KICKING social services is a popular media pastime and the latest headlines have continued a long-standing trend in this country. As is often the case, however, the facts behind the situation often get in the way of a good headline.

Perhaps a few facts will provide a better insight into our recent reported "poor performance".

The indicators causing so much furore were one set of more than 40 submitted at the time. They relate to the performance on our inspections of children's homes and residential homes two years ago.

At the time, the manager of the unit had died in quite tragic and unexpected circumstances, two of the staff were on maternity leave, and recruitment to all vacancies had proved extremely difficult. The unit was also having to deal with two large home closures, and during this time three statutory inspection visits to children's homes were missed.

If the minister, and other sources so quick to condemn, had taken the trouble to find out the situation today, they would know that the unit is on target to meet 100 per cent of all inspections this year. Not quite so newsworthy perhaps, but a much better picture of what is happening now. With respect to our being one of the 17 "poor performers", this relates to the position following a joint review inspection 18 months ago.

Since that time we have been working closely to address all the problems that were identified, and at a meeting with the Social Services Inspectorate and District Audit in October, we were praised for the significant improvements made since that inspection. The inspectors noted that social services had reacted positively to the review and tackled problem areas rigorously and effectively, both within the division and corporately as a local authority.

Hardly a "spectacular failure", but rather a social services working constructively and effectively to improve its operations.

With respect to Mr Dunn (Your Letters, Dec 3) it is not usual for us to comment on individual cases. Given its references to ideological domination and "idiocy", I would simply point out that our actions have been subject to a rigorous external investigation by a prominent independent investigator and judicial proceedings. The outcome of both of these has been generally supportive of the approach taken by the social services and other agencies involved.

The headlines of the past week have been nothing short of scurrilous and misleading. They have put back the considerable efforts made by all staff following the joint review.

I would finish by quoting from the guidelines included with the publication of the indicators. They state that "assessing the performance of an authority is complicated and it is essential to look beneath what appears to be true at face value. Care must be taken not to rely too heavily on any one indicator when drawing conclusions".

What a pity certain ministers and commentators did not follow the Department of Health's very sensible advice.

COUN K. SCARLETT,

cabinet member,

health, housing and

social services.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.