Assessment or referral tool: the unintended consequences of a dual purpose common assessment framework form

References

• Adamson, S., & Deverell, C. (2009). CAF in the country: Implementing the common assessment framework in a rural area. Child & Family Social Work, 14(4), 400–409. doi:10.1111/cfs.2009.14.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, G. (2011). Early Intervention: The next steps an independent report to her majesty’s government. Retrieved from http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/early-intervention-next-steps.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Allen, G., & Duncan Smith, I. (2008). Early intervention: Good parents, great kids, better citizens. London, UK: Centre for Social Justice and the Smith Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes, M, & Morris, K. (2008). Strategies for the prevention of social exclusion: an analysis of the children's fund. Journal of Social Policy, 37(2), 251–270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandon, M., Howe, A., Dagley, V., Salter, C., & Warren, C. (2006). What appears to be helping or hindering practitioners in implementing the common assessment framework and lead professional working? Child Abuse Review, 15(6), 396–413. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0852
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
   Google Scholar
• Burr, V. (1999). An introduction to social constructionism. New York, USA: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Children Act. (1989). Children Act. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• Children Act. (2004). Children Act. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• Children’s Commissioner. (2019). Estimating children’s services spending o vulnerable children. Vulnerability technical spend report. London, UK: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Children’s Workforce Development Council. (2009). Early identification, assessment of needs and intervention. The common assessment framework for children and young people. A guide for practitioners. London, UK: The Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, F., & McCray, J. (2012). Partnership working in services for children: Use of the common assessment framework. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 26(2), 134–140. doi:10.3109/13561820.2011.630111
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corby, B. (2006). The role of child care social work in supporting families with children in need and providing protective services—Past, present and future. Child Abuse Review, 15(3), 159–177. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0852
   Google Scholar
• Cresswell, J. & Clark, V. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). London UK: Sage Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Department for Children Schools and Families (2009). 14-19 Briefing making change happen. London, UK: Crown Copyright.
   Google Scholar
• Department for Education. (2012). Early intervention grant FAQs. London, UK: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Department for Education and Skills (2004). Every child matters: Change for children. London, UK: Crown Copyright.
   Google Scholar
• Department for Education and Skills. (2006). Common assessment framework for children and young people: Practitioners’ guide. Integrated working for to improve outcomes for children and young people. Leeds, UK: Children’s Workforce Development Council.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health (2000). Framework for the assessment of children in need and their families. London, UK: The Stationery Office Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Early Intervention Foundation. (2018). Realising the potential of early intervention. London, UK: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Economic and Social Research Council. (2010). Framework for Research Ethics (FRE). Swindon, UK: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Family Rights Group. (2018). Care crisis review options for change. London, UK: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Featherstone, B., & Manby, M. (2006). Working with families: Messages for policy and practice from an evaluation of a school-based project. Children & Society, 20(1), 30–39.
   Google Scholar
• Featherstone, B., Morris, K., & White, S. (2013). A marriage made in Hell: Early intervention meets child protection. British Journal of Social Work 20 (1), 30–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilligan, P., & Manby, M. (2008). The common assessment framework: Does the reality match the rhetoric? Child & Family Social Work, 13(2), 177–187. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2206.2007.00530.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes, L., & McDermid, S. (2016). The common assessment framework: The impact of the lead professional on families and professionals as part of a continuum of care in England. Child and Family Social Work, 21, 530–538. doi:10.1111/cfs.v21.4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houston, S. (2001). Beyond social constructionism: Critical realism and social work. British Journal of Social Work, 31(6), 845. doi:10.1093/bjsw/31.6.845
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lucas, S. (2017). A children’s space? Participation in multi-agency early intervention. Child and Family Social Work, 22, 1383–1390. doi:10.1111/cfs.v22.4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris, K. (2012). Family support: Policies for practice, In Davies, M. (Ed.), Social work with children and families. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave and Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Munro, E. (2011). The munro review of child protection: Final report. A child-centred system. London, UK: Crown Copyright.
   Google Scholar
• New Economics Foundation. (2009). Backing the future: Why investing in children is good for us all. London, UK: Author.
   Google Scholar
• New Economics Foundation. (2012). The wisdom of prevention long-term planning, upstream investment and early action to prevent harm. London, UK: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Parton, N. (2003). Rethinking professional practice: The contributions of social constructionism and the feminist ‘ethics of care. British Journal of Social Work, 33(1), 1–16. doi:10.1093/bjsw/33.1.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Payne, M. (1997). Modern social work theory. London, UK: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Pithouse, A., Hall, C., Peckover, S., & White, S. (2009). A tale of two CAFs: The impact of the electronic common assessment framework. British Journal of Social Work, 39(4), 599–612. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcp020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahin, F. (2006). Implications of social constructionism for social work. Asia Pacific Journal of Social Work & Development (Department of Social Work, National University of Singapore), 16(1), 57–65. doi:10.1080/21650993.2006.9755992
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Schon, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco, CA, USA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Schwandt, T. (2003). ‘Three epistemological stances for qualittaive inquiry: Interpretivism, hermeneutics and social constructionism.’. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (pp. 189–213). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sheppard, M. (2009). Social support use as a parental coping strategy: Its impact on outcome of child and parenting problems-A six month follow up. British Journal of Social Work, 39, 1427–1446. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcn084
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Social Exclusion Task Force. (2007). Reaching out: Think family. London, UK: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Sodha, S. (2009). Kidulthood: Life as a pre-teen in the UK today. Retrieved from http://www.actionforchildren.org.uk/uploads/media/36/8702.pdf
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. Geneva: United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• White, S., Hall, C., & Peckover, S. (2009). The descriptive tyranny of the common assessment framework: Technologies of categorization and professional practice in child welfare. British Journal of Social Work, 39(7), 1197–1217. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcn053
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar