Search results for ‘Subject term:"personalisation"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Reflections on the utilisation of 'universalist' discourse in contemporary English policy on adult social care
- Author:
- SCOURFIELD Peter
- Journal article citation:
- Critical and Radical Social Work, 2(3), 2014, pp.371-380.
- Publisher:
- Policy Press
References to 'universal services' in social policy are historically associated with social-democratic welfare regimes. However, neoliberal-influenced policy initiatives aimed at 'transforming' adult social care in England talk a lot about local authorities enabling access to 'universal services'. This commentary reflects critically on the effects of policy makers and service providers referencing universalism in ways that are often confused and that have become decoupled from their original meanings in social policy. It discusses the use of the term 'universal services' on four local authority websites to highlight this lack of clarity. Usage can include public services that are free at the point of delivery eg health; services that are paid for at the point of delivery eg transport; as well as services that are available through the market or subsidised by the state eg housing. (Edited publisher abstract)
Implementing co-production in adult social care: an example of meta-governance failure?
- Author:
- SCOURFIELD Peter
- Journal article citation:
- Social Policy and Society, 14(4), 2015, pp.541-554.
- Publisher:
- Cambridge University Press
The idea of ‘co-production’ has been promoted by both New Labour and Coalition governments as a means to help ‘transform’ adult social care. With its emphasis on active citizenship, community support networks, voluntary effort and power sharing, the idea might have been expected to have been received more enthusiastically by those expected to put it into practice and benefit from it. However, unlike other ‘big ideas’ intended to ‘transform’ adult social care, such as ‘personal budgets’, co-production has gained comparatively little traction with either local authorities or service users. Despite the publication of much promotional literature in recent years, co-production has not yet become a significant part of either official or lay discourse on adult social care. It is concluded that apart from definitional problems and conceptual ambiguity, the inability of successive governments to effectively deploy common techniques of meta-governance might also be contributory factors to its sluggish take up. (Publisher abstract)
Going for brokerage: a task of ‘independent support’ or social work?
- Author:
- SCOURFIELD Peter
- Journal article citation:
- British Journal of Social Work, 40(3), April 2010, pp.858-877.
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
It is argued that for the agenda to personalise social care in the UK to be successful, adequate systems of independent support or brokerage need to be in place to ensure that individual funding schemes such as Direct Payments work effectively for those that receive them. Therefore, where brokerage is situated organisationally and ideologically is not inconsequential, both in terms of the accountability, profile and quality of the brokers and the extent to which service users can feel properly in control of their own care or support. Many involved in support brokerage argue that independence from statutory bodies is a key principle. However, models of support brokerage have been suggested that propose brokerage as a possible function of the statutory social care sector. The paper traces how and why the new language of brokerage has emerged in official discourses of adult social care. It also discusses the various ideas about what brokerage is and who is supposed to undertake it. It is considered whether support brokerage should be regarded as a form of social work, which is not currently the case. Were independent support brokerage to expand its role in the adult social care system, the question would arise of where that would leave social work with adults. These developments expose conflicts and tensions in New Labour's modernisation agenda.