Frontline Evaluation
The information below was put together by a team of social work academics and outlines 15 major issues with the Frontline organisation that suggest that it should no longer be publicly funded. Each point also includes links to sources that can be read for more information (all open access). The hope is that this will stand as a communal and public text to be used by anyone and altered and developed based on context, need and purpose. Therefore, please feel free to use this information in full or in part, edit or alter as required to support any and all campaigns to reverse the damage that Frontline and the fast-track model have done to the profession and those we support, and to halt its continuing expansion.
(Updated May 2023)
1. Incompatibility with Social Work Values: Given the vastly
preferential funding arrangements for Frontline participants, it is
understandable, particularly in an age of high tuition fees, that some
potential social workers are drawn to apply to Frontline. However, it must also be emphasised that the
foundations of Frontline stem from an elitist ideology that is at odds with
social work values, including social justice and anti-oppression, and
perpetuates the inequalities that are inherent at all levels of the education
system (and society) in England. This is most clearly observed in the claim
from Frontline that they are able to recruit the “best and brightest” and “high
quality” individuals, and that they can be identified by them based primarily
on prior academic attainment and attendance at specific universities. Those
chosen are then seen by Frontline as the future leaders of the profession, and
as a result are rewarded with resources and advantages withheld from other
students and social workers, who are implicitly characterised as “low-quality”
by comparison. While Frontline have veered away from some of this elitist language
in recent years, and recruitment issues have meant they have needed to lower entry requirements, they still claim to be able to recruit “talented” individuals that others
cannot, and they cannot escape the fact that their entire model is based on
their supposed ability to recruit people of higher “quality”, without which
their disproportionate funding and costs would be unjustifiable.
For more
information:
Selling our Soul for the Best and Brightest
The
Frontline Programme: Conservative Ideology and the Creation of a Social Work
Officer Class
Fast-track
leadership development programmes: The new micro-philanthropy of future elites
Frontline
training scheme poses a threat to social work education
2. Based on Unproven and Narrow Models of Training and Practice: The Frontline approach is based on a fast-track model of training popularised by Teach for America and then brought to England through Teach First. This model was not designed for social work but for the much shorter qualification period that teachers typically undertake (one year postgraduate); however, there is no clear evidence that this model of fast-track, employer-led training develops better practitioners in any profession. Furthermore, Frontline participants are inducted into social work through a narrow model of practice based on motivational interviewing, parenting interventions and a particular interpretation of ‘systemic practice’. Research into practice models raises serious concerns about limiting social worker knowledge, values and skills in this way, and evaluations of Frontline and other fast-tracks have found that their graduates struggle with the realities of practice as a result. As a result, concerns have also been raised both within the UK and internationally that a Frontline social work qualification is of an unacceptable standard for practice outside of England, requiring a top-up course to supplement knowledge. There is a related concern that a disproportionate amount of social work recruitment and education funding is now directed towards early specialisation in child protection social work. This is contrary to the established international and UK principles that initial social work education should provide social workers with a beginning level of familiarity with the knowledge, values and skills to provide a service across the age and needs groups. The increasingly unbalanced availability of funding at qualifying level also risks cutting the numbers entering other areas of social work practice, where social worker vacancy rates are also high.
For
more information:
Social
Work Fast-track Programmes: Retention and Progression Final Report
‘Disconnect’
between fast-track social work training and real-world practice, review finds
Impact of
Motivational Interviewing by Social Workers on Services Users: A Systematic
Review
A
Systematic Review of Parenting Interventions used by Social Workers to Support
Vulnerable Children
In
Defence of University Social Work Education
Frontline
Graduates Face Restrictions on Practicing Outside of England
Revisioning
Social Work Education: An Independent Review
Time
to get the education of social workers right
3. Failed Goals: The 2012 Frontline proposal report outlined five “problems” that Frontline was designed to address. It has failed to address any of these five problems since it was founded 10 years ago, despite huge government funding and rapid expansion. Furthermore, England, where Frontline operates, has consistently faired worse in these areas than other nations in the UK. The problems listed in that proposal report that have not been addressed were:
1. “Rising demand”: Demand for children’s services has continued to rise, and the focus on programmes like Frontline has been at the expense of addressing this rising demand and supporting the wider workforce (see the 2019 ADCS report Building a Workforce that Works for all Children linked below). 2023 research from the UK and Northern Ireland Health and Social Care Workforce Study found that 70% of social workers in England felt their service did not operate a safe staff-to-service ratio (highest level in the UK). Since it was launched in 2012, according to the Department for Education, the number of children in the care system in England has risen from 67,080 to 82,170, the highest level on record. Notably key advocates for Frontline, such as Josh MacAlister and Isabelle Trowler, now argue that a “radical reset” in social care is needed, but have never acknowledged that implicitly this suggests their focus on the supposed “low quality” of social workers in 2012 was misplaced.
