Helping Families: From policy to design to
delivery
National Community Safety Network
Matthew Ainsworth
Katie Kelleher
Seamus Lynch
Salford City Council
18th September 2013
1
This slide pack outlines
• The backdrop to the national policy focus on Troubled
Families
• The rationale for Salford’s approach to ‘Helping
Families’ and progress to date
• Learning from the programme
• Our understanding of the money flow
• Cost Benefit Analysis
• Sustainability plans
2
Background to Troubled Families
• Pre election: Centre for Social Justice Green Paper on the Family
•
•
•
•
– multi agency emphasis
Coalition programme commitment to test a new approach to
working with families with complex needs
Cross Whitehall focus
16 Community Budget Areas focused on Complex Families
(including GM)
ESF for Complex families part of Welfare to Work agenda
3
Post riots: an extra push on delivery
England riots: Cameron to boost
troubled-families plans
Prime Minister David Cameron has said he will put
"rocket boosters" under efforts to turn round
120,000 troubled families in the wake of recent
rioting. Mr Cameron said bureaucracy had "held
back" this work, and promised to "clear away the
red tape".
Ref: BBC.co.uk
New ‘Troubled Families
Unit’ and programme
4
National policy drivers
Government pledge to ‘turn around’ lives of the 120,000 most
troubled families
The Prime Minister has said that ‘turning lives
around’ means getting parents into work, children
attending school, reducing crime and anti-social
behaviour and cutting costs for the State.
These are typically families who have histories of
intergenerational poor educational outcomes, low
skills and worklessness. The challenge is to break
this cycle and raise the ceiling of ambition for
them.
• DWP ESF Support for families with multiple
problems
• DCLG Troubled Families Programme
Payment by results arrangement with Government
for successes achieved
5
306k families with children
with behavioural problems
290k families at risk of severe
exclusion
120k families with
5+ disadvantages
50k families with 5+
disadvantages AND
children with
behavioural problems
Defining ‘Troubled Families’
Original definition - five or more of:
Poor quality or
overcrowded
housing
Cannot afford a
number of food
and clothing
items
No parent in
family in work
No parent with
any
qualifications
Est. 117,000 families nationally
Est. 835 in Salford
Low family
income (60% of
mean)
Poor individual outcomes
Quality of life impact in
neighbourhoods
High costs to public services
6
Mother with
mental health
problems
At least one
parent with
longstanding
limiting illness
Who are ‘Troubled Families’?
The national Troubled Families programme will engage and support Salford families that
have problems, including parents not working and children not in school, and causes
problems, such as youth crime and anti-social behaviour.
In identifying who we work with, families must meet two or more of the following
criteria:
•Young person(s) involved in crime or member(s) of the family involved in anti‐social
behaviour;
•Child(ren) in the family affected by unauthorised absence or exclusion from school;
•Adult(s) in the household out of work and claiming benefits.
In Salford we know that families with these problems are also more likely to have other
related problems, such as domestic violence, relationship breakdown and poor mental
or physical health.
7
Case study: Rationale for Team around the
Family approach.

























‘As is’ response: confusing, expensive, ineffective
(Nov 2009 to Oct 2010)
Key:
Father
Age:
Agency A
Agency B
Agency C
Agency D
Agency E
Agency F
Agency G
Agency H
Agency I
Agency K
Agency L
R.
d.
Info. from police
regarding mass brawl
outside property.
2/6/10
01/04/10
x2
12/03/10 18/03/10
x2
34
ch
04/06/10
0
rch
P
Arrest CA
23/07/10
F
21/11/09
09/03/10
10/02/10
11/12/09
11/01/10
18/01/10
03/02/10
P
Meal
11/02/10
03/12/09
P
01/03/10
21/04/10
Arrest CA
27/03/10
17/05/10
Parenting
Programme0 15/05/10
6/05/10
15/04/10
12/04/10
31/03/10
20/04/10
25/05/10 02/06/10
x2
01/06/10
0
30/07/10
Arrest s.47
24/06/10
ily
A
L
Advised backdate not
requested on HBNS.
