Enhanced Family Support

1
Enhanced Family Support

• SPRINGBOARD
• An Evaluation of a Service for Families in Crises
  
• Through an Action Research Model.
• The Families Experiences.

Professor Tony Long, Research Lead Mike Murphy
Mike Ravey, Researchers
2
Presentation Aim

• Provide an overview of the project including
• Background project/study
• Methodological approach
• Overall findings
• Discuss the families experiences of being
  involved with Springboard
• Highlight the key recommendations

3
Study Aim and Objectives

• The aim of the study was
• To measure the outcomes of the Springboard
  project in relation to the benefits for the
  families receiving the service and Blackpool
  Services.
• The study objectives were to
• Establish baseline targets for each of the
  families, which then could be monitored and to
  implement the recording and analysis of this
  monitoring
• Identify change in practice amongst practitioners
  and the benefits to the Council and the families
  involved.

4
Background to the Projects

• Blackpool represents one of the most deprived
  areas of the United Kingdom
• Blackpool Council has responded to this challenge
  by establishing a raft of innovative service
  including
• Springboard
• Established as a pilot study to develop a
  virtual inter/multi agency service to work with
  60 hard to reach families whos lives could be
  classed as chaotic.

5
Enhanced Family Support

• Services Key Objectives
• Reduce health inequalities by 10 by 2010
• Tackle underlying determinants relating to
  smoking and under 18 pregnancy
• Reduce crime by at least 15
• Tackle social exclusion
• Improve children's educational experience by
  reducing inequalities

6
Methodological Approach

• Evaluation through an Action Research Model
• Interest in the problems of groups, communities
  and organisations
• Attempts to assist understanding
• The approach is one of partnership and
  collaboration
• All stakeholders involved in process
• Stimulate people to change
• Encourage process rather than results
• Start where people are, not where someone else
  thinks they are
• Help with analysis of the situation

7
Data Collection Tools

• Face to face interviews
• Steering group
• Families
• Focus groups
• Springboard team
• Conference techniques
• Services

• Researchers journal
• Steering group
• Operational managers
• Baseline document
• Families
• Control group

8
Threads

• Researcher integral partner within the service at
  all levels
• Cultural change within management groups
• Strategic management team
• Operational management team
• Documentation development
• Matrix
• Baseline
• Families experiences

9
Interviews

• Eight families were interviewed
• Four interviewed while receiving a service
• Four at least six months after leaving
  Springboard
• Interviewed in own home
• Interview lasted approximately one hour
• A thematic analysis was employed to analyse the
  data

10
Family Demographics

• 60 families on the project
• Every family had young people within it
• 50 contained between 1 and 3
• 34 contained between 4 and 6
• 16 contained between 7 and 10
• Complex family structures
• Vignette 1 Mr and Mrs Simpson live in a council
  house with their six children. The eldest two
  children have children of their own. Sam, who is
  in her twenties has three children, while Steven
  has a partner and one child. All of these are
  currently living together within the same family
  home.

11
Quantifiable Outcomes for Families

• 68.3 reduction in criminal behaviour
• 66.8 reduction in anti-social behaviour
• Improvement in school attendance for 67 of the
  children and young people
• Increased up take of health services
• Accessing G.P. services
• Accessing screening services
• Increased awareness and use of sexual health
  advice and smoking cessation and drug treatment
  programmes. High level of signposting to services
• 93 reduction in missing from home reports
• 88 reduction in use of residential care
• 74 reduction in Domestic Violence
• Improvement the quality of housing for
  Springboard families
• Reduction in rent arrears
• Increase in use permanent accommodation (50)
• Significant reduction in families facing eviction
• No change in the level of employment

12
Family Experience (Past Experiences)

• Multiple service involvement
• Majority were statutory
• Police/criminal justice
• Social care
• housing
• Dissatisfied Disillusioned
• isolated
• devalued and
• disempowered

• erm, I just feel like, I dont know, they
  would like, take over if you know what I mean.
  You didnt feel like the parent really. They were
  constantly telling you what to do, how to look
  after your children Theyre too nosey.

13
Family Experience (Past Experiences)

• Described contact as
• Spasmodic
• Invasive
• Ineffective
• Lacking focus
• No exit strategy
• Perceptions were fed by misconceptions and
  mistrust

• they left and left me to it.
• I didnt really like um, because to be quite
  honest I dont like social services anyway
  because they just come around and take your
  children away

14
Family Experience (Introduction to Springboard)

• Complex/significant crises that instigated
  referral
• Domestic violence
• Disruption in school attendance (refusal or
  exclusion)
• High levels of criminal anti-social behaviour
• Drug alcohol misuse
• Housing issues

• I split up with my husband, he kicked off in
  the house and he attacked two of the children. So
  we got the Police involved and we got him away
  from the house obviously. I took him to court and
  he ended up gettin two years probation and then
  the Police said that we'd been referred to
  Springboard.

15
Family Experience (Introduction to Springboard)

• Positive experience of the referral process
• Case conference approach not always a positive
  experience

• ..anyone gettin on you case, if you know what I
  mean.
• there was a few people there and my ex-partner
  was there shouting his head off, saying he didnt
  do it. An ya know what I mean, so it was like
  backfiring on me, so it was a bitdifficult.

16
Family Experience (Positive regard)

• Felt
• Valued
• Respected
• Treated with dignity

• I always get on with (name) ya know. Shes
  always saying am a good mum and she always
  speaks up for me, if anyone says a wrong word, ya
  know in meetings, what I go to every month. She
  always lookin at me as if to say, just ignore
  it, she knows am trying my best. Shes someone
  to talk too.

17
Family Experience (Practical Outcome)

• All families interviewed identify a positive
  effect between the family and the service.
• Perceive the team as having a can do approach,
  stepping beyond traditional boundaries.

• Erm, well, they helped us from getting, stop
  gettin evicted for a start The team supported
  us through our separation, they were there for us
  both, I couldnt fault them. They was there if I
  needed anyone to talk to, it was great. They did
  things beyond what they should, I remember
  phoning (name) on a Saturday, sayin I need help
  to do this and (name), she advised me what to do
  and that was her day off, it was niece.

18
Core Findings

• Criminal activity, housing, education and social
  care issues have experienced most change
• Substance use and employment remain low factors
  for referral and display little change
• Why?
• Behaviours in these areas are resistant to change
  
• Can represent least priority to the families
• Can act as a crutch

19
Cultural Success

• Families willing to engage
• Committed and enthusiastic staff team
• Strong and supportive line management structure
• Interdisciplinary operational management working
  together regarding referrals
• Strategic management group supporting Springboard
  within line management and within services as a
  whole

20
Relevance to IPE

• Early integrated involvement improves the
  experiences for both children and families
• Integrated teams offer continuity of service
  delivery to users
• Integrated teams appear popular with both
  practitioners and managers
• BUT WHAT ARE WE DOING TO PREPARE FUTURE
  PRACTITIONERS FOR THIS NEW ROLE?