2. “High vacancy rates and a reliance on agency staff”: Vacancy rates and the use of agency staff have increased significantly during Frontline’s existence. MacAlister's proposal report outlined that vacancy rates were approximately 8-10%, and they now sit at 20% (latest figures 2022), while agency staff rates are cited in the proposal as 10%, and agency rates now sit at 18% (latest figures 2022). England has the highest levels of social workers considering changing their employers and considering leaving the social work profession altogether in the UK too, both sitting around 50% according to the UK and Northern Ireland Health and Social Care Workforce Study linked below.
3. “Quality of recruits”: There is no evidence that the focus of Frontline on prior academic attainment and attendance at certain universities has improved social work practice, and evaluations of Frontline have shown that their recruits face the same challenges, and leave practice for the same reasons, as all social workers (lack of resources, stress, high caseloads etc.). Frontline and other fast-track graduates have particularly described struggling with the realities of practice, and that they were mis-sold an idealised version of the what social work is.
4. “Quality of training”: The evidence that Frontline training is an improvement on university training remains lacking, even when just looking at child protection interventions, and evaluations of Frontline and revelations from participants raise serious questions about the type of support Frontline participants receive on the programme, despite the financial advantages the organisation benefits from. This includes 2022 Department for Education data finding that Frontline trained social workers were more likely to feel stressed and overworked, and had lower job satisfaction than other graduates. They were also shown to struggle in particular with the emotional aspects of the social work role compared to other graduates.
5. “Low status of the profession”: There is no evidence that the status of the social work profession has improved since Frontline was founded. It is in fact likely that the Frontline model and approach, through regularly attacking the profession of social work as lacking in “quality” over the past 10 years, has actually done significant damage to the profession's status. This can be seen evidenced by Frontline itself increasingly struggling to fill their own cohorts and having to drop their academic entry criteria in order to recruit, suggesting reduced interest. Furthermore, sector leaders continue to highlight concerns related to the "low status" of the profession as hindering recruitment, despite 10 years since Frontline was proposed in order to reverse this. This includes Frontline themselves, who have recently launched a campaign "This is the Work" arguing for the need to improve perceptions around the profession, in a tacit admission that they have failed to do since they were launched.
It is
notable, therefore, that while Frontline has failed even based on its own terms,
this has not prevented the government from expanding it and awarding them a growing number of contracts, all with highly
preferential funding arrangements attached despite their track record.
For more
information:
Frontline:
Improving the Children’s Social Work Profession
Children’s Social Work Workforce Official Statistics February 2023
Building
a Workforce that Works for all Children
Frontline
Master’s Attainment Rate Dropped across First Three Cohorts, Figures Reveal
Social
Work Fast-track Programmes: Retention and Progression Final Report
‘They
need to consolidate, not expand’: The Impact of Frontline’s Rapid Growth on
Student Experience
The
‘Quality’ of Social Work Students in England: A Genealogy of Discourse
2002-2018
Longitudinal Study of Child and Family Social Workers
This is the Work, This is Social Work
Social workers deserve recognition, rather than this endless criticism
Momentum for change to tackle profession's staff crisis says Social Work England
Main Findings for the Occupation of Social Workers: Health and Social Care Workforce Study
4. Poor Organisational Track Record: Despite receiving
disproportionate government funding and support, Frontline have consistently
demonstrated they are a dysfunctional organisation, and revelations in the
media have exposed issues ranging from the use of financial pressures to keep
participants on the programme to the poor handling of issues like race and
diversity.
