CAF and outcomes of early intervention: interim findings from the Local Authorities Research Consortium LARC 2

1. Susannah Bowyer Research Officer, research in practice Torbay 13th October 2009 CAF and outcomes of early intervention: interim findings from the Local Authorities Research Consortium (LARC 2)

2. The Local Authority Research Consortium (LARC)Round 2 Slides used here draw on or reproduce those presented at LARC workshop hosted by RiP at Dartington in September. THESE ARE INTERIM FINDINGS. NOT ALL DATA IN YET. FINAL REPORT OUT DECEMBERSlides used here draw on or reproduce those presented at LARC workshop hosted by RiP at Dartington in September. THESE ARE INTERIM FINDINGS. NOT ALL DATA IN YET. FINAL REPORT OUT DECEMBER

3. Overview of this presentation: What is LARC? The continuing challenge of system change Measuring the impact of integration Interim findings from NfER Example: one authority’s LARC project: Coventry

4. What is LARC… A collaborative partnership between LAs, researchers and national partners to draw together evidence and shared learning about the effective integration of children’s services The partners are: LAs (14 in Round 1; 30+ in Round 2), RiP, NFER, EMIE, IDeA, LGA, CWDC The project has a formal governance framework, project protocols and pooled funding (including funds from DCSF, IDeA, LGA and RIEP) LARC Round 1: reported in June 2008 LARC Round 2: September 2008 – December 2009

5. LARC’s purpose: To enable authorities to identify where they are (individually and collectively) with whole system change To identify how to make faster progress on outcomes To report on this in a collective way nationally Features of LARC’s approach Rooted in evidence, in collaborative action, and in “telling your own story”; clear about different types of impact; honest self-evaluation; sector-led

6. The NFER impact model was first described in: Stoney, S., West, A; Kendall, L. and Morris, M. (2002). Evaluation of Excellence in Cities: Overview of Interim Findings. Slough: NFER [online]. Available: http://www.nfer.ac.uk/publications/other-publications/downloadable-reports/evaluationof-excellence-in-cities-overview-of-interim-findings.cfm.   The model was further developed in: Morris, M. and Golden, S. (2005). Evaluation of Aimhigher: Excellence Challenge: Interim Report. (Research Report 648). London: DfES The NFER impact model was first described in: Stoney, S., West, A; Kendall, L. and Morris, M. (2002). Evaluation of Excellence in Cities: Overview of Interim Findings. Slough: NFER [online]. Available: http://www.nfer.ac.uk/publications/other-publications/downloadable-reports/evaluationof-excellence-in-cities-overview-of-interim-findings.cfm.   The model was further developed in: Morris, M. and Golden, S. (2005). Evaluation of Aimhigher: Excellence Challenge: Interim Report. (Research Report 648). London: DfES

7. The challenge of system change

8. From ‘Your Child, your schools, our future: building a 21st century schools system. DCSF 2009From ‘Your Child, your schools, our future: building a 21st century schools system. DCSF 2009

9. Laming 2

10. Laming 2

11. 2009 - Aims of LARC 2 Does the CAF process support the achievement of better outcomes for children and young people? What are the key factors that promote the effectiveness of CAF in different contexts? With a particular focus on the engagement of Schools in the CAF process

12. Interim findings from NfER CAF process is supporting the achievement of better outcomes for CYPs – Level 3 Impact? Improved behaviour, better school attendance, higher self-esteem, greater responsibility and enhanced resilience, greater readiness for school among younger children Better relationships and improving parenting skills and strategies in families A range of outcomes for all the target groups of children/young people and families and contributing factors were reported by the LARC authorities. These related to:  Improved behaviour and attendance; there was a greater understanding amongst schools, families and young people of the triggers for certain behaviours and these were communicated to professionals working with the child/young person. Accessing or staying in education amongst poor attenders and those in danger of a negative outcome (for example, ‘He’s punctual, he’s on time, he’s happy, ….he’s forming relationships with kids … he said things are a lot better. In terms of learning, he is progressing because of his attendance.’ Quote from a lead professional about a KS3 non-attender). Improved self awareness for young people and their families, especially their social and emotional awareness. Improved resilience and self-esteem for children/young people and parents/carers (e.g., as one lead professional explained about a parents and child with mental health problems: ‘they are actually glowing in praise, the child is settled in school, the mother is more confident, she’s now going for interviews for jobs, she never thought she would get to that stage, she’s using comments like she really appreciates that this help is available, it’s helped her enormously in a short space of time’). Greater readiness for school amongst young children (for example, the CAF facilitated a smoother transition into primary school because appropriate measures were put in place.) Improved family relationships and parenting. Lead professionals reported that the CAF process had enabled parents to learn new skills and strategies to support their children. (for example, as one professional said ‘there are improved relationships with the home. Mum’s alcohol consumption had reduced significantly, so routines are in place. Home is a lot calmer and a less chaotic place to be’.)A range of outcomes for all the target groups of children/young people and families and contributing factors were reported by the LARC authorities. These related to:  Improved behaviour and attendance; there was a greater understanding amongst schools, families and young people of the triggers for certain behaviours and these were communicated to professionals working with the child/young person. Accessing or staying in education amongst poor attenders and those in danger of a negative outcome (for example, ‘He’s punctual, he’s on time, he’s happy, ….he’s forming relationships with kids … he said things are a lot better. In terms of learning, he is progressing because of his attendance.’ Quote from a lead professional about a KS3 non-attender). Improved self awareness for young people and their families, especially their social and emotional awareness. Improved resilience and self-esteem for children/young people and parents/carers (e.g., as one lead professional explained about a parents and child with mental health problems: ‘they are actually glowing in praise, the child is settled in school, the mother is more confident, she’s now going for interviews for jobs, she never thought she would get to that stage, she’s using comments like she really appreciates that this help is available, it’s helped her enormously in a short space of time’). Greater readiness for school amongst young children (for example, the CAF facilitated a smoother transition into primary school because appropriate measures were put in place.) Improved family relationships and parenting. Lead professionals reported that the CAF process had enabled parents to learn new skills and strategies to support their children. (for example, as one professional said ‘there are improved relationships with the home. Mum’s alcohol consumption had reduced significantly, so routines are in place. Home is a lot calmer and a less chaotic place to be’.)

