts and uncles. Where a need is expressed on the part of the child to see other
members of the family, this might also take place in the Centre. Here, vigilance levels
may be decreased always having regard to the specific case history. Where kinship
foster care has been part of the care process, maintaining the kinship relations should
be considered. This might involve visits where extended family members have access
to the child concerned without parents being present.

It is necessary to recognise however, that kinship visiting may involve the

recapitulation of various family patterns including family rituals, stressors, secrets and
loyalties. These patterns are particularly important where some over-involved
relationships may have hitherto existed, which tended to undermine the primary
parent-child relationship. This requires extra vigilance in terms of placing boundaries
on what is said to the child during visits.

7.3 Physical Resources [B]

7.3.1 Safety
Ensuring child safety can be costly since the application of safety measures is
necessarily more rigorous than that generally applicable in a domestic environment.
The environment and the resources contained within it must of the highest safety
standards. The priority lies in protecting the chid from any further harm.

7.3.2 Play
The consultation exercise suggested that parents and foster carers would appreciate
more play resources for children. However the onus must be on those play resources,
which encourage positive interaction between child and parents. Whilst comments
concerning provision of more up-to date computer technology are welcome, it is
necessary to avoid situations where the child becomes so individually absorbed that
the function of the visit is diminished. Computer games, which offer a multi-player
function, are more useful in this regard. Here parents can develop awareness of the
cues that signal a child’s limitations or attention span and learn to respond
accordingly.

Uses of play resources are also useful in promoting an awareness of developmental

milestones. Attention should be given to creating a “library” of play resources that
relate to the cognitive development of the children attending the centre. Children like
to feel that toys are their own and want to find them in the same place as they left
them. It is useful to promote this sense of ownership through the provision of
adequate, flexible storage facilities. Children may then leave their toys in the
designated storage space and collect them there on their next visit. The provision of
 72

low-level shelves or cupboards from which children may choose a toy is a suitable
arrangement.

7.3.3 Provision for siblings

Some attention can be given to provision for siblings where the pressures of visitation
may be lowered through the provision of absorbing games that offer diversion.
Analysis of critical incidents in the life of the centre indicates that visiting siblings
sometimes find it hard to concentrate and can experience a drift in attention. They
may attempt to wander around the building looking for something to interest them. In
this respect a dedicated games room designed for older children may represent a
useful development opportunity. Where a room is free from scheduled visits for
example, this offers the opportunity for siblings to play under minimum supervision.

7.4 Staff resources [C]

The current resourcing of the access centre is restricted by numbers of available staff.
Case throughput is limited by child safety considerations, which are directly related to
close supervision. It is therefore necessary to accurately assess the appropriate staffing
levels and the supervision necessary to facilitate their work. The chart above offers
one option, which depends on the availability of a manager and administrative back
up. The following two posts would be essential for the smooth running of the centre’s
work. In the organisational chart above, the centralisation of the access function can
render the whole system more efficient but places additional demands on the
manager’s post.

7.4.1 Access Manager

Managerial administration constitutes the vital factor in:

1. Policy role in extension (roll out) of the service

2. Maintaining a quality service
3. Selecting, distributing and coordinating cases
4. Staff supervision and workload distribution
5. Social work casework liaison
6. Maximisation of visits
7. Ensuring compliance with centre casework protocols
8. Ensuring that regular staff training and updates take place
9. Ensuring compliance with health and safety regulations
10. Ensuring the development and maintenance of outcome measurements
11. Ensuring the continuing development of the centre
12. Building relationships with the community
13. Financial control

As such, the current Access Centre Manager post should be removed from client or
observation duties in order to give full attention to the above tasks. Secretarial and
administrative assistance should be introduced to ensure that management duties are
fully implemented. The manager post should be upgraded to accommodate the
extension of the service and to include a policy remit that includes dissemination and
development duties beyond the centre. The post would be renamed as Access
Manager.
 73

7.4.2 Reception/administrative worker

The introduction of a reception area necessitates an additional administrative post,
which should include the following duties:

1. Coordination of visits including logging of bookings and cancellations

2. Booking of appointments with internal and external agency staff.
3. Liaison with parents and foster carers to ensure maximisation of
visiting schedules.
4. Liaison with social workers to ensure adherence to referral protocols.
5. Reception of parents, foster carers, children to the centre.
6. Maintaining of statistics; storage and retrieval of relevant data.
7. Administration of telephone and email communications.
8. Maintenance of accounts and data necessary for the smooth running of
the centre.
9. General office duties such as filing, photocopying, maintaining
coordinated diaries, etc.
10. Security duties such as maintaining a record of persons on the
premises; supervising the security function and general surveillance of
the building.

This post should report to the Centre Manager and perform support tasks for all access
staff. This post is identified in the proposed organisation structure represented in
Chart 6 above.