For more
information and examples:
Frontline
says it must improve on race in response to critical feedback from participants
‘They
need to consolidate, not expand’: The Impact of Frontline’s Rapid Growth on
Student Experience
Exclusive:
Graduates must pay up to £10,000 to quit ‘harrowing’ government social care
scheme
Frontline
master’s pass rate misses DfE target for latest cohort to complete programme
Frontline’s
rapid growth threatens its consistency, students warn
5. Declining Academic Standards: Frontline as an organisation was founded on the promise of being able recruit the “most academically able” and provide them with the “best training”. However, since it was founded Frontline has habitually had to lower its academic standards and rigour, once again failing based on its own terms. This has included taking their teaching in-house and away from their university partner, lowering their entry requirements and dropping their compulsory Masters component following reports only 65% or participants were successfully completing it. Despite this, their most recent accounts show that the number of participants successfully completing their qualifying programme is dropping. Those doing their Assessed and Supporter Year in Employment through Frontline have also reported feeling more negative about their learning opportunities than their colleagues on regular ASYE programmes.
For more
information:
Frontline
can help rebrand social work
Frontline
master’s attainment rate dropped across first three cohorts, figures reveal
How
Frontline is changing in its sixth year of training social workers
Frontline’s
social work qualification rates lower than other fast-track schemes data shows
Longitudinal Study of Child and Family Social Workers
6. Expensive use of Public Funds: Frontline is the most
expensive route through which social workers qualify, with their most recent contract awarded at £61m.
Despite the core academic curriculum as required by the regulator being
provided over only five weeks, much of the training responsibility being borne
by local authorities, and large donations and pro bono support coming from
private partners, Frontline still costs the Department for Education at least
twice as much per student in public funds as postgraduate university social
work education (and more than three times more than undergraduate routes). Extrapolating
that out, if the funding received by Frontline had instead gone to university
programmes, approximately 2 to 4 thousand additional social workers could have
been qualified since its inception. Some questionable spending has also been
noted, including a recent contract of up to £738k for a single venue to host
the summer institute. Frontline is also using this funding to accumulate
assets, with their net current assets rising from £2.7m in August 2019 to £7.2m in 2022. At a time when the Local Government
Association predicts children’s services underfunding to be approximately
£2.7bn by 2025, this level of expenditure is unjustifiable.
For more
information:
Frontline Awarded £61m Government Contract to Train Child Protection Social Workers
National Fast
Track Child and Family Social Work Programme
Invitation
to Tender for Frontline Summer Institute Venue
Comparing
the costs of social work qualification routes
English
Councils need 2.7bn more for children’s social care by 2025, LGA warns
government
7. Poor Value for Money: Despite these inflated costs, Frontline has consistently been found to provide poor value for money. As well as all the information provided in the other sections of this document, this also includes an evaluation that found no evidence that Frontline qualified social workers stay in practice longer than others, and revelations that three quarters of Frontline social workers leave their host councils within three years of qualifying (or just two years after the end of their initial contract with and support provided by Frontline). Another recent Department for Education report found Frontline graduates were the most likely of all routes to expect to leave Local Authority practice within a year of qualifying, as well as being most likely to see social work as a springboard into a different career. Frontline graduates have also been shown to quickly rise into management positions, something likely helped by the focus on leadership in the Frontline curriculum. This is all despite Frontline being claiming in its proposal report to be "designed to encourage the retention of staff in frontline posts". Frontline have also habitually failed to meet their key performance indicators (KPIs) related to both number of participants recruited and number of participants successfully completing the programme.
For more
information:
Most
Frontline participants leave host councils within three years, study finds
Social
work fast track programmes: tracking retention and progression: Interim report
Social
Work Fast-track Programmes: Retention and Progression Final Report
£80m for Frontline-style training scheme not value for money, warns BASW
Longitudinal Study of Child and Family Social Workers
Frontline master’s attainment rate dropped across first three cohorts, figures reveal
8. Marginalisation of Lived Experience: The focus on recruiting
primarily based on prior academic attainment and attendance at particular
universities, and equating this with being “high-quality” and “talented”, devalues
the importance of lived experience in social work student recruitment, both
lived experience of practice and lived experience of receiving social work
services. This is despite there being arguable more evidence for the value of
these experiences to the social work profession than any other factor,
including prior academic attainment. These points are exacerbated by the fact
that those in leadership positions in Frontline, including both current and
former CEO, tend not to have any social work experience themselves.
