birmingham city council identifying and working with troubled families in practice
TRANSCRIPT
Birmingham City CouncilIdentifying and Working with Troubled Families in Practice
Identifying and Working with Troubled Families in Practice
Identifying Families under the Troubled Families Programme
Working with Troubled Families in Practice: Case Study: Communities Based Budgets Pathfinder
for Families with Complex Needs Emerging Troubled Families Delivery Model
Identification – The Theory
National estimates of 120,000 Troubled Families based on 2005 Family and Child Survey 2005
Focus on poverty/low income, poor health/mental health, unemployment, poor housing, no qualifications
Using this model Birmingham has estimated 4,180 Troubled Families
Troubled Families Programme Guidance published March 2012, confirmed national identification criteria as: Youth crime/ASB Truancy/school exclusion Worklessness Local discretion to consider other factors
Identification – The Practice
Our data tells us that cases meeting all 3 national criteria will only make up around 7% of our TF target, mismatch between sets of criteria.
Local additional criteria therefore become critical, currently under consideration: Free school meals take up Adult offenders at risk of re-offending Those in treatment for drug & alcohol problems Child Protection Plan Cases
Confident we can identify 2,600 families this year and the remainder next year.
Identification – The Issues
Data quality problems across systems, eg address formats Data access/co-ordination challenges eg RSLs and ASB data DWP overwhelmed by task of checking benefit status of potential
Troubled Families, slow response is likely to delay full identification of families
Need for new systems to handle, analyse and report on vast quantities of data
Criteria don’t include some potentially important issues, for example around health/mental health
Appropriate level of data to pass to lead practitioners needs to be worked through – benefits data, police intelligence etc
But That’s The Easy Bit – What’s Next?
Data Analysis – identifies 2,600 families this year Verification through multi-agency assessment team, create family
case file, identify most appropriate service to make contact with family
Main Service Area (e.g. YOS/IFST/PRU etc) make first contact and make family ‘offer’
Main Service Area draw in agencies for fCAF Multi Agency Assessment and Integrated Support Plan – to focus on achieving Troubled Families Outcomes
Build capacity within service areas to engage with the approx 50% of families not already worked with in some way
Commencing now with 120 known Troubled Families
Working with Troubled Families In Practice:CBB FCN Case Study
Birmingham one of 16 national CBB pathfinders for Families with Complex needs
Work with families with five or more needs
Design and align services better around needs of families
Maintain affordability for required services, within a context of reducing expenditure
Work with 160 in 2011/12 in Shard End and 4,180 city-wide by 2015
Why Shard End? “risk index” by ward
Shard Endpilot
Kingstanding“control”site
CBB FCN – Main Partners
Birmingham City Council: Children, Young People & Families, Adults & Communities, Housing & Constituencies and Development Directorate
Be Birmingham – Local Strategic Partnership Jobcentre Plus Health Sector Partners West Midlands Police Schools and Children’s Centres Drug & Alcohol Action Team and service providers Domestic Violence agencies and groups Voluntary / Community Sector Organisations
Family CAF Business Process
Pre AssessmentChecklist
Section 1
FamilyDetails
Section 2
Children’sAssessment
Section 3
AdultAssessment
Section 4
Analysis& conclusion
Integrated Support Plan
Integrated Support Plan Review
Summative Evaluation
May include early screening tools & risk
assessments eg SDQ, DAS, CAT etc
Section 1Core demographic details& existing
service involvement
Section 2 exactly the same as existing CAF. All
children on the 1 form
Section 3 general assessment of needs &
existing service assessment
Section 4Consent obtained (if not already)
Analysis of needs & which services to involve
‘Contract’ with family & agencies – who
will do what by when.
Evaluation of actions put in place, next steps required & new needs identified
& plannedKPI Target
Summative evaluation of over-all satisfactionKPI Target
15Working
Days
15Working
Days
15Working
Days
Maximum6
months
EpisodeEnd
0 to 18 Years – Early Intervention & Prevention Evidence Based Programmes
FNP Family Nurse
Partnership
Pre birth up to 2yrs for
first time Teenage mum
IncredibleYears
Parenting Programme
Targeting all 3 – 4 year
olds with behaviourproblems
Triple PParenting
Programme
Targeting4 – 6 year oldsWith behaviour
Problems
PATHSPromoting AlternativeThinking Strategies
All primary aged children commencingIn Reception & Yr1
Public Health Approach to Early Intervention & Prevention For All Families in the Shard End CBB Area
BirminghamCommunity Health
Trust
IntegratedFamily Support
Team
Integrated FamilySupport
Team
11 CBBPrimary Schools
Evidence Based Programmes
CBB Exemplar Project:
Cost/Benefit Realisationthrough fCAF
Unit cost for each partnerintervention gives cost of
each fCAF
(in aggregate gives‘community budget’)
+Projected savings for each intervention/fCAF
(in aggregate is communityefficiency targets)
=Beneficiaries tracked across
all partners gives actual savings realised
CBB Budget Adjustments
Pilot Area Multi Agency fCAF/CAF Activity Compared to the rest of the City
Cluster: 2011/12 - Q2 to 2012/13 - Q1 (All)
297
177139 138
113 105 125 126 124 114 100 97 85 68 60 6414
28
30
29 2440 45 18 15 16 18
20 1213
2515 9
30
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Num
ber o
f Ass
essm
ents Closed
Open
ANALYSIS OF 40 fCAFS UNDERTAKEN IN FEBRUARY 2012
ISSUE Number %
UNEMPLOYED 18 45
UNABLE TO ENFORCE RULES/BOUNDARIES 16 40
DVI VICT ADULT PERP 11 28
DEPRESSION 10 25
MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES 8 20
HOUSING ISSUES 8 20
DEBT 8 20
MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES EXT FAMILY 5 13
STRESS 5 13
PHYSICAL HEALTH ISSUES 5 13
DVI VICT CHILD PERP 3 8
BEH ISSUES 3 8
POOR HOUSEKEEPING 3 8
SEXUAL ABUSE HIST 2 5
DRUGS AND ALCOHOL 2 5
BEREAVEMENT 2 5
DVI PERP 1 3
DVI EXT FAM PERP 1 3
OFFENDING 1 3
Coordinating Services for Parents - What Parents Say:
Success fCAF makes complete sense! You cannot not address the needs of the children
without addressing the needs of the wider family. Relationship with key worker and family is key Families using FIP value the support provided. High awareness about PATHS so benefits of population wide public health
approaches.
Challenges Still relatively low awareness amongst families Parents often feel overwhelmed by the role of parenting but limited support Support parents earlier – not just when problems arise Lack of activities in the local area Lack of training and employment opportunities. Need to improve the ‘place’ as well as the ‘people’
What Partners Agencies Say
Successes Partners value partnership working fCAF helps unpick issues that might have been more difficult to
address through single agency interventions, e.g. the impact of alcohol misuse.
Sense amongst families and schools that things getting better
Challenges Identification involving data sharing and analysis hugely
problematic Some agencies are still not actively participating Need for greater realism on how long it takes to work with
families. One-off training for agencies will not suffice.
CBB Pathfinder – Next Steps
Evaluate impact of pathfinder
Roll out whole systems model city wide
Shard End Test bed are for Troubled Families programme
Emerging Birmingham Model: Service Delivery
Troubled Families to be catalyst for systems change which will:
Embed ‘think family’ practice across whole system Be outcomes driven at all stages Adopt ‘whole systems approach’ Build in demand reduction from outset Enable families to self determine issues and barriers Test new approaches e.g. personalised budgets Explore family contracting – reward and enforcement
models Leave a self sustaining service delivery model that
works without PbR support
