New challenges or different opportunities? Voluntary adoption agencies and the shifting terrain of childcare services

Abstract

This paper examines some of the developments and trends that affected the fluctuating relationship between state and voluntary provision of adoption services in England during New Labour's terms of office. Using examples drawn from the work and experiences of one voluntary adoption agency, the paper explores the tensions within this relationship and the increase in state regulation of child care services. In order to consider the demands of recent reforms and initiatives upon voluntary adoption agencies and the ways they have been able to negotiate the adoption market, particular attention is paid to the impact of equalities legislation upon faith-based adoption agencies and to the practical and symbolic role of the inter-agency fee in the relationship between the state and voluntary sector. The paper concludes by considering recent interventions in this area by the Conservative-led coalition government and their implications for VAAs.

Public Perceptions, Beliefs and Experiences of Fostering and Adoption: A National Qualitative Study in South Africa

“…Service delivery is likely equally affected by poor implementation strategies, a lack of minimum standards and inadequate resource investments (Matthias and Zaal, ). In international settings, the use of incentive systems and the privatisation of placement services have been implemented to increase the quality and speed of placements, with varying success (Fink and others, ; Selwyn and Sempik, ).…”

“…Agency level incentives, the use of private sector human resources and accountability for minimum standard with regard to time delays have shown some success in developed countries and warrant consideration (DeVooght and others, ; Fink and others, ). Improved service orientation among those who serve as gatekeepers and first contacts for prospective adopters has also been shown to positively influence adoption rates, as has specialised evidence‐based training of all those involved in the screening and placement process, including social workers and court officials (Cushing and Greenblatt, ; Lee and others, ; van de Luitgaarden, ; Wegar, ).…”