7.4.3 Porter
In a building of this size, demands assistance for various functions. The primary
purpose of a (non-uniformed) porter is to maintain a discreet presence in the building.
This will enhance the security function whilst obviating the need for a security officer.
The porter duties should include:

1. General patrol duties in and around the perimeter of the premises

including parking of vehicles
2. Video monitoring (outside of the access room observation function,
which is an access worker duty).
3. Monitoring of security arrangements both within and outside the
building (including parking).
4. Maintaining a link with police, fire and ambulance services
5. Lifting and transporting office equipment, play resources, files.
6. Receiving and despatching of any goods.
7. Assisting or facilitating any disabled adult or child where necessary.
8. Support in any situation deemed likely to cause physical harm to a
member of staff.
9. General duties such as attending to alarms, central heating and other
appliances. Arranging for necessary repairs to equipment or the
building and supervising such repairs.
10. Opening and closing the building.
 74

7.5 Evaluation and Monitoring [D]

Current evaluation and monitoring are satisfactory but can be further improved. In
particular, outcome measurement needs to be developed. This will depend on a
rigorous attitude towards case progress and the manner in which cases end. When the
case is closed what has happened in terms of the objectives of the centre. Has
permanence increased? Has the child developed in accordance with established
criteria? Are parents better equipped to perform paternal roles?

7.5.1 Process Evaluation

Process evaluation documents the implementation of the service and monitors any
changes that may improve the system overall, much as this examination has done. It
should necessarily comprise the examination of the following items.

1. Services provided
2. Demographics – client characteristics
3. Staff development
4. Throughput statistics including participation and “no shows”
5. Client information data including descriptive information
6. Feedback from all stakeholders including social workers, children, parents,
foster carers - through interviews, focus groups, project observation and
review of data from software

7.5.2 Outcome Measurement

Outcome measurement relates to the benefits achieved for participants in the project.
In this case, such indicators as the following may be adapted for use.

1. Parents and children are interacting well - in a manner that enhances child
development and learning
2. Parents have learned to engage with their children in a responsible manner
3. Ability of the parents to identify and respond to the needs of the child
4. Absence of the child’s need to gratify the parent
5. Assessment of the quality of attachment
6. Children are safe
7. Children are healthy
8. Families access formal and informal support structures to meet their needs
9. Children “developmental milestones” are achieved
10. Children developmental problems are identified and addressed
11. Status at exit (case closed)
12. Post programme information gathered after case completion

At departmental level, a cost-benefit approach should be adopted comparing

programme implementation with alternative approaches. This allows for adjustment
of the programme and should underwrite the further extension (or “rolling out”) of the
successful model at national level.
 75

7.6 Development of the Service [E]

7.6.1 Development
Extension of the service to additional catchments should be subject to a cost benefit
exercise. This should incorporate an examination of the following elements:

A determination of enhanced quality for the primary customers (children, parents,

foster carers):

Saving of direct social work costs in social work hours, transport time, transport
costs

Greater transparency in terms of process and outcomes

7.6.2 Partnerships: An examination such as that specified above should necessarily

examine what benefits exist in the arena of partnerships and purchaser-provider
relationships. If professional voluntary agencies are able to provide services, what
criteria should be applied? It would also be important to examine any savings to the
department obtained through forging this kind of relationship. Undertaking
contracting out will necessitate quality assurance inspections and compliance
management together with the associated costs of administering the tendering,
selection and review process.

Current operational methods and standards within the sector imply that relationships
with the community and opportunities for partnership working be explored. When
considering partnership working, a thorough examination of proposed arrangements
must be undertaken to guarantee fair, equitable and transparent service operations.
Partnerships should have clear written protocols and ethical boundaries must be
incorporated within service agreements. Partnership working is useful only in so far
as it provides clear benefits to the end users.

Possible providers should be limited to those child centred organisations that can
demonstrate proven professional standards and commitment. For example, Barnardos
and ISPCC fit within this category. However, broadly based multi-functional
organisations may not be able to offer the specialist track record required for this
sensitive operational field. It is additionally necessary to recognise that some
organisations may pursue any opportunity for secure state funding. This level of
generality is inappropriate within the legal framework, duties and responsibilities
pertaining to supervised children cases. The key priorities must remain a focus on the
benefits to the child and the rigorous application of safety procedures.

Another option may be to limit partnership working to segments of access work.

Transport could be undertaken by a partner organisation (always having regard to the
professional status of staff accompanying children to their supervised sessions). The
voluntary sector may be able to provide supplementary services however. For
example where parents find it difficult to reach an access centre, they might be
assisted by voluntary organisations in the community. Evidence exists to suggest that
there is a relationship between the time taken to both reach and return from a centre
and the likelihood of attendance This might have the advantage of securing parental
compliance with visiting schedule and render casework scheduling more effective.
Although this may tend to compromise the parents independent wish to see their
 76

child, it is essence the child (as the key service customer) who benefits. In this case
the voluntary escort enhances the existing service.

The voluntary sector may also be able to provide counselling services either at the
centre, at nearby local venues or closer to the parents current home (which may be
outside the catchment). This service enhancement constitutes a matter for further
exploration.
 77

Chapter 8: Executive Summary

8.1 The report begins by outlining the aims of the evaluation, the structure of the
study and the methods employed. The report aims to provide both a service evaluation
and a Vademecum (manual for introduction and extension of the service). This
chapter lays down definitions and terms employed in this report. The chapter goes on
to describe the multi-dimensional approach, which employs a number of methods.
These methods include consultation with major stakeholders and customers, using
discussions, interviews and self-completion questionnaires. Observation employs
basic observation techniques, which include participation in the centre’s activities. In
this regard, in order to engage with children as customers, observation was achieved
through participation in children activities such as play

8.2 The study utilises two models, which employ accepted indicators. In the first
method, access choice voice and accountability offer insight into the service from the
point of view of service users, placed as consumers. The second follows quality
assessment procedures currently standard within EU practice.