will write
a backdate request
YOS
1
m
20/11/09
y
31/07/10
23/07/10
x3
29/06/10
14/06/10
AS
A
M
Ty
Think Family
03/08/10
A
12/08/10
10/08/10
23/08/10
07/08/10
C
20/08/10
Think Family
13/09/10
Tly
11/09/10
x2
06/09/10
T
Ar
27/09/10 02/10/10
x2
14/10/10 20/10/10
W/C 01/11/09 08/11/09 15/11/09 22/11/09 29/11/09 06/12/09 13/12/09 20/12/09 27/12/09 03/01/10 10/01/10 17/01/10 24/01/10 31/01/10 07/02/10 14/02/10 21/02/10 28/02/10 07/03/10 14/03/10 21/03/10 28/03/10 04/04/10 11/04/10 18/04/10 25/04/10 02/05/10 09/05/10 16/05/10 23/05/10 30/05/10 06/06/10 13/06/10 20/06/10 27/06/10 04/07/10 11/07/10 18/07/10 25/07/10 01/08/10 08/08/10 15/08/10 22/08/10 29/08/10 05/09/10 12/09/10 19/09/10 26/09/10 03/10/10 10/10/10 17/10/10 24/10/10
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Month Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Son 1
Age:
20
s
Job submission
Job submission
Submitted to
One Stop Shop
W/C 01/11/09 08/11/09 15/11/09 22/11/09 29/11/09 06/12/09 13/12/09 20/12/09 27/12/09 03/01/10 10/01/10 17/01/10 24/01/10 31/01/10 07/02/10 14/02/10 21/02/10 28/02/10 07/03/10 14/03/10 21/03/10 28/03/10 04/04/10 11/04/10 18/04/10 25/04/10 02/05/10 09/05/10 16/05/10 23/05/10 30/05/10 06/06/10 13/06/10 20/06/10 27/06/10 04/07/10 11/07/10 18/07/10 25/07/10 01/08/10 08/08/10 15/08/10 22/08/10 29/08/10 05/09/10 12/09/10 19/09/10 26/09/10 03/10/10 10/10/10 17/10/10 24/10/10
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
0
Month Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
0
Sep
Oct
Salford
YOS0 ASSFAM
ASSFAM
Legal Planning
21/09/10 30/09/10
29/09/10
Meeting - professionals
10/09/10
only
Salford
C
ASSFAM 07/10/10
YOS
ASSFAM 27/09/10
Health
06/10/10
20/09/10
Visitor
Think
28/09/10 8/10/10
Family
27/09/10
13/09/10
Think
Daughter 1
Age:
Family
0
24/08/10
15
0
Hr
0
fxgjhxf/1
Salford
0 YOS
01/03/10
9
11/0
0
12/10
19/00
05/00
0
Health
Visitor
11/05/10
H
v
Health
V10
T
S
01/03/10 10/03/1016/03/10
02/03/10
110
Family Action Meeting
06/04/10 14/04/10
15/04/10
09/04/10
21/04/10
28/07/10
02/07/10
10/06/10 17/06/10
Health
Visitor
25/08/10
Think
Family
03/08/10
Think
Family
31/08/10
25/08/10
14/07/10
05/07/10
23/07/10 29/07/10 04/08/10
H
28/10/10
12/10/10
13/09/10 20/09/10
010
22/10/10
W/C 01/11/09 08/11/09 15/11/09 22/11/09 29/11/09 06/12/09 13/12/09 20/12/09 27/12/09 03/01/10 10/01/10 17/01/10 24/01/10 31/01/10 07/02/10 14/02/10 21/02/10 28/02/10 07/03/10 14/03/10 21/03/10 28/03/10 04/04/10 11/04/10 18/04/10 25/04/10 02/05/10 09/05/10 16/05/10 23/05/10 30/05/10 06/06/10 13/06/10 20/06/10 27/06/10 04/07/10 11/07/10 18/07/10 25/07/10 01/08/10 08/08/10 15/08/10 22/08/10 29/08/10 05/09/10 12/09/10 19/09/10 26/09/10 03/10/10 10/10/10 17/10/10 24/10/10
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Month Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Daughter 2
Age:
14
Cautioned for criminal
damage.
