Search

ABSTRACT This paper explores how seven organisations from the children's social care sector in England adapted their service during the Covid‐19 pandemic restrictions to better meet the needs of young people experiencing extra‐familial risks and harms. Particularly, it focuses on these organisations' experience of attempting to transform services in a unique crisis context and considers what insights this situated study offers into the processes of innovation and practice improvement in the sector. Twelve respondents from these seven organisations participated in semi‐structured interviews, which were analysed both narratively and thematically. Six of these participants were interviewed longitudinally over 6 months, enabling consideration of barriers encountered within their innovation journeys and the factors and conditions that facilitated the process. From these, three longitudinal narrative accounts were selected, highlighting themes emblematic of the overall dataset. The findings indicate that, unencumbered by the usual constraints of bureaucracy, organisations could adapt service provision with unprecedented speed, to respond in more youth‐centred and welfare‐oriented ways to young people's needs. Rapid cycles of iterative development in response to young people's feedback suggested a surprising potential for agility and responsivity in the children's services sector, raising questions about whether and how this might be mobilised outside of crisis conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the synergies between relationship‐based practice and contextual safeguarding when working with young people experiencing extra‐familial risk and harm (EFRH). The article draws on data from interviews, observations, policy reviews and case files from two sites in England who are testing contextual safeguarding approaches to EFRH, including a children and families social work department and a voluntary and community sector organisation. The findings evidence how relationship‐based practice in contextual safeguarding facilitates practitioners' understanding of places and their peers. The discussion draws on the theory of social defences to evidence that despite willingness and commitment to relationship‐based practice, without systemic and cultural organisational support to respond to EFRH, efforts to do so may undermine and cause harm to practitioners engaging in this work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]