A longtime Oranga Tamariki employee, who wishes to remain anonymous, explains why she could no longer work for the state child protection agency and says despite being well-funded, the money is not being used where it’s needed most.
I have spent more than half of my life working for the government, beginning with the Department of Social Welfare in 1980. I left Oranga Tamariki this year when I found I could no longer have my integrity as a social worker compromised by the organisation.
I have extensive experience and spent much of my career upskilling - I have worked as a social worker, a supervisor, a hospital practice leader and, after completing a post graduate degree, helped to roll out supervision training provided to supervisors.
Having spent so much time within the organisation, it was never just a job, but a part of my life.
I have had the pleasure to meet a huge number of wonderful tamariki and rangatahi and their whānau which has allowed me to reflect on our work and how we could make it better for them.
We get paid pretty well compared to our colleagues in the community, and we have pretty good leave provisions as well, but I have been challenged to now allow those great working conditions to compromise my integrity.
I had been wrestling with a decision to leave Oranga Tamariki for a good part of 2022 and decided my ethics could no longer allow me to stay, where the hierarchy uses gaslighting and bullying and where the front line are carrying huge burdens without the support required to ensure their decisions can be made in safety and that we are not left to manage on our own.
I did not leave Oranga Tamariki with any bitterness - the purpose of writing this piece is to provide a support for the social workers, supervisors, practice leaders and site managers who are constantly criticised for their work by the organisation rather than supported and assisted.
Concerns I have of the organisation are: there are too few social workers within the frontline; the policies and procedures written for the organisation have too many gaps and are ignored by staff at times; the legislation seems to be ignored; and the hierarchy are too quick to place the blame at the feet of the social workers when things go wrong.
Social workers scapegoats
One of the key problems is that professional practice views, opinions and experience are missing at many levels within Oranga Tamariki.
For a long time practice has been driven by key performance indicators such as you might have in a factory. This will never work with a role that involves contact with humans and building of relationships. I am not saying this would give carte blanche to keeping a case open, but there needs to be recognition of how many unique children can be effectively worked with and kept on a case load to ensure their needs can be identified and their safety assured.
Social workers are the staff who are scapegoated for the fault of processes and procedures. Social workers are the ones who, when trying to apply the legislation, are often seen as being opposed to new philosophies of working.
There has been no prioritisation of the role of social worker, supervisor or practice leader. In fact it has become more and more apparent the voices of those professionals have been lost in the hierarchy of the organisation.
Social workers are required to have a qualification - this is now at least a four-year degree - as well as be registered with a professional body (Social Work Registration Board). From my perspective as a social worker, my voice is not listened to, nor does it appear the National Office is interested in whether a piece of policy would work from a social work perspective.
The people writing policy in National office are often not from a social work background and nor are the senior managers coming from a background of understanding what social work is. The Oranga Tamariki Ministerial Advisory Board, in a report released last year, noted there was a disconnect between sites, regions and National Office.
Most of the difficulty for me came from the absolute lack of resources available to keep tamariki and rangatahi safe and free from ongoing harm, where we had no option but to try and cobble together a safe place for them made up of rotating caregivers and motel units.
The amount of paperwork and requests that have to be completed to see if there is a one per cent chance of getting a better outcome, whilst leaving the office at the end of the day and wondering if the young person would be dead the next day, was the burden of social workers, but also of their supervisors, practice leader and manager.
Problems at the coal face
Oranga Tamariki previously introduced a three tier approach to their child and family assessments. This three tier approach meant the National Contact Centre would undertake an initial assessment where they would contact the notifier and gather any further information they could from them and possibly other agencies involved to determine whether this report of concern was something Oranga Tamariki needed to undertake.
It did not involve speaking with tamariki or whānau. As of November 29 this year, a couple of days before the Chief Social Worker’s report on the death of five-year-old Malachi Subecz, the practice centre has been amended to include the ability to speak with the whānau and tamariki if deemed appropriate.
On those sites where the National Contact Centre was not undertaking this work, the reports would be sent directly to sites. At sites, there was supposed to be a social worker with a level of experience undertaking the initial assessment. In some sites there was a lack of social workers with the experience needed to undertake this role and it was often put onto newer social workers to undertake this task.