For more
information:
Better together: Comprehensive
social work education in England
Frontline is excited to announce its new Chief Executive, Mary Jackson
9. Rapid Expansion: From an initial cohort of 104 participants, to their most recently awarded contract being for 500 participants per cohort, Frontline has expanded rapidly. This is despite assurances from the founder and former CEO that they would not expand beyond 450 participants per year made in 2018. Notably, Frontline are increasingly struggling to fill their cohorts despite these increased numbers, further raising questions about the logic of increasingly growing their contracted participant numbers. Frontline have also expanded into other areas of social work, including a government contract to run the new Pathways leadership development programme, building on their previous government funded Firstline programme, another initiative with limited evidence of impact and exclusionary entry criteria. The government's newly launched website covering the CPD opportunities for children and family social workers demonstrates the dominant role Frontline now has in this area, with the vast majority of programmes listed being Frontline provided. Frontline, working alongside corporate partners, have even developed their own Blueprint model calling for national reorganisation of children’s services, a Blueprint that was launched just a year before Frontline's founder and then CEO was appointed to chair the Children's Social Care Review. For an organisation that has such a poor track record and no evidence of success, this rapid expansion and influence is highly concerning, and likely to continue with the opportunities stemming from the government's response to the Children's Social Care Review.
For more
information:
A
Fisher-eye lens on social work reform
Dismantling the Blueprint: Buurtzorg in English Child Protection Social Work
Frontline Awarded £61m Government Contract to Train Child Protection Social Workers
Frontline, Firstline and now Headline… The Plotline Thickens
Evaluation
of the Firstline Leadership Programme
Child and Family Social Work Development Programmes
Why we are worried about the 'Independent' review of Children's Social Care
DfE awards Frontline £7m contract to run social work leadership training scheme
It's time to end the feud over fast-track training for children's social workers
10. Student Support Disparities: Frontline participants are afforded a number of benefits that are withheld from students on mainstream university courses, including a bursary of approximately £20k in their first year, and guaranteed employment, access to (funded) post-qualification education, and full-time salary in their second year. In addition Frontline participants and graduates are provided leadership training and networking opportunities that are withheld from other social work students and graduates. This includes access to Frontline's Step Forward programme, and their Innovation Programme, both reserved for Frontline fellows despite Frontline subsisting primarily on taxpayer funding. At the same time bursaries for mainstream social work courses have been increasingly restricted, including the introduction of a cap on bursaries and the removal of first year undergraduate bursaries. An eight year freeze on the value of the remaining bursaries and an increase in university tuition fees have also meant a drastic real-term devaluing, while at the same time Frontline bursaries annually increase. This has led to increasing reports of social work students on other cohorts struggling financially, including skipping meals, attending food banks and attending warm banks. In terms of ‘fair competition’ with graduates considering a social work career, the steep rise in master’s course fees also seriously cuts into the income available to students on mainstream courses, making it necessary for many to have to seek paid employment alongside a very demanding full time course and placements. These issues are all exacerbated dramatically by the cost-of-living and housing crises.
For more
information:
Social
work students quitting courses and visiting food banks amid seven-year bursary
freeze
Scrap
the social work bursary, and lose students like us
Apply Now to the Step Forward Programme
Frontline Innovation Programme
Why we are worried about the 'Independent' review of Children's Social Care
Life on a social work student's income
11. Diversity Concerns: Frontline consistently recruits a cohort that is more likely to be white, middle class, not have a disability and not have caring responsibilities than other social work courses, making the financial disparities outlined above all the more concerning. Their mandatory summer institute also excludes those who are unable to take five weeks away, including those with caring responsibilities. Significantly Frontline maintains this residential requirement for most of their government funded CPD courses also, meaning these can be similarly exclusionary, of particular concern based on their focus on leadership roles. This further raises questions about the Frontline model’s compatibility with social work values and the valuing of lived experience. In addition, the insular model based on a summer institute followed by small practice units further restricts the potential for participants to learn from diverse experiences and knowledge. Frontline also recruits more men onto their programme than other routes, and regardless of varying perspectives on whether there is a need to recruit more men into social work, we should all be able to agree this should not be done in a way that disproportionately provides those men with financial, networking and leadership opportunities like Frontline do. The influence of Frontline in these areas is therefore likely to exacerbate the existing issues around men disproportionately holding leadership/high salary roles within the profession, as well as other diversity concerns in leadership in the social work profession.