Report t committed
criminal damage with
associate to neighbour's
property Court hearing - obtained
ex-parte injunction
Co
W/C 01/11/09 08/11/09 15/11/09 22/11/09 29/11/09 06/12/09 13/12/09 20/12/09 27/12/09 03/01/10 10/01/10 17/01/10 24/01/10 31/01/10 07/02/10 14/02/10 21/02/10 28/02/10 07/03/10 14/03/10 21/03/10 28/03/10 04/04/10 11/04/10 18/04/10 25/04/10 02/05/10 09/05/10 16/05/10 23/05/10 30/05/10 06/06/10 13/06/10 20/06/10 27/06/10 04/07/10 11/07/10 18/07/10 25/07/10 01/08/10 08/08/10 15/08/10 22/08/10 29/08/10 05/09/10 12/09/10 19/09/10 26/09/10 03/10/10 10/10/10 17/10/10 24/10/10
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
N
Month Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
W
0
Son 2
Age:
0
14
0
.
A
Salford 0
YOS
19/04/10
C
ng
0
S0
C0 Con
On programme
S
S
0
r
1
0
S10
S
S S0
Con10
S
S
16
Connexions
Conn
14/07/10
Con0
Con
C9
C9
Co
C
W/C 01/11/09 08/11/09 15/11/09 22/11/09 29/11/09 06/12/09 13/12/09 20/12/09 27/12/09 03/01/10 10/01/10 17/01/10 24/01/10 31/01/10 07/02/10 14/02/10 21/02/10 28/02/10 07/03/10 14/03/10 21/03/10 28/03/10 04/04/10 11/04/10 18/04/10 25/04/10 02/05/10 09/05/10 16/05/10 23/05/10 30/05/10 06/06/10 13/06/10 20/06/10 27/06/10 04/07/10 11/07/10 18/07/10 25/07/10 01/08/10 08/08/10 15/08/10 22/08/10 29/08/10 05/09/10 12/09/10 19/09/10 26/09/10 03/10/10 10/10/10 17/10/10 24/10/10
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Universal
Highly reactive: crisis management
Targeted planned
(Nov 2009 to Oct 2010)
Reactive unplanned
Key:
R.
Universal
Targeted
d.
Reactive
Info. from police
regarding mass brawl
outside property.
2/6/10
Father
Age:
12/03/10
x2
34
01/04/10
x2
18/03/10
ch
04/06/10
0
rch
P
Arrest CA
23/07/10
m
03/12/09
20/11/09
11/12/09
11/01/10
18/01/10
01/03/10
03/02/10
21/04/10
Arrest CA
27/03/10
P
09/03/10
12/04/10
31/03/10
20/04/10
25/05/10
x2
15/05/10
M
A
Think Family
13/09/10
12/08/10
10/08/10
Arrest s.47
24/06/10
02/06/10
23/08/10
07/08/10
C
Tly
20/08/10
01/06/10
AS
A
Ty
Think Family
03/08/10
17/05/10
Parenting
Programme0
6/05/10
15/04/10
ily
A
P
Meal
11/02/10
10/02/10
0
30/07/10
L
Advised backdate not
requested on HBNS.
will write
a backdate request
YOS
1
F
21/11/09
y
31/07/10
23/07/10
x3
29/06/10
14/06/10
06/09/10
11/09/10
x2
T
Ar
27/09/10 02/10/10
x2
14/10/10
20/10/10
W/C 01/11/09 08/11/09 15/11/09 22/11/09 29/11/09 06/12/09 13/12/09 20/12/09 27/12/09 03/01/10 10/01/10 17/01/10 24/01/10 31/01/10 07/02/10 14/02/10 21/02/10 28/02/10 07/03/10 14/03/10 21/03/10 28/03/10 04/04/10 11/04/10 18/04/10 25/04/10 02/05/10 09/05/10 16/05/10 23/05/10 30/05/10 06/06/10 13/06/10 20/06/10 27/06/10 04/07/10 11/07/10 18/07/10 25/07/10 01/08/10 08/08/10 15/08/10 22/08/10 29/08/10 05/09/10 12/09/10 19/09/10 26/09/10 03/10/10 10/10/10 17/10/10 24/10/10
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Month
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Son 1
Age:
20
s
Job submission
Job submission
Submitted to
One Stop Shop
W/C 01/11/09 08/11/09 15/11/09 22/11/09 29/11/09 06/12/09 13/12/09 20/12/09 27/12/09 03/01/10 10/01/10 17/01/10 24/01/10 31/01/10 07/02/10 14/02/10 21/02/10 28/02/10 07/03/10 14/03/10 21/03/10 28/03/10 04/04/10 11/04/10 18/04/10 25/04/10 02/05/10 09/05/10 16/05/10 23/05/10 30/05/10 06/06/10 13/06/10 20/06/10 27/06/10 04/07/10 11/07/10 18/07/10 25/07/10 01/08/10 08/08/10 15/08/10 22/08/10 29/08/10 05/09/10 12/09/10 19/09/10 26/09/10 03/10/10 10/10/10 17/10/10 24/10/10
