« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
SECTION 7: OTHER ISSUES
7.1 Management of the service
Most interviewees who were asked about the management of the service were unable to respond to this question because they did not have sufficient knowledge.
Enquire respondents described in some detail the supervision arrangements and staff development which were in place. A member of the advisory committee noted the relatively high level of staff turnover, which was very costly in terms of staff training and the loss of accumulated experience. Given the number of policy-related jobs in Edinburgh, and the valuable experience gained by staff at Enquire, it was unsurprising that they were poached by other agencies. One possibility was to augment the pay of key members of staff in order to retain their services for a longer period of time.
7.2 Value for money
Respondents from the Scottish Executive believed Enquire was very cost effective because of the range of services it provided. In addition, its location within Children in Scotland was beneficial because of efficiencies arising as a result of using some of the larger organisation's infrastructure. This view was also expressed by Enquire respondents.
The majority of external interviewees were unable to answer this question because they were unsure of the exact level of funding which Enquire was receiving and the targets which they were expected to meet. An educational psychologist commented that Enquire appeared to offer good value for money in terms of the range of tasks undertaken and, in particular, the number and range of publications.
Three organisations providing some similar services said that they did not believe Enquire offered particularly good value for money. They felt that the volume of calls to the telephone helpline was rather low, although it was not clear exactly what the point of comparison was. It was felt that in order to increase the use of the helpline, greater efforts needed to be made to inform parents of its existence and to ensure that it was providing the type of support they required. There was resentment amongst some support organisations that some of the services undertaken by Enquire had not been put out to tender, and, they believed, better value for money might be obtained by drawing on a wider range of providers. These views need to be understood in the context of the competitive environment in which support organisations operate and the attendant insecurity over long-term funding. Efforts need to be made by SEED and the voluntary sector to ensure that, as far as possible, organisations are delivering complementary services so that a better climate of co-operation can develop.
« Previous | Contents | Next »