8.3 Within the multi-dimensional approach adopted, the study is laid out in the
following fashion. Following the introduction, Chapter 2 describes the context within
which the service is being introduced – at the legislative and political levels. Chapter
3 offers a comparative dimension and looks at best practice in several states –
Australia/new Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. It draws out
various features, which are appropriate to the introduction of the service currently
under investigation. Next, Chapter 4 closely examines the phases of development of
the current access centre. This seeks to locate any necessary components and criteria,
which should be applied in service development. The Consumer Model is applied in
Chapter 5, and is primarily focused on the use of the existing centre. It briefly
examines the introduction of the purpose-built centre, which is not in operation at the
time of completion of this report. The application of Quality Assessment indicators in
Chapter 6 constitutes a synthesis of information gathered during the course of the
evaluation. Chapter 7 concludes the report by examining options for development of
the centre and the service generally.

8.4 The study examines the political and legislative context at the Ireland state,
EU and international levels. It places the Access Centre within the current focus on
the child and children’s rights. It finds that the Access Centre is an essential service
component in achieving the objectives of the Child Care Act 1991, the Adoption Acts
1988 and 1991, the Children Act 2001 and the fulfilling of state obligations within
European and United Nations legislative frameworks. At local level, it also fulfils
policy objectives as outlined in Children First (1999) and Strengthening Families for
Life (1998). Finally it fulfils Objective L of the National Children Strategy whereby
children shall have the opportunity to experience the quality of family life. The
various legislative instruments pertaining to child contact are specified in this chapter
and links to relevant statutes provided. The services of the Access Centre are found to
comply with this legislation.

8.5 The study looks at the comparative dimension through an examination of the
specificities of access centres in three areas: Australasia, The United Kingdom and the
United States. The report suggests that the Access Centre adopts the vigilance levels
 78

specified in the analysis of Australia and New Zealand where services are
comparatively well developed. It additionally recommends the adoption of service
principles outlined, which cover aspects of safety and of guidance in child-parent
interaction. The United States information specifies particular standards that may be
applied to access centres in terms of referrals, resources and procedures. In particular,
the US experience points to the usefulness of ancillary facilities (such as counselling)
that may be integrated within access centre services. However the report also draws
attention to the problem of social work “over-referral” in the United States,
suggesting the need for clear referral principles. Overall, however, most access
services were being provided outside the state sector, normally (but not exclusively)
within purchaser-provider relationships. In Ireland, the access centre innovation
therefore appears as an example of a state-led initiative, which offers a best practice
model for emulation by the third sector generally.

8.6 Chapter 4 deals with the development of the access centre for the original
concept through operationalisation to the design of a new purpose built centre. This
analysis shows that the centre is a within-service idea, which had potential and
credibility. It was supported through the consensual validation of experienced social
workers, who saw the development as offering professional enhancement of their
work. It was also regarded as an effective and economic alternative to existing
processes. The study oriented to future service extension, and tracked the phases of
introduction such that delay points and negative incidents could be avoided in the
future. The study notes the presence of evidence-based enquiry, which supported the
general direction of the centre’s work

8.7 Chapter 4 specifies the establishing of priorities in (1) underwriting child

safety and (2) avoidance of further harm. It notes the role of the staff in creating clear
professional boundaries and adhering to safety standards of a high order. Analysis of
throughput statistics indicate that the centre is instrumental in saving much social
work time, which can now be dedicated to other casework duties. Figures also
demonstrate that that the staff members have engaged well with referral patterns,
reducing absences and no-shows. The study notes the lack of development of outcome
measurement. This appears to stem from a lack in human and physical resources. The
introduction of specialist software will not only accommodate the production of
statistics, but also help manage referrals, transport and visiting. However, increased
staffing levels will be required to manage the operation successfully. In particular,
transport operations tend to be regarded as a neutral operation whereas it is, in
essence, an emotional part of the child’s visiting experience. It should be reviewed as
specialist function that deserves both additional staffing and professional expertise.

8.8 The study finds that development of human and physical resources proved
slower than necessary and that this was due to causes located within the protocols of
the Department. This suggests that in order to facilitate innovation, protocols should
be reviewed and improved. This particularly applies to staff appointments, but also to
transport and buildings. It is additionally important where children are the focus of
innovation. Delays to entry to the existing premises and to the purpose built centre
could have been reduced through better communications, improved systems and
project management. Staff members were placed in a position of constantly informing
parents about a change of venue that, for many of them, never took place. This has
clear implications for customer services in terms of access, choice and accountability.
 79

8.9 An analysis of critical incidents showed that the staff members were flexible
and proactive in managing the premises and the visitation process. Critical incidents
encountered included drug use on the premises, arriving under the influence of
alcohol, arriving with unauthorised persons, children (often within large families) who
act out within the centre and theft. The experience of those incidents led the staff to
create a code of practice, which is attached as Appendix “D”. The study suggests that
a safety-risk assessment for each client should be integrated into both care and
visiting plans and that the Manager has access to computerised social work records to
further facilitate child protection measures.

