Brief No: RB521
March 2004
ISBN 1 84478 201 8
DEVELOPING IDENTIFICATION, REFERRAL AND TRACKING
SYSTEMS: AN EVALUATION OF THE PROCESSES UNDERTAKEN
BY TRAILBLAZER AUTHORITIES – EARLY FINDINGS
Professor Hedy Cleaver, Julie Barnes, David Bliss and Deborah Cleaver
Royal Holloway, University of London
Introduction
Information Sharing and Assessment aims to ensure that all children at risk of social exclusion are identified early,
referred to appropriate services, and monitored through improved information sharing between agencies, professionals and
supporting operational processes. The Department for Education and Skills gave ten local authorities, pairings or groups of
neighbouring authorities, £1 million each to develop innovative approaches to information sharing and multi-agency working.
These ‘trailblazers’ are working closely with the national team to refine the longer term policy for Information Sharing and
Assessment. The lessons learnt from the IRT projects will be used to support and inform the other 135 local authorities in
their implementation of Information Sharing and Assessment.
The research is taking place over one year and has two main aims: i) To explore how the trailblazers are delivering services,
including an examination of the mechanisms and systems that have been put in place; and ii) To explore the development
processes the trailblazers have gone through to establish the new mechanisms and systems for the delivery of the services.
The study is being carried out in two stages. The first stage explores what the trailblazers are delivering, how these
approaches were developed, and identifies common themes in relation to what works, facilitators and barriers. A variety of
methods have been used to gather information including: a scrutiny of documentary evidence such as training manuals,
toolkits, information sharing protocols, and project plans; interviews with project managers and stakeholders; regional
workshops to bring together key stakeholders from neighbouring IRT trailblazers.
This is a summary of the interim report which draws the initial findings together. The second stage of the work has yet to
be undertaken and will follow-up themes and issues identified during stage one and explore in greater depth the strategies
that were particularly successful in implementing IRT.
Key Findings and Messages
Trailblazer managers and other stakeholders identified a number of key messages they wished to give the 135 local
authorities to support them in their implementation of Information Sharing and Assessment. These can be summarised
under five headings, context, vision, management, people and partnerships.
Understanding the context

Establish a clear starting point – don’t rely on hearsay
Creating the vision and Managing the project

Start small, keep it simple and build up from there

Make marketing and communication a priority – you need to sell IRT

Have a designated project manager with authority and credibility
Engaging people and developing partnerships

Involve practitioners from all agencies early

Stakeholders need to get involved early – don’t wait to be asked
Project managers and other stakeholders were particularly keen for authorities to remember the following:

Stay child focussed

Talk to families and young people

It’s okay not to know all the answers – take the plunge together!

The journey is as important as the destination

Acknowledge, celebrate and build on what you already do well
The context of the trailblazers
The local authorities were all high performers in relation
to children’s social services and education prior to gaining
trailblazer status.
In many authorities partnership
arrangements between relevant organisations were
already in place. However, although working effectively in
isolation, there were difficulties in ensuring different
partnerships shared the same objectives and linked
effectively with one another. The IRT status was seen as
a potential driver and incentive to overcome these
difficulties.
The importance of information sharing was generally
recognised by all the authorities prior to becoming a
trailblazer. There were a number of existing protocols
and procedures covering information sharing but these
were either intra-agency, between a limited number of
agencies, or in relation to a specific issue. No authority
had protocols that covered information sharing between
all relevant agencies.
Prior to gaining trailblazer status agencies within the
authorities had limited access to ICT facilities, the level
of computer literacy amongst front-line staff in
different agencies varied, and systems in different
organisations were unable to communicate with each
other.
A number of trailblazers saw a successful
application to gain trailblazers status as an incentive to
improve and develop an innovative ICT solutions. There
was wide variation in the extent to which children and
young people were involved in planning and developing
services within the authorities prior to them becoming
trailblazers.
Authorities applied for trailblazer status because they
saw a number of real benefits, including the impetus and
resource IRT would provide to:





