Skip Navigation



BJSW Advance Access published online on October 3, 2005
British Journal of Social Work, doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch250
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
36/1/41    most recent
bch250v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wigfall, V.
Right arrow Articles by Reynolds, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The British Association of Social Workers. All rights reserved.

Article

Putting Programme into Practice: The Introduction of Concurrent Planning into Mainstream Adoption and Fostering Services

Valerie Wigfall *, Elizabeth Monck , and Jill Reynolds

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Valerie Wigfall, E-mail: v.wigfall{at}ioe.ac.uk


  Abstract

Originating in Seattle, USA, in the early 1980s, concurrent planning aimed to speed the placement of children into permanent families, either birth or substitute, and to reduce overall the time spent in impermanent care. When the first pilot concurrent planning project was introduced in the UK in 1998, independent evaluation was a requirement of government funding. The evaluation was expanded to include two additional projects when the number of initial referrals failed to meet the projected target. This paper looks beyond the successful outcomes of the pilot projects, focusing instead on the local authority context in order to explore some of the difficulties in setting up such an innovative programme, and to shed light on why concurrent planning appeared slow to take off. Based primarily on interviews conducted with social workers at different levels of responsibility, the researchers encountered a steep learning curve for all the professionals. The research findings indicated positive outcomes for the children placed through concurrent planning, but limited understanding of the concept of concurrent planning, uncertainty in the division of responsibilities, and failure to take up preparation and training opportunities contributed to the initial slow progress in the incorporation of the programme.

Keywords: looked after children, concurrent planning, adoption, fostering, permanence.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
J. W. Ross, L. Hooper, E. Stenhouse, and R. Sheaff
What Are Child-Care Social Workers Doing in Relation to Infant Mental Health? An Exploration of Professional Ideologies and Practice Preferences within an Inter-Agency Context
Br. J. Soc. Work, March 26, 2008; (2008) bcn029v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.