8.10 Chapter 5 examines the consumer aspects of the Access Centre introduction.
The existing Centre was found to be accessible enough and transport was much
appreciated by both social workers (internal customers) and foster carers. Parents
appreciated the domestic setting of the house for reasons of anonymity and
accessibility. In general they compared the centre favourably vis a vis previous
arrangements. Children clearly enjoyed being at the premises and were able to play in
a relaxed fashion. Parent-child interaction was closely monitored and demonstrated
the value of the relaxed but attentive atmosphere facilitated by staff members. This
was indicated by the fact that (for example) they fully expected their toys to be in the
same place as they left them. They took ownership of the building when present. The
study found that the centre offered a precursor of customer choice in that the present
circumstances limited options. However, consultation showed that parents appreciated
the service. They stressed that they always received the information they required and
stated that were treated in a respectful manner.

8.11 Chapter 5 noted that the consultation exercise mobilised by the study gave the
service users a measure of “voice” and allowed them to make criticisms and
suggestions for improvements. The study suggests that these exercises should form
part of the regular protocols of the centre. At the service level, accountability was
facilitated through information and consultation. Yet awareness of and understanding
of the service by social workers was a little limited – particularly where matters of
staffing and child safety was concerned. The study suggests staff awareness training
designed to promote the efficiency of referral systems currently in place. Finally, the
accessibility of the purpose built centre was briefly examined. The study found that
certain aspects of the building were deficient and suggests that improved
communications at the design period would have obviated any difficulties. These
particularly apply to child safety and to factors relating to the interior ambience of the
building, such as lighting. This would have prevented costly remedial measures at a
later stage.

8.12 In Chapter 6, the study examines “quality in provision” indicators. It finds that
that the service is responding to demonstrable and differential needs in the community
and in the social services generally. Yet the Access Centre is a quality service
constrained by limited resources. Although some aspects could be dealt with through
financial inputs and improved internal organisation, others could be improved by re-
organisation of staff and resources at the departmental level. In particular the study
finds that staffing requires improvement both in numbers and in training received.
Staffing difficulties limit the continuity of service that users/consumers have the right
to expect. The study recognises that the pool of available staff is somewhat restricted
 80

by factors who’s origin is external to the system under review. The Centre is further
limited by a weak relationship with the community and the third sector generally.
Again, this is a factor conditioned by the position of the innovation process within a
state-led initiative and the constraints of legal requirements. However, the study
recognises that staff members made considerable effort to establish broader
relationships outside the framework of the department. The study also finds that
although the centre is very strong in process measurement, there is a need to establish
accurate output measures (case outcomes particularly) and performance targets. It
suggests that information systems should be extended accordingly. This would help to
demonstrate the effectiveness of the service.

8.13 Chapter 7 examines options for development and makes suggestions for
improvements. Whilst the study recognises that the service has met its objectives, it
locates several areas in which the service could be enhanced and extended in terms of
Procedures and protocols, physical and staff resources, evaluation and monitoring and
in further development of the service. The chapter suggests that the access function
should be reorganised such that access is centrally administered. The Access centre
would in this case be the central referral point for cases and all cases would route
through that point. This would offer improvements in efficiently, transparency,
accountability and knowledge. The study recognises that transport is not a neutral but
a specialist function, which minimises child harm through adequately engaging with
the anticipation period of the child’s visit. It is suggests that the transport function
should also be centralised and professionally administered under the remit of the
Access Centre. A staff reorganisation chart offers a picture of the manner in which the
centre might more efficiently achieve its objectives.

8.14 Chapter 7 suggests that play resources be extended within the centre such that
parent child interaction constitutes the main focus. The study recognises that children
are utilising electronic and computer games at much earlier ages and that listening to
music is increasingly a technological function. The report suggests that the focus of
the centre must remain the relationship between child and parent. The study suggests
that development of ancillary services would enhance the quality of the service. Such
services as counselling has a direct bearing on the permanence of relationships and
should be strongly considered. Provision for extended family should also be
considered. The need for contact with significant others is also important to the well
being of the child.

8.15 Chapter 7 examines staffing requirements and suggests that the Access Centre
Manager be upgraded to a principal post to accommodate the following change in
responsibilities: additional access workers, a transport officer, receptionist and porter
and a dissemination and development function. The posts are deemed necessary given
the scope of new purpose built centre, the reorganisation and centralisation of access
work across the catchment. The necessity of rolling out the service will demand a new
policy level input from the manager that orientates outwards to assist in extending the
service.

8.16 Chapter 7 examines monitoring and suggests that process measurements are
adequate. The report identifies output measurements as requiring development. These
would focus on case outcomes and developmental activities successfully completed
within the Access Centre programme.
 81

8.17 Chapter 7 looks at the scope for development and extension, suggesting a cost
benefit exercise prior to roll out. It briefly examines partnerships and suggests that the
importance of the child protection function demands a limitation on partnership
activities. The study estimates that purchaser-provider relationships will increase. It
recommends that, in this case, access centre work should be restricted to professional
organisations with a clear and transparent track record, such as Barnardos and ISPCC.
 82

Chapter 9: Recommendations
9.1: It is recommended that the Access Centre be regarded as a best practice
model. It is recommended that the plans be drawn up for extending the service
following a cost benefit exercise. It is further recommended that the Centre Manager
play a central role in disseminating information concerning the value of the service.