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
0
Month
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
0
Sep
Oct
Salford
Think
Daughter 1
Age:
Family
0
24/08/10
15
10/09/10
0
Hr
0
11/0
0
12/10
19/00
T
14/04/10
15/04/10
06/04/10
10/03/1016/03/10
110
09/04/10
Think
Family
31/08/10
25/08/10
28/07/10
02/07/10
10/06/10
21/04/10
17/06/10
14/07/10
05/07/10
23/07/10
29/07/10
Think
Family
13/09/10
Health
Visitor
25/08/10
Family Action Meeting
01/03/10
02/03/10
05/00
Health
V10
S
fxgjhxf/1
Salford
0 YOS
01/03/10
9
0
Health
Visitor
11/05/10
H
v
04/08/10
H
YOS 0 ASSFAM
ASSFAMLegal Planning
21/09/10 30/09/10
29/09/10
Meeting - professionals
only
Salford
C
ASSFAM 07/10/10
YOS
ASSFAM 27/09/10Health06/10/10
20/09/10
Visitor
28/09/10
27/09/10
8/10/10
28/10/10
12/10/10
13/09/10
22/10/10
010
20/09/10
W/C 01/11/09 08/11/09 15/11/09 22/11/09 29/11/09 06/12/09 13/12/09 20/12/09 27/12/09 03/01/10 10/01/10 17/01/10 24/01/10 31/01/10 07/02/10 14/02/10 21/02/10 28/02/10 07/03/10 14/03/10 21/03/10 28/03/10 04/04/10 11/04/10 18/04/10 25/04/10 02/05/10 09/05/10 16/05/10 23/05/10 30/05/10 06/06/10 13/06/10 20/06/10 27/06/10 04/07/10 11/07/10 18/07/10 25/07/10 01/08/10 08/08/10 15/08/10 22/08/10 29/08/10 05/09/10 12/09/10 19/09/10 26/09/10 03/10/10 10/10/10 17/10/10 24/10/10
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Month
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Daughter 2
Age:
14
Cautioned for criminal
damage.
Court hearing - obtained
ex-parte injunction
Co
W/C 01/11/09 08/11/09 15/11/09 22/11/09 29/11/09 06/12/09 13/12/09 20/12/09 27/12/09 03/01/10 10/01/10 17/01/10 24/01/10 31/01/10 07/02/10 14/02/10 21/02/10 28/02/10 07/03/10 14/03/10 21/03/10 28/03/10 04/04/10 11/04/10 18/04/10 25/04/10 02/05/10 09/05/10 16/05/10 23/05/10 30/05/10 06/06/10 13/06/10 20/06/10 27/06/10 04/07/10 11/07/10 18/07/10 25/07/10 01/08/10 08/08/10 15/08/10 22/08/10 29/08/10 05/09/10 12/09/10 19/09/10 26/09/10 03/10/10 10/10/10 17/10/10 24/10/10
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
N
Month Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
W
0
Son 2
Age:
0
14
0
.
A
Salford
YOS
19/04/10
0
C
ng
0
W/C
Week
r
1
Con
0
S10
S
S0
C0
On programme
S
S
0
S
S0
ConnexionsConn
14/07/10
Con10
S
S
16
Con0
Con
C9
C9
C
Co
01/11/09
08/11/09
15/11/09
22/11/09
29/11/09
06/12/09
13/12/09
20/12/09
27/12/09
03/01/10
10/01/10
17/01/10
24/01/10
31/01/10
07/02/10
14/02/10
21/02/10
28/02/10
07/03/10
14/03/10
21/03/10
28/03/10
04/04/10
11/04/10
18/04/10
25/04/10
02/05/10
09/05/10
16/05/10
23/05/10
30/05/10
06/06/10
13/06/10
20/06/10
27/06/10
04/07/10
11/07/10
18/07/10
25/07/10
01/08/10
08/08/10
15/08/10
22/08/10
29/08/10
05/09/10
12/09/10
19/09/10
26/09/10
03/10/10
10/10/10
17/10/10
24/10/10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Helping Families - Context
• In Salford, we developed a Team around the Family (TAF) model and will
work with 835 families over the lifetime of the programme. 479 Troubled
Families were initially identified, 300 of whom we started to work with in
year 1.
