Transcript Slide 1

Troubled Families
Mags Walsh
Programme Director
9th July 2012
Prime Minister & Leicestershire’s Ambition for
Our Troubled Families
“Last year the state spent an estimated £9 billion on just 120,000 families…
…that is around £75,000 per family.
David Cameron 15th Dec 2011
1. Significantly improving outcomes for families and their
children
2. Reducing the current costs of public services
“Our heart tells us we can’t just stand by… Our head
tells us we can’t afford to keep footing the
monumental bills for social failure. we have got to
take action to turn troubled families around”
David Cameron, 15th December 2011
2
Louise Casey Unit Ambition
 “Success is bigger than the payment by results model…I want to see
real system change…this is about changing the mainstream. The
Programme needs to catalyse sustainable reform of services in order
to prevent future families from becoming ‘TF’ and to deliver
significant cost savings to the State”
 “My ‘manna from heaven’ is that a 3 year focus on the family’s
needs will result in the number of agencies involved with them will
reduce from, say, 17 to 2”
 “This will be different because it will focus on individual families and
their needs, rather than individual services”
3
Founding Principles
Approved by Programme Board June 2011
 Place’ and ‘citizens’ before ‘organisation’
 Place shared vision, objectives and services
 Pro-active co-design between partners in the place and between the place
& Whitehall
 Prevention by early and earlier intervention
 Better outcomes at less cost
 Fully understand the problem before defining a solution
 Ambitious & if appropriate radical local innovation
 Build on good practice /initiatives in place in Leicestershire i.e. Integrated
Offender Model, Children’s Centres, YOS, Systems Change, many others
 Decommission & reprioritise services when required
 Pooled /aligned budgets around the theme/place
4
SECONDARY
RESEARCH
PRIMARY
RESEARH
Family Insight
A comprehensive approach
Practitioner
Insight
Family
Insight


Desk based
research

Other Insight

Full day practitioner workshop
Ethnography
3 Workshops
Individual
family
consultation
9 families
21 adults, 13 CYP
9 families
- 135 practitioners, cross agency
Customer
Journey
Needs
Assessment
Customer
Journey maps
Craig's story
(Beacon project)
Child Poverty
Mental Health
Evidence base for family models
Melton Family Model
Current/emerging policy
Mapping Families
LIFE - Swindon pilot
The detailed Insight report is now published on the Leicestershire Together
Website: www.leicestershiretogether.org/partnerships/communitybudgets
Barriers to Families
6
What Must Change
Earlier Intervention
Re-training
/ attitude of
workforce
Shared vision and
stronger leadership
Family-centric, not
organisation-centric
approaches to working
Advocate /
Key Family
Worker
Shared
processes /
systems
Politics /
resources
Better joint
working
Information
sharing
Community
From insight phase: practitioner event
7
Barriers highlighted by Aperia
 The range of support and access to support is confusing, services are not
joined up, are complex, and they don’t know what is available so they
didn’t get the help that perhaps does exist
 Services start and then stop and it is confusing – not one individual felt
that their personal goals were clearly and openly aligned to the objectives
of the services – hence they personally felt that nothing had changed, but
services were stopped as the service felt that a goal had been achieved
 People don’t listen, are too quick to judge and don’t really understand
 Services are reactive, based on crisis prevention and short term
interventions
 Services are set up to dealt with single issues i.e. offending, domestic
violence, mental health and not ‘whole family’ or ‘whole person’ approach
 Families often feel services work against them, not with / for them
8
Barriers highlighted by Aperia
 Lack of education - many attendees regretted that they felt unprepared and
ill-trained for the lives that they live. This is both at an educational attainment
level and also in terms of the skills to be able to manage and run their own
homes
 Their past / lack of role models – some people commented that it is hardly
surprising that they are currently suffering the problems that they face given
their experiences / lives to date. Some referenced directly that they feel there
are not enough role models for them or their children. This was a very strong
view from practitioners and echoed, although less precisely, by service users
9
What we learned from the Insight Phase…
Common issues for FCN
 Confusing landscape of public
services
 Poor/overcrowded housing (incl.
homelessness)
 High risk behaviours (incl.
substance misuse)
 Poverty (incl. debt &
unemployment)
 Health (incl. mental health &
disability)
 Crime (offending and experience
of)
 Lack of education/ attainment
 Domestic violence
 Poor parenting
 Difficulties maintaining
relationships (incl. family, friends,
peers, isolation & social
marginalisation)
 Lack of resilience (incl. capability,
capacity, confidence & inability to
cope)
 Lack of or limited choice/control
 Adverse effect on aspirations/
perception of social mobility
What Parents said they want most from
Services
 Stability, support, encouragement, consistency
 To be listened to and acknowledged
 People to do what they say they’re going to do and to get
back to them
 Freedom from prejudice/social marginalisation
 Services to work for and not against them
 Have their own needs addressed as well as their children’s
Reoccurring Themes from Evidence Base,
Current Literature and National Policy on What
works:
 Early intervention
 Building resilience
 Stability, continuity and
transitions
 Effective parenting and
supporting families
 Tackling educational performance




Tackling worklessness
Tackling poor health
Tackling poverty
Involving communities and
building social capital
 Building capabilities, resilience
and skills development
12
Troubled Family Risk Factors
Involvement in crime/ASB
Poor parenting
No parent in the family is working
Family lives in poor-quality
Truancy, exclusion or low
Child Behavioural Problems
or overcrowded housing
educational attainment
Limited support network
No parent has any qualifications
Child is a carer
Family in debt
Child Substance abuse problems
Mother has mental health problems
Adult with learning difficulties
At least one parent has a long-standing
limiting illness, disability or infirmity
Drugs or alcohol misuse
Communications problems
Marriage, relationship
or family breakdown
NEET
Family has low income
(below 60% of the median)
Teenage Parent(s)
Family cannot afford a number
of food and clothing items
Domestic violence
Child protection issues
Risk factors attributed to families with 5 or more disadvantages (from) Families At Risk: Background
on families with multiple disadvantages, Social Exclusion Taskforce Research Report, 2007
Additional risk factors from families supported through family intervention (NatCen, Mar 2010).
13
Local Definition for Leics Troubled Families
 Out of 23 potential risks/issues
– More than 5 risks/issues = Troubled Family
– Any family with an open Child Protection Plan not in the
above = Troubled Family
– Add to this any family not in the above but has 2 or more
of:•
•
•
•
•
Alcohol Misuse
Drugs Misuse
Violence or abuse
Crime/ASB
Mental Health
Any family presenting 2-4
risks not in the TF category
= a At Risk Family
e.g. at risk of becoming Troubled
14
Leicestershire’s Troubled Families –
c1300
Oadby & Wigston, 68
Blaby, 80
North West
Leicestershire, 235
Charnwood, 431
Melton, 127
Hinckley & Bosworth, 277
Harborough, 66
15
Count of Troubled Families and
Threshold Families
Oadby & Wigston, 224
Blaby, 252
North West Leicestershire,
589
Charnwood, 1066
Melton, 288
Hinckley & Bosworth, 667
Harborough, 216
16
NAT CEN FIP RESEARCH:
Outcomes for families exiting FIP
Outcome Improvements Recorded:







Families involved in ASB
 A Reduction of 58% to 34%
Families involved in Crime
 A Reduction of 41% to 20%
Children with behavioural /truancy problems
 A Reduction of 53% to 28%
Risks from poor family functioning (DV, family breakdown, child protection)
 A Reduction of 47% to 16%
Child protection plans
 A Reduction of 34% to 18%
Health risks including mental, physical health and substance misuse problems
 A Reduction of 34%
In worklessness (ETE)
 A Reduction of 14% to 58%
17
Evaluation Highlighted 8 Core Features Viewed
as Critical to FIP Success
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Recruitment and retention of high quality staff who can work in an
empathetic way, build trust whilst maintaining professional boundaries
(the relationship with families is key)
Small caseloads (no more than 6 at any one time)
Dedicated key worker who works intensively with each family in the
home & community and outside of ‘office hours’
A whole family approach
Consistency of key worker with family and longevity
Having the scope to use resources creatively i.e.. personal/flexible
budget
Using sanctions alongside support/incentives for families
Effective multi-agency relationships/working and information sharing
18
The Design:
Leicestershire’s Family Model
19
Family Support Model - Key Principles
 Any new model is sustainable beyond the medium term
 Aims to move families closer to independence from public services
 Model will need to be underpinned by cultural change with strong leadership
across Leicestershire Public Sector/Voluntary Sector
 ‘champions’ and SRO in all organisation to lead required cultural change?
 Supports early/earlier intervention
 Builds on good, well evaluated practice
 Incorporates some personalised commissioning at family & locality level
 Workforce development a key component (multi-agency training)
 Robust supervision framework key
 Families/workers are able to access services required quickly with some priority
(with lower entry thresholds)
 Is able to influence commissioning for identified service gaps and policy
changes
 Single Family Assessment Framework
 Information is Shared
20
Approved Family Model
Specialist
Services
Co-located locality
service:
• Permanent core team
members inc. Family
Worker
• P/t Co-opted team
members
• Personalised family
budgets
Family
Family
Universal
Services
Role:
Whole family approach
• Delivers direct support
• Co-ordinates other services
• Outreach in home/community
• Assertive intensive support
• Small caseloads
Improved outcomes
Increased resilience, strengths &
independence
Targeted
Services
21
Leicestershire’s Family Support Model
A.
Team around the family approach with dedicated family key worker
 Role is outreach working in family homes and communities
 small caseloads and intensive approach as required by family circumstances/needs
 In some families may require an additional separate worker to directly support the
children
 Builds family capacity, resilience & recognises strengths within the family
 Builds self esteem, skills, relationships and aspirations
B.
Co-located services in localities
 Local integrated core multi-agency teams
 Locality partnership solutions and delivery
C.
Working with families for better outcomes for their families
 Single Family Plan (owned/developed by family with support)
 Honest conversations
 Empowering families will be key
 In partnership with team/key worker - with empathy but clear boundaries
 It will be important to work with families to agree objectives – this will require an
understanding of what their drivers / priorities are
 Realistic expectations on outcomes for the most long term ‘troubled’ families
 Access to required services key
22
Enablers for the Family Model
Partnership approach: multiagency & families for better
outcomes for families
• Highly trained workforce –
learn together
• Robust training, supervision
and support will be key
• The right
skills/competencies/attitude
• Supportive systems, policies,
training & mutual respect
An Enabling Culture
Core Set of Outcomes
• The new family model and
approach needs to be part of a
fundamental wider cultural
change and policy review
cross organisationally to
address the policy constraints
& barriers
• Staff will need to have the
freedoms and flexibility to
make decisions about support
needs / solutions
• No blame culture but
‘learning’ culture within and
across services/organisations
will be critical to the success
of the approach
• Move away from “this is the
service we offer” culture to
“what is required” culture
• All services for families should
be commissioned on a core
agreed set of outcomes
Needs to be everyone’s responsibility
Sustainability & The Role of the
Wider Community
• Including businesses,
voluntary sector, churches
and local community will be
core to achieving optimal
outcomes
Family Feedback on the Family Model
 17 Families across 2 district areas attended a number of focus groups
 The findings from the original FCN insight were reinforced
•
This included the importance of :
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Early years and early/earlier intervention
having a joined up whole family approach that was family led (listening to families
needs, trying to help them and not judge them)
Family designed (choice, flexibility and a language families understand)
Sustainability (to enable families to be independent of services)
Workers who are well trained with a good awareness of the issues and challenges
families face
Quality services that meets families needs (advocacy and practical support)
Appropriate information sharing
Ensuring families do not feel any professional or social stigma when fighting for
their families needs
24
Family Feedback on the Family Model
 Highlighted the importance of the following elements in a
family support worker:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
the softer skills needed by staff
the ability to build a relationship, trust and mediate
not to be critical or judgemental
a consistent person
knowledge on how to get things done
authority to get things done
choice (i.e. about time in the home or community, the nature of the help)
easily contactable or available in a crisis
sharing data amongst the team around the family
understanding the professional’s ‘language’
25
Current/Next Steps




Clarifying the National Programme
Briefing & Consulting Key Stakeholders
Establish Governance for the Programme
Developing a Financial Budget (profile income & costs)
 Impact of Government funding
 Impact of contributions from partners
 Making appropriate links into other relevant Initiatives/Priorities i.e.
Worklessness; Economic Development/Employers Engagement; Voluntary Sector
Initiatives etc
 Planning Implementation
 Delivery Model/Service, infrastructure, staffing, systems, policies,
performance framework , Information Systems, Communications Strategy etc.
26
Questions
 How could Parishes contribute to the Troubled
Families Programme?
 What can we do to enable that support to
happen?
27