respond to the recommendations of earlier reviews;
co-ordinate and develop existing initiatives;
re-inforce
existing,
or
develop
new
joint
arrangements;
continue with, or enable the development of ICT
solutions to support joint working arrangements;
gain direct access to DfES in order to influence
policy.
Applications to become a trailblazer were co-ordinated by
local councils and involved representatives from
education, social services, health and Connexions; other
agencies were not generally included.
The current position of the trailblazers
The main task for the trailblazers was to test out
innovative approaches to improve information sharing
between relevant agencies in order to identify vulnerable
children and safeguard and promote their wellbeing.
A key aspect of information sharing is to establish a
common language and a common assessment framework.
Most trailblazers based their common assessment
framework on the Framework for the Assessment of
Children in Need and their Families published in 2000 by
the Department of Health, Department of Education and
Skills, and the Home Office. To achieve agreement on a
common assessment framework trailblazers consulted
widely with professionals from a range of different
disciplines and organisations. Practitioners saw two major
advantages in adopting a common assessment framework.
First, it would reduce unnecessary assessments for
children, and second, it would help them identify issues in
children’s development that were outside their own area
of expertise.
Although Lord Laming’s report, the Government’s
response and the Green Paper have all raised the profile
of information sharing in relation to children and families,
it is an issue of major concern to practitioners.
Practitioners are uncertain about what information they
can legally share with one another and in what
circumstances.
Strategies used by trailblazers to
increase practitioners’ knowledge and confidence were:

training;

the production of protocols;

seeking legal guidance.
Most trailblazers reported that the majority of young
people they asked, accept the need for agencies to share
information about them and are only surprised that it is
not being done anyway.
One way of improving information sharing when more than
one agency is involved with a child and family, is to
introduce a policy of using ‘lead professionals’ who are
responsible
for
co-ordinating
service
provision.
Trailblazers are taking different approaches to the
selection of lead professionals, some allow young people
to choose, others nominate the professional who first
registers that a child has needs, while in others a multiagency team appoints the lead professional.
To increase information sharing and better co-ordination
between different agencies some trailblazers are
introducing multi-agency meetings for children with low
levels of concern.
Co-ordinating and chairing these
meetings will be new to many professionals. Trailblazers
are providing training and tools to give practitioners the
necessary skills and confidence to do this.
Computer systems can support practice in relation to
information sharing and monitoring vulnerable children.
Trailblazers have taken different approaches to using
ICT and the degree of sophistication is related to the
circumstances of individual authorities. Key features of
trailblazers’ current or planned computer systems are:

a child index

the identity of agencies working with a child




need markers or alert flags
on-line referrals
practice monitoring
out-puts for service planning
The projects’ development
Every trailblazer had to consider how best to integrate
IRT with other government initiatives. The most popular
strategy was to establish a dedicated IRT management
structure and steering group, although one trailblazer
had taken a different approach and integrated IRT into a
wider Integrated Services Project. A project manager
and IRT team is responsible for the day to day work and
answerable to the steering group.
But regardless of the type of management structure, the
following features were key to its success:



senior level management commitment at an agency
and inter-agency level;
an IRT team that includes representatives from all
relevant agencies who can promote IRT within their
own agency as well as speak on behalf of their agency
or profession;
a full-time project manager at a sufficiently senior
level to plan, co-ordinate, steer and promote IRT.
Being a trailblazer for a successful IRT project depends
on informing relevant agencies and organisations about
IRT and gaining their commitment to implement it.
Trailblazers used a combination of methods to achieve
this, including:





multi-agency conferences, meetings and workshops;
single agency conferences and meetings;
presentations at team meetings in relevant agencies
and organisations;
existing and specifically designed newsletters;
champions based within different agencies and
organisations.
All the trailblazers were keen to inform, consult, and
involve young people and communities in the development
of IRT. This was generally undertaken once trailblazers
had developed a clear idea of what IRT would mean in
their authority.
Several are currently (or planning)
informing and consulting with young people via a variety of
methods. For example, trailblazers are taking advantage
of existing channels such as web-sites and newsletters
and using school council meetings, as well as developing
new ones such as running publicity stalls, and theatre
workshops.
Alongside the consultation with young people, trailblazers
are, or plan to, consult and involve specialist groups, such
as Bangladeshi, Muslim, Jewish and traveller communities,
to ensure issues of diversity and equality are addressed
within the IRT projects.
To ensure that staff will understand any newly
established policy, procedures and practice guidance
introduced to support IRT, trailblazers are setting up
training programmes. In the trailblazers where training
is already underway the plans suggest most are taking an
iterative approach that is accompanied by well-designed
toolkits and other supportive materials.
To support the introduction of IRT approximately half
the trailblazers have taken advantage of the expertise of
outside consultants. Most commonly consultants have
advised on: technical issues and ICT systems, information
sharing, auditing, and training.
Early achievements and obstacles overcome
All the trailblazers were able to identify a number of
early successes in developing IRT during their pre-pilot
stage. These include:




a clear vision for IRT that was achievable, agreed
with partner agencies and integrated with other child
care initiatives;
gaining the commitment of councillors, senior
managers and practitioners to the development of
IRT;
securing the involvement and engagement of a wide
range of people from all the relevant agencies, in the
development of IRT;
a range of products to support IRT, such as service
directories, protocols, toolkits and pilot plans.
These early achievements were facilitated by a number
of issues. For example, the funding enabled sufficient
flexibility and purchasing power, and the willingness of
agencies to second knowledgeable and experienced staff
meant that IRT worked effectively and efficiently. In
addition, it was acknowledge that the willingness of senior
staff to take risks, and the enthusiasm of practitioners,
led to innovative IRT developments and helped to
overcome problems of information sharing. Finally, the
publication of the Green Paper was seen as timely because
it raised the profile of IRT for all professionals working
with children.
Project managers also identified obstacles
threatened their projects. These included:


that
The short term nature of the national funding and
difficulties in securing local resources.
This
impacted on the ability to plan long term, recruit
staff and ensure that what they were establishing
would be sustainable.
The continuing ambiguity over legal aspects of
information sharing. This has held up the progress of
establishing IRT projects in some trailblazers, and

resulted in time-consuming and complex discussions
with legal advisers.
Local practicalities have also impacted on project
development. For example, difficulties in locating
project teams together, inconsistent representation
at project meetings due to resource pressures within
agencies, dealing with bureaucracy, and resistance to
change.
Particular solutions for identified barriers and obstacles
are presented for each workstream (organisational,
professional, legal and technical) within the main report
(pp8-11 of the executive summary, and pp92-95 of the
main report).
Additional messages for other local authorities
Understanding the context

Be clear about what you are doing, who you need to
involve and how it fits with your strategy for
children’s services.

Understand the implications of what you are doing,
for example, the legislation.

Don’t underestimate the impact of cultural change,
Creating the vision

Be clear what you are trying to achieve and define it.

Clarify the values to which you are working and the
outcomes you want.

Think people and organisation first, not ICT systems.
Managing the project

Start early; don’t rush it.

Ensure that you have robust project management
arrangements.

‘Buy-in’ and leadership from members and senior
officers is vital.

Be clear with the Project Steering Group that they
are not just there to listen.

Have a multi-agency team leading the project.
Engaging people

Do the ‘hearts and minds’ stuff first – it’s important.

Start with where people are and bring them along.

It’s not the tools that matter but what you do with
them.
Developing partnerships

Partnerships must be real.

Involve as many people as possible.
The challenge ahead
All of the trailblazers have begun or are preparing to run
their pilots to test out the systems and processes they
have been developing. In doing this they will focus on
training, preparing and supporting the staff in making the
vision a reality, and steering the implementation through
the inevitable obstacles and opportunities. These pilots
will be evaluated to learn what has worked well and what
can be improved in the wider implementation in each
authority. Keeping up momentum and making the changes
sustainable will be a major task for the trailblazers.
Many of the other 135 local authorities have begun
developing Information Sharing and Assessment
programmes. The experience of the trailblazers will be
available to help them, through this interim report and
through the various local and regional mechanisms. For
them, the early tasks will be finding ways to engage and
keep the support of their managers and practitioners and
prioritising the use of their limited resources.
The pace of change in government policy and guidance is a
challenge for all authorities. Keeping the focus on
children during the development of Information Sharing
and Assessment will help both practitioners and managers
to overcome the challenges ahead..
Additional Information
Copies of the full report (RR521) - priced £4.95 - are
available by writing to DfES Publications, PO Box 5050,
Sherwood Park, Annesley, Nottingham NG15 0DJ.
Cheques should be made payable to “DfES Priced
Publications”.
Copies of this Research Brief (RB521) are available free
of charge from the above address (tel: 0845 60 222 60).
Research Briefs and Research Reports can also be
accessed at www.dfes.gov.uk/research/
Further information about this research can be obtained
from Adam Cooper, AS: Supporting Children and Families
Team, Level 4, DfES, Caxton House, Tothill Street,
London SW1H 9NA.
Email: [email protected]
The views expressed in this report are the authors’ and
do not necessarily reflect those of the Department for
Education and Skills.