• Our delivery plan works on the principle of a case co-ordinator model, with
more complex cases being intensively managed by workers with small
caseloads (e.g. FIP) with less complex families being managed less
intensively by workers with much larger caseloads. Locally, we’ve categorised
these tiers as Super-Intense, Intense, Normal & Light.
• We made assumptions on what proportion of our cohort would be managed
through which tier, which secondary services they would access and which
outcomes would be achieved.
• These outcomes were apportioned to the relevant agency along with a
corresponding financial value (fiscal benefit).
• This information formed our baseline Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA)
• Our assumptions have subsequently been replaced by actual data for 300
families who have been supported and a refreshed CBA produced.
11
Delivery Model
Key features: TAF comprises Lead Professional and relevant services
as decided by the Locality Panel. Primary functions to work with the
family / front line delivery. Data capture via the GM Toolkit. Day to
day management of the family done within the TAF via the Lead
Professional. Where necessary seek specific funding from Locality
Steering
Group
The Troubled Families
Cohort
- Strategic Overview
- Perf Monitoring
- Challenge & support
Panel to help assist the family.
Locality Panels
- Case allocation
- Performance monitoring
Performance Reports
LP North
LP South
LP
Central
LP West
LP East
Central
Teams Around The Family
- Operational Delivery
TAF
TAF
TAF
TAF
TAF
TAF
TAF
TAF
TAF
TAF
TAF
TAF
TAF
TAF
Data
GM Toolkits
available on
SharePoint
Interventions:
Including but not limited to: BIT, Family Group
Conference, Evidence Based Parenting, Children's
Centres, Domestic Violence, Strengthening Families,
Drugs & Alcohol, Family & Adult Learning, Legacy Future
Jobs Fund
12
Services:
Including but not limited to: IYSS, Childrens Services
(EIP, Housing Officers, Skills & Work Officers, EWOs,
Family Support Workers).
TAF
Team around the Family Approach
Current situation
New approach
Multiple professionals involved with different
family members
Named workers for named families
Agencies defeated by ‘resistant’ or hard to
help’ families. Tendencies to pass cases on or
pull resources if there is no progress or the
family simply costs too much.
Persistence with families backed up by sanctions
Overlapping assessments and interventions,
agencies efforts conflicting and unaligned with
no overall objectives or agreement about what
is being aimed for with a family
A ‘common endeavour’ among agencies for
each family, operating within agreed structures.
Existing support services lack focus on work and
meaningful activity. Defeatism about these
families capacity to work or contribute.
Meaningful activity is a consistent aim for the
families
Services look at individuals or single problems,
no attention to how the family works as a
system or family history.
Rather than just ‘thinking family’ - ‘Doing
family’
13
Financial Model
The delivery model has been costed for the five years 2013/14 to 2017/18
The financial benefits of delivery have been calculated using a mix of modelled and
actual data, based on the presenting needs of 300 families, some of whom now have
cases closed, some of whom are still being worked with. Some agency benefits are still
to captured.
For each year of the programme the costs are expected to be circa £2.33m and the
annual benefits peak at £3.89m.
The cost of Salford’s delivery model is split between primary (Team around the Family)
and secondary interventions and is a mixture of cash and in kind.
• The cost of the Team around the Family primary intervention is £1.18m/annum
• The cost of secondary interventions is £1.15m/annum
• The model includes the investment made by SCC for project management,
commissioning, IT development, infrastructure support for Locality Panels and
significant time of senior staff in design and monitoring of the programme.
