Search results

The purpose of this paper is to report on findings from an evaluative research study which looked at a timed intervention model of practice comprising of up to 24 weeks of intensive meetings with adult service users set up by one local authority in England, to prevent and delay the need for care and support. A particular focus of this paper is on adults who hoard.

The study employed a mixed-methods design, consisting of interviews with service users (n=13), social workers (n=3), social work managers (n=2) and stakeholders from external services and agencies (n=6). It included a costing analysis of staff time and an analysis of goals of service users and “satisfaction with life” self-report questionnaires (n=20), completed at pre- and post-intervention stages.

There was evidence that social workers used strengths, relationship-based and outcome-based focused approaches in their work. The techniques used by social workers to engage, achieve change and assess effectiveness with service users varied. These techniques included the use of photographs to enable the service user to map and assess their own progress over time, encouraging hoarders to declutter and reclaim their living space. The service users valued the time the social workers spent with them and the way that they were treated with sensitivity and respect.

The study focused on one local authority in England; there was no comparison group. This, and the small sample size, means that statistical generalisations cannot be made and only limited conclusions can be drawn from the quantitative data.

The paper provides insights into the work undertaken by social workers with adults who hoard. It contributes to the body of knowledge on effective social work interventions with adults who hoard.

WITH eloquence which we cannot imitate, or repeat, the national loss has been sufficiently expressed by others. It is true, Kipling and William Watson being dead, and Alfred Noyes silent, the poets have not risen to the height of a great occasion, but that is by the way. Our own tribute to the late King must be based on his work for libraries, since any other tribute is general to a whole Empire. Kings can have few hours in which to read and yet some of the stories, true or apocryphal, of King George V. touch upon his reading. He showed, however, a closer interest of late years in libraries than any other of our monarchs has done, and at the opening ceremonies of the National Central Library and the Manchester Public Library he uttered words which are the best slogans that libraries have received. Even if he did not write them—a matter which we have no right to affirm or deny—his utterance of them gave them the royal superscription. We repeat them, as they cannot be too often repeated:—

The widening rift at the macro level between the proponents of economic growth and those of environmental protection may have triggered forces acting in the opposite direction at the micro‐level where competitive performance is increasingly becoming a function of the ability of firms to respond to environmentally‐defined strategic advantages. We cite examples of current corporate behavior which suggest a stages model of responses to environmental threats and opportunities. The model portrays an evolutionary process in which competitiveness and environmental goals may converge to become complementary forces driving pro‐active firms toward a strategy of competitive environmentalism.

AN ESTEEMED correspondent points out that there are about two dozen library magazines of all sorts and sizes in circulation, whereas when he started his career there were no more than three. Our correspondent has himself had considerable editorial experience, and it may be that he is still in harness in that regard. One of his earliest efforts was in running the magazine of the old Library Assistants' Association, and it is not likely that that magazine has ever reached the same heights of excellence as it attained in his day. He observes that there are far too many library magazines now in circulation. We agree.