9.2 It is recommended that access centre work be rolled out in remaining

community care areas, and then at regional and national level, always subject to the
adjustments detailed below.

9.3 It is recommended that the position of the Access Centre within the overall
HSE structure be changed such that the Centre becomes the Central Access Unit
(CAU) for Community Area 7. The system should be reorganised such that all access
work, including referrals, is centrally coordinated and distributed at the Central
Access Unit.

9.4 It is recommended that within the Access Centre, improvements in staffing be

made such that quality services and resources usage be maximised. The appointment
of not less than four Access Workers is required to filly utilise the resources of the
purpose built centre.

9.5 Given the relocation of the service to the new purpose built centre, it is
recommended that support staff be appointed commensurate with the scope of the
service and the scale of the building. The appointment of a receptionist/
administrative worker and a porter is deemed necessary.

9.6 It is recommended that the transport function be recognised as a professional

service in its own right. It is recommended that child transport become a dedicated
service attached to the Access Centre, catering for all Access transport and that this
function fall under the remit of the existing Access Centre manager.

9.7 It is recommended that that the post of Access Centre Manager be re-evaluated
in the light of the changes detailed above and the remit of the post extended

9.8 It is recommended that staff training be reviewed and extended such that staff
members receive regular updates in professional aspects of the work. These may
include such development options as:

Workload planning

Information systems

Planning for Permanency

Child Development

Child Observation

Interventions

Critical Thinking

Pattern Recognition

Dealing with Stress

Foster care Outcomes

Child Safety

Hearing the Voice of the Child
 83

9.10 It is recommended that the Access Centre explores the possibility of providing
ancillary services at the new purpose built unit, those services to have a direct impact
on all customers of the service: children, parents and foster carers. Services such as
counselling, family therapy etc., would add value to the current service

9.11 It is recommended that the Access Centre anticipate likely developments in

purchaser-provider relationships and forge links with third sector organisations with a
view to enabling partnerships, which may mobilise resources and achieve common
objectives. It is however recommended that any partnership involving direct children
work be restricted to experienced organisations such as Barnardos and the ISPCC.

9.12 The report recommends the introduction of vigilance levels to be applied to all
cases. These levels should be anchored in a manner similar to the levels evolved in the
New Zealand and Australia case studies in Chapter 3.

9.13 The report recommends that elements of Risk Assessment be quantified and
integrated into current visiting plans, using numerical ratings that determine the
allocation of resources to particular cases.

9.14 It is recommended that resources that maximise child –parent interaction be

subject to review and development. This should include any play resources located in
the Centre. The report recommends that this function be recognised as a key function
within access centre work and budgeted accordingly.

9.15 The report recommends the development of outcome measurement for all
cases. These may comprise of a set of outcome indicators measuring the achievements
of a series of access visits but must ultimately address case conclusion outcomes. The
report recommends the acquisition of specialist software to accommodate this
function and other tasks (including scheduling and resource allocation). The report
recommends the continued use of such instruments as were developed during this
evaluation project, to hear the voice of its customers. These may also be integrated
into process and outcome measurement systems.

9.16 The report recommends that as far as is practicable, the Centre develops
further formal means of hearing the Voice of the Child and integrates these into
Visiting Plans. Further, that the Centre extends the consumer perspective, which
locates parents and foster carers (external customers) and social workers (internal
customers) as consumers with a range of available options and choices.
 84

APPENDIX “A”: DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE

What Is An Access Centre?

Introduction:
The Access Centre provides a welcoming place for children looked after away from
home, to have healthy contact visits with their parents in a safe and child centred
environment.

Purpose of Access:
The primary purpose of visiting is to allow children to preserve relationships with
people who are important to them. Effective access is an essential part of the process
in any future planning for children.

The Role of The Access Centre Staff:

The Access Centre is staffed by a Manager and 2 qualified Child Care Workers. All
access visits are supervised by a staff member. Supervision may take the form of
discreet observation at a distance, or involve active participation by the supervisor to
encourage interaction, or to ensure a child’s safety. The Centre will (in as far as
possible) strive to achieve consistency by attempting to assign the same worker to
supervise all sessions that take place with individual children and their families.

Premises:
The access house has two comfortable well equipped visiting rooms, with a wide
range of games, toys, activities etc. to cater for children of all age groups. Children
and their families are welcome to light refreshments, e.g. tea/ coffee, soft drinks
during their visits.

Opening Hours:

The Access Centre is open on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday from 10.00 am
to 5.30pm, and on Thursday from 10.00 am to 6.30 p.m.

Location:

The Access Centre is situated at 29A Kilmore Road, Artane, Dublin 5, Tel.No.
01.8478124

Dublin Bus serves the Artane area, with bus routes 20B to and from the city centre,
and 17A/103 to and from Ballymun and Santry.
 85

Appendix “B”: DRAFT CODE OF PRACTICE

This code of practice seeks to account for all likely experiences during referral
process, visits and different outcomes of the Access Centre activities. It seeks
to lay down the formal principles under which Access Centre staff members
operate.

1. Clear arrangements for a child whose parents are estranged must be

made such that the child does not unduly suffer. This may include
restricting visits of one or other of the parents. The Access Centre shall
however be cognisant of the child’s wishes to see both parents, always
bearing in mind the safety and well being of the child.

