Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T00:15:49.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mobility within the Childcare Workforce: Evidence for a New Policy?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2008

JUNE STATHAM ,
JULIA BRANNEN  and
ANN MOONEY
JUNE STATHAM
Affiliation:
[Qcontact author] Professor of Education and Family Support, Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, 27/28 Woburn Square, London WC1H 0AA. Email [email protected]
JULIA BRANNEN
Affiliation:
Professor in the Sociology of the Family, Thomas Coram Research Unit
ANN MOONEY
Affiliation:
Senior Research Officer, Thomas Coram Research Unit
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article presents findings from a three-year government-funded study of the work and family lives of four important groups within the childcare workforce in England: residential social workers in children's homes, family support workers, foster carers and community childminders. The study used a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods, including biographical narrative interviews. The policy context of the Children's Workforce Strategy is discussed, focusing particularly on the government's aim to develop greater integration between different types of work with children and the creation of a more flexible childcare workforce. The article then draws together findings from the study to argue that although the planned integrated qualifications framework may assist mobility within the childcare workforce, other factors also need to be taken into account. The choice to engage in particular types of childcare work is often linked to factors such as life stage, preferred age of child, preferred working environment and the worker's own background and needs. This suggests the need for more targeted recruitment, matching people to type of work, and for more attention to be paid to the connections between work and family life. The study does provide some evidence of transferable skills and movement over time between types of work with children, and demonstrates the importance of seeing the life-course as presenting opportunities for childcare employment rather than being an obstacle.

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , April 2008 , pp. 295 - 309
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aldgate, J. and Bradley, M. (1999), Supporting Families Through Short-Term Fostering, London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Bebbington, A. and Miles, J. (1990), ‘The supply of foster families for children in care’, British Journal of Social Work, 20: 4, 283–307.Google Scholar
Brannen, J., Statham, J., Mooney, A. and Brockmann, M. (2007), Coming to Care: The Work and Family Lives of Workers Caring for Vulnerable Children, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Cameron, C., Owen, C. and Moss, P. (2001), Entry, Retention and Loss: A Study of Childcare Students and Workers, London: DfEE.Google Scholar
Children's Workforce Development Council (CWDC) (2006), ‘Recruitment, retention and rewards in the children's workforce’, http://www.cwdcouncil.org.uk/projects/rrr.htmGoogle Scholar
Deakin, G. and Kelly, G. (2006), ‘Children's Workforce Research’, DfES Research Report No. 716, http://www.dfes.gov.uk/researchCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eborall, C. (2005), The State of the Social Care Workforce 2004, The second skills research and intelligence annual report, Leeds: Skills for Care.Google Scholar
Fostering Network (2004), ‘Shortage of foster carers reaches critical levels’, Press release 24 August 2004 http://www.fostering.net/news.Google Scholar
Harrison, A. (2006), ‘The Children's Workforce Development Council and Residential Child Care Staff ’, National Centre for Excellence in Residential Child Care Conference proceedings, Issue 21, 17–19, http://www.ncb.org.uk/ncercc/20060428ncerccnewsletter.pdfGoogle Scholar
HM Government (2003), Every Child Matters, London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
HM Government (2005a), Children's Workforce Strategy, Nottingham: DfES.Google Scholar
HM Government (2005b), Common Core of Skills and Knowledge for the Children's Workforce, Nottingham: DfES.Google Scholar
Laming, Lord (2003), The Victoria Climbié Inquiry Report, London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Local Government Association (LGA) (2006), ‘Adult, Children and Young People Local Authority Social Care Workforce Survey 2005’, Report No. 36, Social Care Workforce Series, http://www.lgar.local.gov.ukGoogle Scholar
Mooney, A., Knight, A., Moss, P. and Owen, C. (2001), Who Cares? Childminding in the 1990s, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Morgan, R. (2005), Being Fostered: A National Survey of Foster Children, Foster Carers and Birth Parents, London: CSCI.Google Scholar
Topss England (2003), Integrated and Qualified: Workforce Development for Effective Delivery of Services to Vulnerable Children and Young People, and Those Who Care for Them, Leeds: Topss England.Google Scholar
Wengraf, T. (2001), Qualitative Research Interviewing: Biographic Narrative and Semi-Structured Methods, London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar