Family Intervention Project Showcase
Friday 15 September
Leeds
Welcome
Ian Brady
Director
Respect Task Force
Context • Drive on ASB
• Small number of families causing disproportionate problems
• Spending large amounts of money - often not very effectively
• Small number of pioneering projects providing a more effective response
• Developed these approaches in Trailblazer and Action Areas
• Respect Action Plan
– Outlines proposals to widen the clampdown on ASB and tackle its causes
– Sets out commitment to develop Family Intervention Projects in 50 areas by end 2006 - to change the behaviour of those causing disproportionate problems in their community
This is something that the PM and others have repeatedly highlighted
“(We need to) end the farce of half a dozen agencies all spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on problem families. Identify these families early, have them handled by one lead agency and give it whatever powers it needs to affect change or impose sanctions.”
PM speech to Labour Party Conference
Who do the projects work with?
•Households who have been or about to be evicted because of ASB
•Households with severe and multiple needs
Depression Other MH problems
Alcohol /drugs
Violence Risk of child being taken into care
School attendance problems
School exclusion
60%
22%
30% 28%
40%41%
36%
Source: Interim evaluation of projects for families at risk of losing their homes (2006) Sheffield Hallam, ODPM
Adult and child needs identified at point of referral
No complaints
29%
Reduced56%
Increased15%
Project interventions lead to a reduction in ASB complaints and incidents
Project workers’ assessment of the impact of IFIP on the level of ASB complaints*
Source: Sheffield Hallam Final evaluation 2006 (forthcoming)
Positive outcomes on levels of ASB complaints in 85% of all closed cases (35 out of 41 families)
* based on 6 evaluated projects in North West England
The changes in behaviour were attributed to a number of different factors including:
•Increased Parental control
•Development of communication & conflict management skills
Family Intervention can improve school attendance
6%
8%
15%
27%
13%
19%
29%
42%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Permanentexclusion
Truancy
Temporaryexclusions
Frequent non-attendees
Post intervention Pre intervention
Comparison of schooling concerns pre and post FIP intervention* (among 44 Families)
* based on 6 evaluated projects in North West England Source: Sheffield Hallam final evaluation 2006 (forthcoming)
Young people involved in IFIPswere often very positive about assistance in getting to school and being supported or represented at meetings associated with school attendance
Reduced80%
Stayed the same20%
Stable77%
Partially Stable
8%
Unstable15%
FIPs can reduce the risk of homelessness and improve the stability of tenancy Project workers’ assessment of the risk of homelessness when families exited the IFIP*
* based on 6 evaluated projects in North West England
The risk of eviction was reduced for 32 out of 40 families
Project workers’ assessment of tenancy stability when families exited the IFIP*
Stabilising tenancies and preventing evictions can prevent further negative consequences such as family breakdown and children being taken into care
Source: Sheffield Hallam evaluation 2006
There are also a number of other important outcomes from FIPs
The IFIP in Rochdale was found to have made progress in 46% of cases with debt and money management
Trailblazer project monitoring 2005-6 suggested a 23% behaviour improvement in young people involved in IFIPs
Trailblazer project monitoring (2005-06) suggests a 21% improvement in family functioning
Recipients recognise the difference that has been made
“It’s just, they’ve kept me together. They’ve just kept me completely together, you know.
Any worries I’ve had just a phone call away if I’d needed.
And the positivity that you pick up, you know, just listening to common sense and just things that you don’t think or wouldn’t think of, they seem to be able to
help.”
“I think the council would have evicted me, I’d have been on a
dead end estate bringing up four kids round a load of junkies and
my kids would probably be junkies”
“I had problems controlling the children…I couldn’t, and they controlled
me. But … things have improved. The swearing has stopped…now instead of
shouting at them I do things like making them sit on the naughty step or stopping
them from watching telly”
Key messages• Real opportunity here to make a significant difference to these
families and the communities in which they live
• Need you to take these messages back to the areas in which you work and convince others
• Not about doing more of what you are already doing… going beyond traditional key working, housing related support and youth interventions
• A new approach, a fantastic opportunity
Setting up Family Intervention Projects
Gill Strachan
Assistant Director
Respect Task Force
Context
• Drive on Anti-Social Behaviour • Small number of families – large amounts of
money • Pioneering Projects • Respect Action Plan
Objectives
• Stop ASB• Prevent Homelessness• Achieve Every Child Matters Outcomes
Why are the current interventions ineffective?
