When the idea of deinstitutionalisation is first mentioned at an institution, there is usually a lot of push-back. Among the first arguments to be brought up are usually: ‘but we have all these buildings here’, and ‘what about our staff, they will all be out of work’. These are understandable concerns, but – as we shall see in this blog – not things that need to be obstacles.
Staff working in institutions usually need their job to be able to feed their own family. In some places residential childcare institutions are the main employers in small communities, making deinstitutionalisation seems like a serious threat to people’s livelihood. This is a reason why if rumours start to circulate about plans for DI, without full information, this can lead to a lot of resentment and difficult behaviour from the staff. In turn this can lead to worse care for the children.
However, deinstitutionalisation is not simply the closing down of an institution. It is a transition from one care system to another. Just like the institutional care system, the family-based care system also needs staff to keep it going. Usually it makes a lot of sense to retrain the staff working at the institution to fill some of the positions in the new care system. Depending on their background and experience, people working at a residential childcare institution could be trained to become foster care and/or small group home managers or coordinators, small group home caregivers, foster parents or they could change from one administrative job to another. Unless someone is grossly incompetent or abusive – in which case they ought to be fired regardless of whether a transition is made – they can often be trained to be part of the new system.
Material resources can also often be reused, if they are still in good enough shape. For example, beds and other dorm furniture can be distributed to small group homes and foster families, cars can be used by social workers to visit families, office furniture can be used for the offices of the foster care and small group home management. And the buildings can be changed into offices, or day-care centres or inclusive schools, or they can be sold, freeing up money for operational costs.
When it comes to money, it has been mentioned before (HERE) that family-based care is almost always much cheaper than institutional care. This might lead to the temptation to see a transition to family-based care as a simple way of saving money, and using the ‘left-over’ money for other things. However, it is far more effective to make sure that the money allocated to the care of children in institutions is reserved, or ring-fenced, for the care of vulnerable children. By doing this, more vulnerable children can benefit from support, while spending the same amount of money.
So for example, by using the money ‘left over’ after all children have been moved to family-based care to fund community services and family strengthening measures, you can reach even more children. Plus, doing this will help limit the number of children who will need out-of-home care.
That was a little overview of getting more for your money, without worrying about leaving people unemployed or wasting material resources.
Please share this blog to help spread awareness.