There were also times where there were no social workers to allocate to and this would create a backlog of cases. Some sites managed to allocate all their work but caseloads were then extremely high and other sites would allocate up to 20 children per social worker.
The purpose of the core assessment phase is to work with the whānau or family to assess current and future safety and harm or the likelihood of harm to te tamaiti, determine whether te tamaiti has needs that require addressing, and if so who is best to provide those services, and inform the decision about future involvement by Oranga Tamariki, such as a Family Group Conference.
It was suggested this process should only take 20 days. If it was believed there were care or protection concerns or the wellbeing needs identified were such that children may be suffering or likely to suffer serious harm, or wellbeing concerns were complex and wide ranging and may require more information to be gathered before determining the response, then a full assessment would need to be undertaken prior to the Family Group Conference being held.
One of the key elements for a social worker is to build a relationship - it is not to tell a whānau what they are doing wrong, but to listen to the whānau stories and what they see as being the worries and concerns and understanding their position.
Building a relationship within 20 days is never going to work and nor is it possible to form a belief during that timeframe because you have not built the relationship. Likewise calling together a Hui-a-Whānau (a more informal Family Group Conference) within 20 days does not meet whānau needs.
Board recommendations
In September last year the Oranga Tamariki Ministerial Advisory Board released its report into the organisation and made recommendations to significantly improve the responsiveness to Māori, address its systemic, institutional and professional issues, and encourage strong leadership, regional accountability and safe working practices.
It recommended collective Māori and community responsibility and authority must be strengthened and restored in order to lead prevention of harm to tamariki and their whānau, and that over the three months following its release work was undertaken to engage with Māori collectives and communities to enable the shift to prevention and that a strategy to address this was urgently required.
It was stressed by the Board that adequate resources and authority must be shared equitably with Māori.
Many of the services and support for tamariki and their whānau currently delivered by Oranga Tamariki can, over time, be provided by Māori and community groups and the primary role for Oranga Tamariki social workers can then be to respond to emergency situations and navigate tamariki and whānau to immediate help in order to secure their safety and protection.
It stated in order to work collaboratively with Māori, community organsiations and other government agencies, the purpose of Oranga Tamariki must be clarified, including who it primarily exists to serve, what areas of service delivery and support are for Māori and Community to lead and where the responsibility of other government agencies must be to support improved outcomes for tamariki and their whānau.
It also had some specific recommendations targeted at reinforming the social work focus at Oranga Tamariki. This included that the position of Chief Social Worker should be restored as a central role with Oranga Tamariki with influence across the agency and was needed to address the de-professionalisation of Oranga Tamariki’s workforce, including that induction, training, continued professional development and supervision, including training and support for supervisors and practice leaders, should be prioritised.
Lastly, it recommended a national Oranga Tamariki Governance Board should be established to oversee the diversity and depth of changes needed to guide and support Oranga Tamariki through the challenges they will inevitably face over time.
The Governance Board would have responsibility for guiding Oranga Tamariki to devolve authority and resources to Māori collectives and community groups to take on many of the services currently provided by Oranga Tamariki.
This would be an excellent move if Māori and community groups had the capacity, capability and resourcing required to do this. My understanding is that most community groups currently have received a 10 per cent cut to their funding from the Ministry due to the budget restraints imposed. Oranga Tamariki offers little services other than providing an assessment of needs and strengths and then providing the funding for other agencies to carry out any of the supports identified. Oranga Tamariki does not have therapists or offer specific parenting programmes or other services to assist whānau.
The recommendations from the Oranga Tamariki Ministerial Advisory Board were accepted in full by the Acting Chief Executive, Chappie Te Kani, but more than a year later and I have yet to see any changes on the frontline.
Blame and shame
The profession of social worker is one of hope and as social workers we have an obligation to be hope providers.
Unfortunately it seems this very simple role is not supported by an organisation who are critical of the role of social workers and I question whether those in the higher echelons even understand what social workers do. To blame and shame appears to be the culture.
The values of the organisation do not seem to extend to those working within the organisation and I liken working within Oranga Tamariki to being in a whānau impacted by family harm, where the youngest social workers are at risk of significant harm and who are learning the ways of the oldest.
I left to start a new role outside of the place I know so well, but with some trepidation, because I daresay I have been institutionalised.
