The Promise Scotland – a strategy set up to help implement the 2020 Scottish Care Review recommendations – recently launched Plan 24-30. This is intended as a roadmap for Scotland’s institutions and organisations to follow, to ensure that The Promise is put into effective practice. This is not the first plan. Indeed, the overall plan for The Promise – that every child grows up loved, safe, and respected – began in 2020 and is destined to end in 2030. The first plan, Plan 21-24 has already come and is pretty much gone. It may come as no surprise to those who follow Scotland’s progress when it comes to the implementation of social policy, that this plan has not been realised.
Plan 21-24 came from the same people involved in implementing the Scottish Care Review. Fiona Duncan, current strategic advisor to the Scottish Government and Chair of The Promise Scotland board of directors, along with a small group of others, continued the work begun during the review. Following wide consultation, they devised an implementation plan for all those involved (including themselves) to follow. It was reasoned that without such a follow-up the review would be in danger of ending up like so many past reviews. Too often, reviews have fallen by the wayside. The various systems have struggled to make the necessary changes – we know they often serve themselves; recommendations are not acted on and there is rarely the positive change proposed.
Failure of past promises
It is to her credit that Fiona Duncan decided to continue and is determined to see things through. I am in no doubt that she was influenced by her experiences of listening to, and sharing space with, so many other people who have experience of care. It would have been easy to walk away and leave others to bridge an implementation gap that so many have fallen through in the past. Four years later she is determined and working alongside others so that Scotland will keep to its promise.
Plan 21-24 was accompanied by a ‘change programme’, set out so that progress could be monitored, and the various parts of the so-called ‘care system’ knew what they had to do and by when. There were ambitious plans to create a ‘live’ feedback loop so that data could be fed into a near-to-real-time ‘data map’ that would show what (or indeed what was not) happening. Further to that, was the idea that an ‘ideas bank’ would be accessible for those who wished to see what was being done elsewhere so that they could adopt and adapt to the needs of those they served in their own locality. None of this was realised to a degree that could be classed as a success. That programme of work failed.
The mitigating circumstances of Covid-19 and the financial crisis certainly hastened its demise, and the size of the job may well have been underestimated. Scotland does not do implementation that well and striving to initiate such change across multiple policy contexts is no small feat. We should not blame people for ambitious efforts. We should however dig into the reasons, to learn for the future. This is what The Promise Scotland says they have done for Plan 24-30. It remains to be seen if that effort will produce the desired result.
Accountability for failure needed
So, what went wrong? Firstly, the Scottish Government must hold up its hands to its own failures. The civil service was tasked with producing an implementation paper and did so by copying and pasting from existing Promise Scotland literature. Unsurprisingly, this was featherlight on detail and heavy on meaningless ‘blah’. This meant that however motivated or keen to keep the promise the various parts of Government were, they just didn’t know how to do what they were agreeing to do. In saying that, The Promise has bled into many of the places throughout government over the last four years, and if that continues, then a fully functioning arterial system may just emerge. Systematic change needs to be thorough for long-lasting progress.
Local Authorities (LAs) too have been found wanting in parts of Scotland. It will come as no surprise that talking the talk and walking the walk continues to be a difference some LA’s struggle with. A freedom of information request by a prominent charity unearthed issues with education, sibling separation and restraint that continue, despite both legislation and focus. The continuing issue of recruitment and retention in the social care workforce needs immediate attention through a national strategy. Given that we are now four years into the ten-year programme, this is another thing that should have already happened.
No excuse for Promisewashing
Good progress is not missing, and commitment to The Promise remains, as is evident in the most recent COSLA report Local Government and The Promise. However, it is not the LAs who should mark their own homework. We need to know if these changes are being felt within the bodies and minds of those they are there to serve. Badges, ribbons, and other ‘promotional’ materials plastered across a website do not count without real-life experiences improving in line with the Promise recommendations. There can be no excuse for ‘Promisewashing’.
Millions have been spent over the last few years. Many a promise-related post have been created, and many Promise-specific initiatives supported. In fact, this could be key to why progress has been lacking in multiple areas. There has been criticism that funding has replicated the problems of the past by tying it to narrow criteria such as ‘innovation’ and because it is short-term in nature. This all seems somewhat obvious and should have been accounted for. Other long-term trust-based funding initiatives exist, and we have to ask why these are not the norm. Think transport infrastructure – these investment cycles can reach 25 years – why wouldn’t we do the same for services serving Scotland’s future, our children?
The government has again tripped itself up by tying its own shoelaces together. Instead of ensuring the £50mn allocated for whole family wellbeing was accessible to existing projects that have shown success over the years, they tied funding to the term ‘innovation’ and therefore much of the money has gone unspent. A complete anathema to organisations that need support, investment or upscaling. Why-oh-why do they do this? The path was clear, and they threw stones in their own path. Third-sector partners have had enough of consultations and burdensome funding processes. If the money is available then get it spent, it really isn’t that hard.
Strategic long-term investment for care
There is a lot of work left to be done if the 2030 deadline is to be kept. We do not know how much of the good work already achieved is sustainable (there has been good progress in some areas). The new plan must ask that strategic long-term investment/disinvestment features be large so that this progress endures. Some services should be planning for their own obsolescence. Funding must be accessible to those who need to continue, improve and grow good work, not tied to nonsensical concepts such as ‘innovation’. Much of caring is simple; obstacles must be taken out of the way for relationships to form, grow, and bear fruit. We know what needs doing. Just ask any of the vital services constantly asked to contribute to consultations or justify their work when jumping onto the merry-go-round of short-term or time-limited funding applications.
Keeping the promise of success
It is heartening to see commitment to keep The Promise remains high across political parties, Local Authorities, and throughout the third sector. Housing, health, police, and all those others involved in keeping this promise are embedding it into their ways of working to varying degrees in a way that no other review has instigated. If it will it be enough remains to be seen. That after four years buy-in exists is unfortunately unique. A short while after a review, too many are never heard of again.
The Promise Team have just released their most important document to date. Let’s interrogate it with a view to determining if it is a roadmap that will show the way in the necessary detail. If we agree it does, then it is down to every actor involved to do their bit to ensure we arrive at 2030 with success. From every institution down to each individual working with these children and their families, we all have a part to play. A decent society expects nothing less.