14
Year 1: Cohort Segmentation
Youth Crime
and ASB
225
25
49
Worklessness
Education
180
15
Year 1: Cohort Distribution
16
Year 1: Lead Professional Distribution
• 300 families have been tracked through the TAF process and their distribution is:
Tier
No of Families
Cost (£)
Super Intense
36
189,000
Intense
145
802,695
Normal
36
59,561
Light
83
129,516
Total
300
1,180,772
17
Presenting Issues
Troubled families have a wide range of presenting needs, examples of which are
detailed below
Presenting Issues
Looked After Children
3%
Housing Evictions
8%
12%
Child in Need
23%
Fixed Term Exclusions
Child Protection
25%
Persistent Absence
38%
ASB
50%
Alcohol
50%
W orklessness
60%
Drugs
60%
65%
Mental Health
0%
10%
20%
30%
18
40%
50%
60%
70%
Defining success for families
Crime/ASB
• 33% reduction in proven offending for all under 18s in household in the last 6
months, compared to the previous 6 months
• At least a 60% reduction in anti-social behaviour incidents across the household in
the last 6 months
Education
• All school age children in household have had fewer than 3 fixed term exclusions and
less than 15% unauthorised absences in the last 3 consecutive terms, AND
• All school age children who were not on school roll have moved into school, PRU or
alternative provision and have had fewer than 3 fixed term exclusions and less than
15% unauthorised absence in last 3 consecutive terms
Worklessness
• An adult in the household has volunteered for the Work Programme or has been
attached to ESF Family Support provision in the last 6 months, OR
• An adult in the household has moved off benefits and into continuous employment (if
not already on ESF or Work Programme provision)
19
Year 1: Outcomes Achieved
Youth Crime
and ASB
52
7
7
Worklessness
Education
58
20
Who pays and who benefits?
21
Cost Benefit Analysis
The cost benefit analysis (CBA) shows a Cost Benefit Ratio (CBR) of 1:1.38 over a five year period. That
is for every £1 spent in the year of intervention there will be a £1.38 benefit spread over five years.
• The CBA has been prepared by looking at the total annual costs and the indicative results for
300 families. Where actual data is not available prudent modelling assumptions have been
used (see benefits assumptions).
• The CBA will change as more families are supported through the programme and more actual
data is collected.
• A broader range of agencies have agreed to align their resources to year 2 delivery and this will
be reflected in the costs base of the next iteration of the CBA.
• The range of beneficiaries will also increase as the programme develops.
22
Case Study
Background: M-14 year old, ADHD, not attending school, history of self harming, physical violence displayed
towards Mum, posed a risk to the younger siblings in the house, resulting in a Child Protection Plan. To
protect the younger children, Step Dad and 2 siblings moved into a different house.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Support: Mum was reluctant due to the family previously engaging with other agencies, the family were fed
up telling agencies all about their family history, working with them for a short period of time then pulling out
with no other support been put in place.
The FIP worker started visiting the house a few times a week in order for M to become familiar with her, and
over a course of 1-2-1 sessions M started to speak openly about her past and the reason to why she was not
attending school.
An intensive package of support was implemented. Lack of engagement in education, so arranged for the
school to provide homework which was collected from the school and taken home.
Mum engaged with a parenting worker, helping with enforcing boundaries and exploring methods to help
with parenting, and is attending counselling at Salford Foundation.
Outcomes (so far): A suitable education placement was found for M & the FIP worker helped her prepare for
the new school & supported integration back into education, focusing on expectations and establishing
routines beforehand. She has now started attending fulltime.
Work around the family has continued, focusing on M’s relationship with Mum and her siblings, the family
have become a lot closer, with M and mum’s relationship improved significantly. Mum is now confident when
enforcing boundaries and sticking to them.
The Child Protection Plans for all the children has now been lifted and the family is now happily living together
again under the same roof.
Mum and Step Dad are keen to gain full time employment and are being supported by a dedicated Skills &
Work Advisor. Mum has now enrolled on a college course.
23
Case Study
6 months prior to intervention
Number of
instances
Number of
instances
Presenting issue
Unit Cost
Child Protection
1113
3
3339
0
0
Persistent absence
1832
1
1832
0
0
Worklessness
8285
2
16570
2
16570
13832
1
13832
0
0
230
1
230
0
0
FIP
1
3913
Skills & Work
1
308
Parenting Course
1
1000
Domestic Violence
Mental Health
Total Cost
6 Months post intervention start
Total Cost
Cost of intervention
Total Cost
Difference
35,803
24
21791
-14,012
Improving the system
• We are looking to address a number of considerations in order to maximise the
benefits of the Helping Families programme, which include the need for:
– An intelligent and integrated process to identify, screen, triage and allocate and
families who are already troubled or at risk of becoming troubled. This needs to be
underpinned by an ICT platform and consistent data sharing processes.
– Resources (capacity & capability) and processes to support performance
management, evaluation and CBA development
– Governance (accountability and regulatory) to drive integrated working and a
‘family approach’
– Workforce reform to engender integrated working, moving towards more
generic/homogenous roles
• In order to make sustainable changes (and save money in the long term), the focus
needs to shift from a reactive agenda of turning around the lives of troubled families to
a more preventative agenda focussed on early help.
25
Questions?
26