This article examines the organisational models of decision-making regarding care placements in child welfare. Many countries currently report reorganising and economising their services and greater use of independent and voluntary agencies, all of which will have a direct and indirect influence on placement decisions about children in care. Very little is known about how public authorities make these decisions, what processes achieve the best option for a child and how different organisational models interact with front-line decision-making. The article is based on a study of placement decisions in Finland. The data comprise 49 phone interviews and five focus group interviews with social workers and their managers in charge of substitute care in different municipalities. The analysis presents three decision-making models: the holistic model, the shared expertise model and the centralised model. Each of these rests on different understandings of knowledge, expertise and client participation. The study predicts that the centralised model is likely to become more common due to the reorganisation of social services. While this may strengthen the managerial process and enhance the quality of decision-making, it is likely to diminish the relationship-based casework that is typical for the holistic model.
BardyMHeinoT (2013) Katsaus lastensuojelun toimintaympäristöihin: paniikista toivoon ja näköalat auki [An overview of the contexts of child welfare: from panic to hope]. In: BardyM (eds) Lastensuojelun ytimissä [In the Core of Child Welfare], Helsinki: THL, pp. 13–42.
2.
Berrick J, Peckover S, Pösö T and Skivenes M (2015) The formalized framework for decision-making in child protection care orders: a cross-country analysis. Journal of European Social Policy.
3.
BloorMFranklandJThomasMRobsonK (2001) Focus Groups in Social Research, London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
4.
BurauVKrögerT (2004) The local and the national community care: exploring policy and politics in Finland and Britain. Social Policy & Administration38(7): 793–810.
EgelundT (1996) Bureaucracy or professionalism? The work tools of child protection services. International Journal of Social Welfare3(5): 165–174.
7.
ForkbyTHöjerS (2011) Navigation between regulations and gut instinct: the unveiling of collective memory in decision-making processes where teenagers are placed in residential care. Child & Family Social Work16(2): 159–168.
8.
GarrettP (2009) ‘Transforming’ Children’s Services? Social work, neoliberalism and the ‘modern’ world, Maidenhead: Open University Press.
9.
GlissonCGreenPWilliamsN (2012) Assessing the Organizational Social Context (OSC) of child welfare systems: implications for research and practice. Child Abuse & Neglect36(9): 621–632.
10.
GubriumJHolsteinJ (1997) The New Language of Qualitative Methods, New York: Oxford University Press.
11.
HarrisJWhiteV (2009) Modernising Social Work: Critical considerations, Bristol: The Policy Press.
12.
HasenfeldY (1983) Human Service Organizations, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
13.
HeinoT (2009) Lastensuojelu – kehityskulkuja ja paikannuksia [Child protection – tendencies and locations]. In: Lammi-TaskulaJKarvonenSAhlströmS (eds) Lapsiperheiden Hyvinvointi [The Well-being of Families with Children], Helsinki: Terveyden ja hyvinvoinnin laitos, pp. 198–213.
14.
HöjerSForkbyT (2011) Care for sale: the influence of new public management in child protection in Sweden. British Journal of Social Work41(1): 93–101.
15.
LaaksoR (2013) Mistä koti huostaan otetulle lapselle? [Where to Find a Home for a Child who has been Taken into Care?], Helsinki: Kunnallisalan kehittämissäätiö.
MorganD (2002) Focus group interviewing. In: GubriumJHolsteinJ (eds) Handbook of Interview Research, London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: SAGE Publications, pp. 141–160.
18.
O’SullivanT (2011) Decision-making in Social Work, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
19.
PösöT (2011) Combatting child abuse in Finland: from family to child-centered orientation. In: GilbertNPartonNSkivenesM (eds) Child Protection Systems: International trends and orientations, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 112–130.
20.
PösöTLaaksoR (2014) Matching children and substitute homes: some theoretical and empirical notions. Child & Family Social Work. doi:10.1111/cfs.12144.
21.
PösöTSkivenesMHestbaeckA (2013) Child protection systems within the Danish, Finnish and Norwegian welfare states: time for a child centric approach?European Journal of Social Work. doi:10.1080/13691457.2013.829802.
22.
RostilaIMäntysaariMSuominenTAsikainenP (2011) Sosiaalityön professionaalisuuden erot kuntaorganisaatioissa – Organisaatiokulttuurien ja organisaatioilmapiirien kirjo [The differences between social work professionalism in the municipal organisations – the variation of organisational cultures and atmospheres]. Janus19(2): 143–157.
23.
StanleyNAusterberryHBilsonAFarrellyNHusseinSLarkinsCManthorpeJRidleyJ (2013) Turning away from the public sector in children’s out-of-home care: an English experiment. Children and Youth Services Review35(1): 33–39.
24.
SellickC (2006) Opportunities and risks: models of good practice in commissioning foster care. British Journal of Social Work36(8): 1345–1359.
25.
SellickC (2011) Privatising foster care: the UK experience within an international context. Social Policy & Administration45(7): 788–805.
26.
Sellick C (2013) Foster care commissioning in an age of austerity: the experiences and views of the independent provider sector in one English region. British Journal of Social Work. Advance Access published March 13. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bct046.
27.
Sosiaali- ja terveysministeriö (2013a) Sosiaali- ja terveydenhuollon järjestämislain valmisteluryhmän loppuraportti. Report 45, Helsinki: Sosiaali- ja terveysministeriö.
TilburyC (2007) The regulation of out-of-home care. British Journal of Social Work37(2): 209–224.
30.
VettenrantaVHolmaTRousuS (2008) Lastensuojelupalvelujen hankkimisen ja tuottamisen näköaloja [The Landscape for the Purchasing and Providing of Child Welfare Services], Helsinki: Suomen Kuntaliitto.
31.
WiklundS (2005) Social barnavård i nya former. Om marknadsorientering inom barnavårdsarbetet [New forms of social child welfare: about the market orientation in child welfare work]. Socialvetenskaplig tidskrift2–3: 149–168.