2. In interests of the child’s safety, Access Centre staff may have to

control, restrict or suspend visits. In particular, where a parent is clearly
deemed to be verbally or physically abusive or under the influence of
alcohol or drugs, admission may be refused and the visit postponed.

3. The Access Centre shall avoid delay in respect of matters relating to

children. This is especially damaging in the case of very small children,
where even temporary breaks with parents can be detrimental.

4. Having regard to the age of the child, the child’s wishes should be
respected. The Centre strives to listen to the child. This is especially
important where the child expresses an unwillingness to see the parent
or parents. The child’s feelings may change however and the Access
Centre therefore strives to keep relationships and arrangements open.

5. The Access Centre aims to provide a constant review beyond the

statutory review process. The Centre will seek to confirm whether
arrangements are working or if they are too restrictive. The Access
Centre will monitor difficulties and identify necessary changes. Any
changes shall be discussed in the first instance with the referrer.

6. In the event that the Access Centre staff detects that parents are
"drifting away" from the child, staff will point out, to the parents, the
long-term implications for the child.

7. The Access Centre staff shall maintain clear and effective liaison within
the service on all access arrangements. Recommendations on
suspension or limitation of access shall be addressed to the
appropriate Social Worker

8. The Access Centre staff shall explain to the parents any change in
access visits or procedures and confirm this in writing. Access
limitations and access postponement shall be discussed with the
appropriate social worker and conveyed to the parents in writing
together with reasons.
 86

9. Should the Access Centre staff be forced to cancel or postpone access

visits for operational reasons, the staff shall contact the parents in a
timely fashion and mutually agree a new appointment.

10. The Access Centre shall maintain full and clear records for the effective
monitoring and evaluation of access visits.

11. The Access Centre aims to ensure that foster parents are made aware
of the need for effective relationships between the child and birth
parents. The Access Centre will liaise with foster parents on any
matters pertaining to the child’s welfare, which arise from experience
during access.

12. The Access Centre shall take all reasonable action to ensure that
transport is provided for the child in a manner that limits any emotional
harm to the child caused by reunions and partings.

13. The Access Centre staff will provide a congenial welcome for children,
parents and other relevant parties in the Access Centre venue. The
Access Centre staff will encourage parents to participate in the child’s
life. This might include preparing meals, making drinks, shopping for
clothes or preparing the child for a sleep.

14. The staff shall facilitate the parent in visiting the Access Centre to an
extent that will not compromise the personal autonomy or development
of the parent. The staff will advise the parents concerning directions
and transport to the Centre and endeavour to ensure that parents do
not arrive late for appointments.

15. The Access Centre understands that parents shall have the right to
complaint about access and that they are able to ask for a review of
decisions. The staff shall inform parents and others users of the centre
about complaints procedures pertaining within the Health Board.

16. Unexpected crises may occur, necessitating suspension of access to

protect the child. If a crisis occurs the centre will terminate
appointments. The relevant social worker shall be informed with a view
to a joint review of termination to take place between social worker and
Access Centre staff.

17. Where continuous observation is necessary. Access Centre staff will

appraise the parents of the reasons for such a safeguard. Parents may
inspect any facilities such as two way mirrors, observation rooms and
so on.

18. The Access Centre strives to ensure the safety of the child. However, if
an act of child abuse occurs on the premises (shouting, threatening,
hitting) the staff shall terminate the appointment. Depending on the
severity, the Access Centre may have no option but to inform the
 87

Gardai. The parents shall be informed in writing of reasons why this

occurred

19. In the event of any non-accidental injury occurring to a child on the

premises, the staff shall terminate the visit and suspend access, prior
to an investigation. The parents shall be informed in writing. In the
event of accidental injury, the staff shall take all necessary steps to
ensure the welfare of the injured party. Staff shall make the necessary
report and enter it in the appropriate health and safety records.

20. If a child becomes ill at the Access Centre, the staff shall take
appropriate action to ensure the safety and well being of the child.

21. If a child refuses to engage with the parent/s, the staff shall take all
necessary action to persuade the parties that continuing the
relationship is beneficial. If this cannot be achieved the relevant social
worker shall be informed of the situation with a view to deciding
appropriate action.

22. Visits to the Access Centre outside of the scheduled appointments

shall generally be discouraged. At the same time, the Access Centre
wishes to encourage a friendly relationship between parents and staff.
"Dropping in" will therefore be at the discretion of the management.

23. Access Centre staff shall not admit any person to the premises whom
they believe is likely to harm a child, parent or member of staff.

24. The Access Centre will take all reasonable action to ensure the privacy
of visits for the child and his or her family.

25. The Access Centre staff shall endeavour to monitor welfare practice
and childcare, development, suggesting training, changes to practice or
procedures or compliance with safety regulations pertaining to children.
 88

Appendix “C”: PARENTS’ QUESTIONNAIRE

What do YOU think

about the Access Centre?

About this form …

We need your point of view. It will help to make the service better

Your answers are private and confidential. No name is required.

Don’t worry about spelling. It is your answers that are important.

There are NO “right” or “wrong” answers – it’s YOUR opinion.

We want you to be as honest as you can be.

If you have any problems, ask a friend or someone you trust

to help you.
 89

1. Children’s ages:(write in) Boys __________ Girls _________

2. How long have you been using the access centre? Please tick
(√) ONE answer

a) Between 1 month and 3 months

b) Between 3 months and 6 months
c) Between 6 months and 9 months
d) Between 9 months and one year
e) More than one year

3. How do you normally GET to the centre? Please tick (√) ONE
answer.

a) I come by bus
b) I come by car
c) I come by train
d) I walk
e) Mixture of ways
(Please write in) ______________________

4. Please tick (√) ONE of the following answers:

a) Getting to the Centre is easy

b) Getting to the Centre is hard

5. Do you have any problems with GETTING TO the centre? Tick

(√) ONE answer that you agree with

a) No, never
b) Yes,always (Please say why it’s difficult ________)
c) Sometimes (Please say what happens _________)
 90

6. How do you FEEL at the centre? Tick (√) as MANY answers as

you like.

I feel welcome
I feel unwelcome
I feel relaxed
I feel anxious
I feel safe
I feel watched
I feel happy
I feel forced to come
I feel supported
Any other feelings?
Please write in __________________

7. How do your children like the centre? Tick (√) as MANY as you
like

They like being at the centre

They don’t like being there
They find it upsetting
They find it good fun
They hate it when they leave
It’s a mixture of things

8. What are the GOOD THINGS about the centre? Please write in.

_______________________________________

_______________________________________

9. What are the BAD THINGS about the centre? Please write in.

_______________________________________

_______________________________________
 91

10. Is there anything that would make the centre better for YOU
and your children? What would you CHANGE? Tick (√) AS
MANY as you like.

I would like …
a) More space/rooms in centre
b) Different travel arrangements
c) More activities
d) More play, games and toys
e) Good weather activities
f) Bad weather activities
g) More staff

11. Do you feel comfortable with asking the staff questions?

Tick (√) ONE answer you agree with.

a) Yes, I always can

b) No, I never can
c) I sometimes can
d) Don’t like to bother them

12. Sometimes staff have to cancel your visit. When it happens,

how do you FEEL? Tick (√) ONE answer you agree with.

a) It is a disappointment
b) It is OK.
c) It is upsetting
d) I don’t mind

13. Sometimes YOU have to cancel YOUR visit. How do you get
on? Tick (√) ONE answer you agree with.

a) I feel bad about it

b) It doesn’t matter
c) It is necessary sometimes
d) It can’t be avoided
e) I may have to be at home
 92

14. Do you think staff give you enough INFORMATION? Tick (√)
ONE answer you agree with.

a) It is OK as it is at the minute
b) They give too much information
c) No, I need more information
(Please write in what kind of information you need)
__________________________

15. Sometimes you have to get in touch with the Centre. How do
you get on? Tick (√) ONE you agree with

a) It is OK
b) It can be hard to get in touch
c) I don’t like leaving messages
d) At times I run out of phone credit

16 How do YOU FEEL after a visit to the Access Centre?

Please TICK (√) as MANY as you like.

a) Dreadful
b) Happy
c) Tired
d) Tearful
e) Hopeful
f) Sad
g) Frustrated
h) Annoyed
i) Satisfied
j) Nervous

17 Have a look at these statements underneath. TICK (√) ONE

answer you agree with.

a) I look forward to my next visit

(Please say why) _______________________

b) I hate the thought of my next visit

(Please say why) ________________________
 93

18. Remembering all that you have said, how do you feel
OVERALL about the Access centre? TICK (√) ONE answer you
agree with.

a) It’s awful
b) It’s good
c) It’s all right
d) It’s better than nothing
e) It’s better than MacDonalds

19. Is there anything ELSE you would like to say about the
centre? Please write it in the box underneath

Thank you for filling in this form. It will help us to make services better.
All your answers are private. Your name will not be used anywhere.
Please hand it back to a member of staff.
 94

Appendix “D”: FOSTER CARERS’ QUESTIONNAIRE

What do YOU think

about the Access Centre?

About this form …

We need your point of view. It will help to make the service better

Your answers are private and confidential. No name is required.

There are NO “right” or “wrong” answers – it’s YOUR opinion.

We want you to be as honest as you can be.

If you have any problems, ask a friend or someone you trust

to help you.
 95

1. How many children do you foster? _______

Children’s ages:(write in) Boys __________ Girls _________

2. How long have your foster children been using the access
centre? Please tick (√) ONE answer

Between 1 month and 3 months

Between 3 months and 6 months
Between 6 months and 9 months
Between 9 months and one year
More than one year

3. Have you ever visited the access centre?

Yes I have visited the centre

No I have not visited the centre
I have never been invited

4. The foster children in your care usually get picked up to go to

the centre. How do you feel about the pick up service? Please tick
(√) as many answers that you AGREE with:

I dislike it
I’d rather deliver them myself
I like it
It saves me time
My own children get upset
I don’t like to wait in for it
I like meeting the staff
My own children like it
The foster children like it
I don’t have to meet the parents
Anything else? (please write in)
_____________________________
 96

5).Sometimes you have to deliver or pick up children from the

access centre. Tick (√) any answers that you agree with.

I never delivered or picked up

I don’t like running into the parents
It takes a lot of time
Don’t like seeing the children upset
Picking up upsets my own children

6.Sometimes you have to deliver foster children for a supervised

visit somewhere else (not at the access Centre)?