• Services not Co-ordinated• No Common Endeavour• Unwilling to use Enforcement
What Works?
• Targeting the Worst families• Highly Intensive Support• Structured Supervision• Clear Sanctions• Root Causes• Whole Family
Key Worker
• Consistent• Determined• Relentless
Models of Intervention
• Outreach Support• Dispersed Accommodation• Core Block
Conclusion
• Grip the family• Grip the problem • Grip other agencies
WORKSHOPS
Room Workshop
Matcham Suite Setting up a dispersedor residential service
Thomas Ambler Room Key working
Parenting models & resources
Steve Harwood
DfES
Evaluation & monitoring
Ben Monks
Respect Task Force
Monitoring…
“Prefer to spend my time delivering services, not filling in forms…”
“I am just too
busy!”
“Endless data that no-
one uses”
“Difficult to
collect”
Monitoring
• Condition of Grant
• Provides data about all families accessing project
• We want to limit the burden and develop systems that will assist the development of your project and enable you to manage and assess your performance.
• Respect Task Force will help with completion and feedback.
Opportunities & Outcomes• To understand how many families have received intensive
intervention and what the outcomes of support have been;
• To intervene early to bring about change in projects;
• To help convince areas that are reluctant to offer intensive family intervention;
• To understand who is being referred and whether these are the right families
• To understand the full costs of delivery and identify savings to public purse
• To develop evidence for Comprehensive Spending Review 2007
Project Administrative data collected quarterly
Family data: Collected quarterly by the project worker for each family with which the project intervenes and in collaboration with other agencies e.g. School, Police, Landlord
80
84
95
82
70 75 80 85 90 95 100
%
%
%
Reduction in the level of complaints
Maintained tenancy / planned move
Improved school attendance
Threat to the home stabilised
%
The Evaluation…• In-depth understanding of the process and outcomes of projects on:
• families• service providers • communities
• Build on previous work such as Sheffield Hallam (Nixon et al 2006)
Interim findings from Sheffield Hallam project (2006)
Research Questions
?
A. What are the characteristics of households that are referred to intensive family support projects?
B. What are the characteristics of intensive family support projects?
C. What are the referral arrangements and project acceptance thresholds and how effective are they?
D. What are the outcomes for communities?
E. What are outcomes for families?
F. What are the social and financial costs and benefits associated with different models of intensive family support?
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
Rubbish / Litter Burglary / Theft Danger to property Fear of mugging /robbery
£0
£50,000
£100,000
£150,000
£200,000
£250,000
£300,000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Case
Costs include: Loss of revenue to other properties (£100k), Theft & vandalism to surrounding properties (£100k), & Fire service call outs (£36k)
Case study analysis of ‘problem families’: identified costs to local agencies
Higher end problem families
The cost of these problem families to local agencies is substantial – anywhere between £60k pa and over £250k
Source: Southampton study 2005, Costings of FSPs 2005, Cost effectiveness of FSPs 2005, Leicester New Start Family Support Project 2006, MORI
% point change in key indicators of community safety in Leicester, 2001 v. 2005 (MORI)
• Before the project, there were on average 7 evictions a year from social housing due to ASB. Since the project started there have been no evictions caused by ASB
• Key indicators of community safety have shown a downward trend since the IFSP started
Key outcomes of Leicester New Start Family Support Project
Next steps
Donna Molloy
Respect Task Force
What do the Respect Task Force Expect from areas?
• Speed!• Commitment to getting key local partners on
board• Recognition this is unlikely to be more of what
you are doing already• Commitment to funding projects from
mainstream resources after 2008
What can we offer in return?
• Guidance/help with setting up the project• Contact in Respect Task force
–ongoing support–trouble-shooting
• Links to others involved in the same task e.g. regional practitioner networks
• Reassurance of strong cross departmental commitment to these projects
And more practically…
• Some pump priming funding• Help for the projects to access crucial services
–Parenting classes–Employment services –Health services
• Help with evaluation/monitoring/quality assurance
• Being part of a high profile area of work
Next steps
• Most have either sent us a proposal or are developing proposals.
• Now we need: –Work on the detail and getting sign off for
proposals–Details of what you need to get parenting
provision in place –Intensive work to get projects established –Getting the first referrals in!
Question & Answers