Considerations in the use of local and national data for evaluating innovation in children’s social care

IF 1.4 Q2 SOCIAL WORK
O. Preston, R. Godar, M. Lefevre, Janet Boddy, C. Firmin
{"title":"Considerations in the use of local and national data for evaluating innovation in children’s social care","authors":"O. Preston, R. Godar, M. Lefevre, Janet Boddy, C. Firmin","doi":"10.1108/JCS-12-2020-0081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to explore the possibilities in using such national, statutory data sets for evaluating change and the challenges of understanding service patterns and outcomes in complex cases when only a limited view can be gained using existing data. The discussion also explores how methodologies can adapt to an evaluation in these circumstances.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis paper examines the use of data routinely collected by local authorities (LAs) as part of the evaluation of innovation. Issues entailed are discussed and illustrated through two case studies of evaluations conducted by the research team within the context of children’s social care in England.\n\n\nFindings\nThe quantitative analysis of LA data can play an important role in evaluating innovation but researchers will need to address challenges related to: selection of a suitable methodology; identifying appropriate comparator data; accessing data and assessing its quality; and sustaining and increasing the value of analytic work beyond the end of the research. Examples are provided of how the two case studies experienced and addressed these challenges.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\n• Quasi-experimental methods can be beneficial tools for understanding the impact of innovation in children’s services, but researchers should also consider the complexity of children’s social care and the use of mixed and appropriate methods. • Those funding innovative practice should consider the additional burden on those working with data and the related data infrastructure if wishing to document and analyse innovation in a robust way. • Data, which may be assumed to be uniform may in fact not be when considered at a multi-area or national level, and further study of the data recording practice of social care professionals is required.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe paper discusses some common issues experienced in quasi-experimental approaches to the quantitative evaluation of children’s services, which have, until recently, been rarely used in the sector. There are important considerations, which are of relevance to researchers, service leads in children’s social care, data and performance leads and funders of innovation.\n","PeriodicalId":45244,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Childrens Services","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Childrens Services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JCS-12-2020-0081","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to explore the possibilities in using such national, statutory data sets for evaluating change and the challenges of understanding service patterns and outcomes in complex cases when only a limited view can be gained using existing data. The discussion also explores how methodologies can adapt to an evaluation in these circumstances. Design/methodology/approach This paper examines the use of data routinely collected by local authorities (LAs) as part of the evaluation of innovation. Issues entailed are discussed and illustrated through two case studies of evaluations conducted by the research team within the context of children’s social care in England. Findings The quantitative analysis of LA data can play an important role in evaluating innovation but researchers will need to address challenges related to: selection of a suitable methodology; identifying appropriate comparator data; accessing data and assessing its quality; and sustaining and increasing the value of analytic work beyond the end of the research. Examples are provided of how the two case studies experienced and addressed these challenges. Research limitations/implications • Quasi-experimental methods can be beneficial tools for understanding the impact of innovation in children’s services, but researchers should also consider the complexity of children’s social care and the use of mixed and appropriate methods. • Those funding innovative practice should consider the additional burden on those working with data and the related data infrastructure if wishing to document and analyse innovation in a robust way. • Data, which may be assumed to be uniform may in fact not be when considered at a multi-area or national level, and further study of the data recording practice of social care professionals is required. Originality/value The paper discusses some common issues experienced in quasi-experimental approaches to the quantitative evaluation of children’s services, which have, until recently, been rarely used in the sector. There are important considerations, which are of relevance to researchers, service leads in children’s social care, data and performance leads and funders of innovation.
在使用地方和国家数据评价儿童社会关怀创新方面的考虑
目的本文旨在探索使用此类国家法定数据集评估变化的可能性,以及在使用现有数据只能获得有限观点的复杂情况下理解服务模式和结果的挑战。讨论还探讨了在这种情况下,方法论如何适应评估。设计/方法论/方法本文研究了地方当局(LA)定期收集的数据的使用情况,作为创新评估的一部分。通过研究团队在英国儿童社会护理背景下进行的两项评估案例研究,讨论并说明了所涉及的问题。结果LA数据的定量分析可以在评估创新方面发挥重要作用,但研究人员需要解决以下方面的挑战:选择合适的方法;识别适当的比较器数据;获取数据并评估其质量;以及在研究结束后保持和增加分析工作的价值。提供了两个案例研究如何经历和应对这些挑战的例子。研究局限性/影响•准实验方法可能是理解儿童服务创新影响的有益工具,但研究人员也应考虑儿童社会护理的复杂性以及混合和适当方法的使用。•如果希望以稳健的方式记录和分析创新,那些为创新实践提供资金的人应该考虑数据和相关数据基础设施工作人员的额外负担。•当在多个地区或国家层面考虑时,可能被认为是统一的数据实际上可能不是统一的,需要对社会护理专业人员的数据记录实践进行进一步研究。原创性/价值本文讨论了对儿童服务进行定量评估的准实验方法中遇到的一些常见问题,直到最近,这些方法在该部门很少使用。有一些重要的考虑因素,与研究人员、儿童社会护理服务负责人、数据和绩效负责人以及创新资助者有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信