I never delivered/picked up GO TO QUESTION 8

I delivered to social work offices

7. What was that like?

Please write in __________________

8. How do your foster children feel about the centre? Tick (√) as
MANY as you like

They like being at the centre

They don’t like being there
They find coming back upsetting
They find it good fun
They hate it when they leave
It’s a mixture of things

9. What are the good things about the access centre service?
Please write in.

_______________________________________
 97

10. What are the bad things about the access centre service?
Please write in. ____________________

11. Can we improve the Access Centre service to make it better

for YOU and your foster child? What would you CHANGE?
Tick (√) AS MANY as you like.

It is OK as it is
Different transport arrangements
Please specify _________
More frequent visits
Less frequent visits
More staff
More contact
More information
Anything else

12. Do you feel comfortable with asking the staff questions?

Tick (√) ONE answer you agree with.

Yes, I always can

No, I never can
I sometimes can
Don’t like to bother them

13. Sometimes staff have to cancel your visit. When it happens,

how do you FEEL? Tick (√) ONE answer you agree with.

It is a disappointment
It is OK.
It is upsetting
I don’t mind
 98

14. Sometimes YOU have to cancel YOUR visit. How do you get
on? Tick (√) ONE answer you agree with.

I feel bad about it

It doesn’t matter
It is necessary sometimes
It can’t be avoided

15. Do you think staff give you enough INFORMATION? Tick (√)
ONE answer you agree with.

d) It is OK as it is at the minute
e) They give too much information
f) No, I need more information
(Please write in what kind of information you need)
__________________________

16. Sometimes you have to get in touch with the Centre. How do
you get on? Tick (√) ONE you agree with

It is OK
It can be hard to get in touch
I don’t like leaving messages

17 How do YOU FEEL after your foster child’s visit to the

Access Centre? Please TICK (√) as MANY as you like.

Concerned
Pleased
Hopeful
Sad
Frustrated
Annoyed
Satisfied
Anxious
 99

18. Remembering all that you have said, how do you feel
OVERALL about the Access centre? TICK (√) ONE answer you
agree with.

It’s awful
It’s good
It’s all right
It’s better than nothing

19. Is there anything ELSE you would like to say about the
centre? Please write it in the box underneath

Thank you for filling in this form. It will help us to make services
better. All your answers are private. Your name will not be used
anywhere. Please hand it back to a member of staff.
 100

Appendix “E”: SOCIAL WORKERS QUESTIONNAIRE

Access Centre Project

SOCIAL WORKERS
PRELIMINARY QUESTIONNAIRE
 101

INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETION

This questionnaire consists of almost entirely of open-ended qualitative

questions. However, if you have any numerical figures or indicators that might
be useful to explore at this stage could you please indicate what these are
and in what form they are held – case load statistics etc.

The answers will be used to help build the research project so it should be
treated as preliminary exercise. I will hold the answers as confidential so
[please be as forthright as you feel is appropriate

If you mention individual cases as examples, please don’t use the actual
names. Case A, Case B is acceptable. This is to safeguard the confidentiality
of the clients,

If you envisage any problem regarding what constitutes an “access case” the
following will apply: " any case involving children access that requires social
worker arrangements will be regarded as an access case for the purpose of
this exercise. I am envisaging that multi problem families may present
categorisation problems.

If you need any help with answering the questions, please do not hesitate to
give me a ring on any of the numbers on the cover. Leave a message and I
will return your call as soon as possible

Please put your reply in the envelope provided and either give it to Mary
O’Loan or post it back to me at Virtual Image Research Consultants, Units 4-
5, 14 Elgin rd Dublin 4

If you would prefer to use your co0mputer, I am happy to send the Word file
for completion and return by email. We are at virtual@ireland.com

The questionnaires should be returned within three weeks of receipt. If there

are any difficulties, please call me!”

Thank you for your help!

 102

ACCESS CENTRE
SOCIAL WORKERS QUESTIONNAIRE

Name _____________________

Position ___________________

a) How long have you worked in your current position?

b) What are your current arrangements for access?

c) For how many children do you make access arrangements? What

percentage of your overall caseload does that comprise?

In numbers

In hours

d) For how many families do you make access arrangements?

 103

e) On average, how many hours in your working week do access cases

take?

Preparation time
Travel time
Contact time
Review time

f) What percentage of your total hours worked do access cases take?

g) What are the best aspects of the current arrangements?

I. For yourself

II. For the children

III. For their families

h) What are the worst aspects of these arrangements?

I. For yourself

II. For the children

III. For their families

i) Are there any ways in which these arrangements can be improved?

j) In what ways would the availability of an access centre affect your work

(e.g. Time management, workload, etc.)

 104

k) In what ways would the availability of an access centre affect the

children?

l) In what way would this affect the families/guardians/parents?

m) When the access centre is in operation are there any anticipated cost
(financial) changes that you can foresee.?

n) When the access centre is in operation are there any anticipated

resource (non-financial) changes that you can foresee.?

o) In an ideal world, what arrangements and resources should be in

pace for child and parent access?

p) Is there anything else that you would like to mention (which you
feel is important)?
 105

Please use this space to say anything you like about the issues discussed in
your questionnaire: hopes, worries, concerns or anything that you think was
missed in the questions on the other pages. This is a useful space for
exploring or sharing ideas about access centre arrangements, objectives,
protocols and so on.

Thanks for your time!