• Summary: This article explores some complex issues involved in promoting accountability in local authority public services. In the UK, a gap in accountability for services for Looked After children was identified by the High Court. We offer an analysis of policy initiatives developed in response. Citizen review, another approach to strengthening accountability in widespread use in the USA, is described and appraised.
• Findings: Accountability in services for Looked After children in the UK has been substantially improved by recent developments in law and policy. However, it is argued that the continuing absence of external review and reliance on upward accountability still leaves a flawed structure. The paucity of quality evaluation of citizen participation in US is noted, but we identify its potential to promote both outward accountability and diversity in accountability and review.
• Application: The article is a contribution to the ongoing analysis of accountability in public services, and promotes more inclusive practice in reviewing service provision. Its focus is on Looked After children, but some of the principles discussed are capable of application to other vulnerable groups and communities.
Arizona Department of Health Services (2005) available online at: [www.azdhs.gov/phs/owch/crp].
2.
Audit Commission (2005a) `CPA 2005: The Way Ahead', available online at: [http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/reports/NATIONALREPORT.asp ].
3.
Audit Commission (2005b) `CPA - The Harder Test', available online at: [www.bestvalueinspections.gov.uk/reports/NATIONAL-REPORT ].
4.
Audit Commission (2007) CPA, the Harder Test: Scores and Analysis of Performance in Single Tier and County Councils 2006. Wetherby: Audit Commission .
5.
Barnes, M., Newman, J. and Sullivan, H. (2004) `Power, Participation and Political Renewal: Theoretical Perspectives on Public Participation under New Labour in Britain', Social Politics11(2): 267-79.
6.
Barton, A. and Welbourne, P. (2005) `Context and its Significance in Identifying "What Works" in Child Protection', Child Abuse Review14: 77-194.
7.
Cabinet Office (2007) Policy Review: Public Services. London: Prime Minister's Strategy Unit, available online at: [ www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/policy_review/documents/public_services.pdf].
8.
Cafcass (2006) `IRO Scoping Survey Final Report', available online at: [http://www.cafcass.gov.uk/english/publications/consultation/06Dec08IRO_Scoping_Survey.pdf].
9.
Christensen, T. and Laegreid, P. (2002) `New Public Management: Puzzles of Democracy and the Influence of Citizens', The Journal of Public Philosophy10(3): 267-95.
10.
City of New York (2003) Panel Report, available online at: [http://www.hsc.stonybrook.edu/sosw/pdf_docs/AnnualReport2003.pdf].
11.
Collins, W. (1998) Citizen Review Panels: An Opportunity to Improve Child Protection?Washington, DC: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
12.
Department for Children, Schools and Families ( 2007a) `Care Matters: Time for Change', available online at: [http://www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/timeforchange/docs/timeforchange.pdf ].
13.
Department for Children, Schools and Families ( 2007b) Beyond Care Matters: Future of the Care Population, Working Group Report. Nottingham: DCS&F .
14.
Department for Constitutional Affairs (2004 ) Referrals to the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service by Independent Reviewing Officers. Consultation Paper CP (L) 16/04. London: Stationery Office.
15.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) ( 2003) Keeping Children Safe: The Government's Response to the Victoria Climbié Inquiry Report and Joint Chief Inspector's Report Safeguarding Children. Cm 5861. London: Stationery Office.
16.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) ( 2004) Independent Reviewing Officers Guidance - Adoption and Children Act 2002. London: Department for Education and Skills.
17.
Department of Health (DH) (2001) `The Quality Protects Programme: Transforming Children's Services', Local Authority Circular No. 29.
18.
Department of Transport, the Environment and the Regions (DTER) (1998) Modernising Local Government: Local Democracy and Community Leadership. London: Stationery Office.
19.
Devaney, J. (2004) `Relating Outcomes to Objectives in Child Protection' , Child and Family Social Work9: 27-38.
20.
Dixon, J. and Dogan, R. (2003) `A Philosophical Analysis of Management: Improving Praxis', Journal of Management Development22: 6-24.
21.
Dixon, J., Kouzmin, A. and Korac-Kakabadse, N. (1997) `Managerialism - Something Old, Something Borrowed, and Little New: Prescription Versus Effective Organizational Change in Public Agencies', International Journal of Public Sector Management11: 164-79.
22.
Family Law Newsline (2004) `Independent Reviewing Officers', Family Law, August, Fam LJ 34 566.
23.
Geekie, C. (2002) `Protecting Children's Rights after Re S and Re W - The Pressing Need for Reform', Family Law, July, pp. 534-9.
24.
HM Government (2007) Policy Review - Building on Progress: The Role of the State. London: Cabinet Office.
25.
Harwin, J. and Owen, M. (2003) `The Implementation of Care Plans and its Relationship to Children's Welfare', Child and Family Law Quarterly15: 71-82.
26.