For more
information:
We
are creating a social work education system where those in greatest need
receive the least
Better together: Comprehensive
social work education in England
Social
work leaders’ lack of diversity out of step with workforce
DfE awards Frontline £7m contract to run social work leadership training scheme
12. Harmful Marketing Practices: Frontline engages in a
number of harmful marketing practices that negatively impact on social work
student recruitment broadly. As well as the aforementioned attempts to
discredit the “quality” of other social work qualifying programmes and their
students, additional harmful practices include the hiring of “Brand Ambassadors”
to recruit students on university campuses, including those with established
social work programmes, and an “attract to reject” policy that allows them to
claim large numbers of applications per place, while still habitually failing
to fill their cohorts and discouraging candidates from applying elsewhere. Due
to the disproportionate public funds they received, Frontline are able to spend over £2.5m per year on participant
recruitment (approximately £5,500 per recruit), alongside a range of
pro bono advertising support they are able to draw upon due to their status as
a charity.
For more information:
Better together: Comprehensive
social work education in England
Google
Ad Grants: Free advertising for non-profits
Frontline: Campus
Brand Managers
13. Impact on other Programmes: As well as these harmful
marketing practices, there are a number of additional ways that Frontline
negatively impacts on other social work qualifying programmes and their
students. Frontline use their disproportionate financial resources to secure
placements that would otherwise be used to support university social work
students. Students on university programmes have also described the negative
impact that the elitist rhetoric and financial disparities have had on their
experiences of qualifying. Additionally, Frontline diverts resources from these
other programmes, while also allowing the government to claim investment in
social work education, weakening the potential for university education
providers to collectively advocate for more funding and support. Considering
university programmes are where the majority of research and scholarship
related to social work takes place, Frontline have therefore also undoubtedly had a
negative impact on the knowledge base for social work practice. For more
information:
In
Defence of University Social Work Education
Higher
Fast-track funding costing courses students and placements, claim education
leaders
Frontline
training scheme poses a threat to social work education
14. Close ties to Government: The continued government support of Frontline despite its poor track record can be explained by its close ties to political networks. From Michael Gove holding private meetings to design and found Frontline, to the recent appointment of former Frontline CEO Josh MacAlister as chair of the “Independent” Children’s Social Care Review, the links between Frontline and influential government actors are well documented. As a result, the Department for Education habitually acts as the chief funder as well as a key marketing arm for Frontline, while Frontline refuses to call out concerning government practices while promoting a narrow vision of social work that is more in line with the interests of these same political networks. The government also frequently uses their funding of fast-tracks to respond to and deflect from their consistent failures to support social workers and to improve the circumstances of those they support.
For more
information:
Networks of Power and Counterpower in
Social Work with Children and Families in England
Network
Ethnography of the Care Review
The Interdependence of
Independence: A Network Map of Children’s Services
Prescience of paranoia? Reflecting on the Future
15. Connections with Problematic Private Sector
Organisations: As
well as these close connections with political networks, since its inception
Frontline has been supported by and collaborated with a large number of highly
problematic private sector organisations that have histories of scandal and
corruption, including KPMG, Credit Suisse, and Boston Consulting Group. It
needs to be asked what profit-maximising institutions such as these believe they stand
to gain through their collaboration and association with Frontline, in
particular when they are represented on its board. Notably, Frontline is no
longer fully transparent about who their private supporters are, having
recently removed the page on their website that previously contained a full
list. However, according their accounts the annual value of this support is
anywhere from £1.5m to £3.5m, depending on the year.
For more
information:
Global
Management Consultancies, English Social Work Reform and the co-option of good
intentions
The Interdependence of
Independence: A Network Map of Children’s Services
Networks of Power and Counterpower in
Social Work with Children and Families in England
Pennies in the karma bank? Big philanthropy, English social work reform and theneoliberal bind
Frontline
& Corporate Connections in Social Work
The
Rise of the Teach First Empire
Comments
Post a Comment