Harwin, J., Owen, M., Locke, R. and Forrester, D. (2001) Making Care Orders Work: A Study of Care Plans and their Implementation. London: Stationery Office.
27.
Hinchcliffe, M. (2004) `Whatever Happened to Starred Care Plans?', Family Law Journal34: 660-2.
28.
Hood, C. (1991) `A Public Management for All Seasons?', Public Administration69: 3-19.
29.
Jennings, M.-A., McDonald, T. and Henderson, R.A. (1996) `Early Citizen Review: Does it Make a Difference?' , Social Work41(2): 224-31.
30.
Jones, B. (2004) `Effectiveness of Citizen Review Panels', Children and Youth Services Review26: 1117-28.
31.
Jones, B., Litzelfelner, P. and Ford, J. (2003) `The Value and Role of Citizen Review Panels in Child Welfare: Perceptions of Citizen Review Panel Members and Child Protection Workers', Child Abuse and Neglect27: 699-704.
32.
Jones, O. (2004) `A New Approach to Case Referral', New Law Journal, 17 September, p. 1368.
33.
Kot, V., Bruner, C., and Scott, S. (2001) Citizen Review Panels for the Child Protective System: Guidelines and Protocols. Chicago, IL: National Committee to Prevent Child Abuse.
34.
Kouzmin, A. and Dixon, J. (2003) `Public Domains, Organizations and Neo-Liberal Economics: From De-Regulation and Privatization to the Necessary "Smart" State' , in R. Koch and P. Conrad (eds) Öffentlicher Dienst als Motor der Staats- und Verwaltungsmodernisierung [New Public Services], pp. 1-37. Weisbaden , Germany: Gabler-Verlag.
35.
Kouzmin, A., Dixon, J. and Korac-Kakabadse, N. (2001) `From Self-referential Economics to Managerialism and the "Economic Holocaust" of Downsizing/ Re-engineering: An Ethical Audit', Titsmeikan Law Review (Tokyo) 4, cumulative no. 278: 293-356 (in Japanese): 293-315.
36.
Laming, L. (2003) The Victoria Climbié Inquiry: The Report of an Inquiry by Lord Laming. London: Stationery Office.
37.
Litzelfehner, P. (2001) `The Use of Citizen Review Boards with Juvenile Offender Cases: An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Pilot Program', Juvenile and Family Court Journal52: 1-9.
38.
Maryland Department of Health and Human Resources (2006) available online at: [www.dhr.state.md.us/crbc/program.htm].
39.
Mole, N. (2002) `Case Commentary: A Note on the Judgment from the Perspective of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 - Re W and B; Re W (Care Plan) and Re S (Minors) (Care Order: Implementation of Care Plan); Re W (Minors)(Care Order: Adequacy of Care Plan)', Child and Family Law Quarterly, December, pp. 447-66.
40.
Nagalro (2003) `NAGALRO Response to Independent Reviewing Officers Draft Guidance', available online at: [http:www.nagalro.com/docs/].
41.
Newburn, T., Crawford, A., Earle, R., Goldie, S., Hale, C., Hallam, A., Masters, G., Netten, A., Saunders, R., Sharpe, K. and Uglow, S. (2001) The Introduction of Referral Orders into the Youth Justice System: Final Report. Home Office Research Study No. 242. London: Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate.
42.
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004) The Future of Local Government. London: ODPM.
43.
Parton, N. (2004) `From Maria Colwell to Victoria Climbié: Reflections on Public Inquiries into Child Abuse a Generation Apart', Child Abuse Review13: 80-94.
44.
Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care ( 2004) `Fostering the Future: Safety Permanence and Well-Being for Children in Foster Care', available online at: [ http://pewfostercare.org/research/docs/FinalReport.pdf].
45.
Posner, G. (2005) `In Practice: Starred Milestones by Any Other Name?', Family Law Journal35: 488.
46.
Power, M. (1994) The Audit Explosion. London : Demos.
47.
Smith, C. (2002) `Case Commentary: Human Rights and the Children Act 1989 - Re W and B; Re W (Care Plan) and Re S and Re W (Minors) (Care Order: Implementation of Care Plan); Re W (Minors)(Care Order): Adequacy of Care Plan)', Child and Family Law Quarterly, December, pp. 427-38.
48.
Social Services Inspectorate (2002) Modern Social Services: A Commitment to Reform. London : Department of Health Publications.
49.
Taylor, D. and Balloch, S. (eds) (2005) The Politics of Evaluation. London: The Policy Press.
50.
Waterhouse, J. (2000) Report of the Inquiry into Child Abuse in North Wales. London: Stationery Office .
51.
Youth Justice Board (2003) `Statistics on Youth Offending Panel Membership', available online at: [www.youth_justice_board.gov.uk/YouthJusticeBoard/AboutUs/NewsArchive/4April2003.htm ].