13. Interim findings 2 The CAF was most effective when there was: Holistic understanding and regular review of the needs of the child and the family, with agreed plans and targeted support An appropriately skilled lead professional who maintained a positive relationship with the family Shared accountability across services, with effective information sharing Professional, practitioner and family engagement with the CAF process, and full involvement of the young person the CAF process was said to have been instrumental in these outcomes because it:  Improved practitioners’ and families’ understanding of the holistic need of the child and so led to appropriate multi-disciplinary support being implemented. Facilitated, where appropriate, the involvement of the child/young person in an exploration of the issues with their family and with professionals, which had a positive impact on them and their family. Helped improve information sharing between different Children’s Trust partners. Led to closer monitoring of a child/young person’s general well-being, not just at school.  In order for these processes to work effectively, it was essential that the family was committed to it. This worked best when the lead professional:  Had established a positive relationship with the family and had built up the trust and had the confidence and skill set to: discuss sensitive issues with the family work with (and manage, where appropriate) a multi-agency team.  In addition, the continued involvement of the family was only ensured if:  The right agencies were involved at appropriate times in the process. The child’s needs were visibly being met by all, clear action plans were in place and shared with the family. Both the child/young person and the family had a voice in the process.  The CAF process was best supported when:  It was overtly child-centred and/or family-centred, as necessary (with all prioritising the needs of the child and/or the family) and solution-focused The CAF reduced bureaucracy for parents so they only needed to tell their story once There was a lack of jargon, which ensured that the process remained accessible for families, and where appropriate, children/young people. Agencies shared accountability throughout the CAF process. the CAF process was said to have been instrumental in these outcomes because it:  Improved practitioners’ and families’ understanding of the holistic need of the child and so led to appropriate multi-disciplinary support being implemented. Facilitated, where appropriate, the involvement of the child/young person in an exploration of the issues with their family and with professionals, which had a positive impact on them and their family. Helped improve information sharing between different Children’s Trust partners. Led to closer monitoring of a child/young person’s general well-being, not just at school.  In order for these processes to work effectively, it was essential that the family was committed to it. This worked best when the lead professional:  Had established a positive relationship with the family and had built up the trust and had the confidence and skill set to: discuss sensitive issues with the family work with (and manage, where appropriate) a multi-agency team.  In addition, the continued involvement of the family was only ensured if:  The right agencies were involved at appropriate times in the process. The child’s needs were visibly being met by all, clear action plans were in place and shared with the family. Both the child/young person and the family had a voice in the process.  The CAF process was best supported when:  It was overtly child-centred and/or family-centred, as necessary (with all prioritising the needs of the child and/or the family) and solution-focused The CAF reduced bureaucracy for parents so they only needed to tell their story once There was a lack of jargon, which ensured that the process remained accessible for families, and where appropriate, children/young people. Agencies shared accountability throughout the CAF process.

14. Challenges for the CAF process Many families engage in the CAF process with little difficulty, others thought the process intimidating or overwhelming If parents, even temporarily, withdrew from the process, some services withdrew their support Some LARC authorities reported that relationships between some parents and services deteriorated temporarily at various points in the process Not all services gave the same level of importance to CAF and TAC meetings, including review meetings There was some confusion in schools, and other services, regarding threshold levels Challenges for the CAF process  3rd bullet: It was suggested that this may have been due to the difficulties that the family had in accepting how to best meet the needs of their child, but this is clearly something to which lead professionals (and Children’s Services more widely) may need to be alert. Challenges for the CAF process  3rd bullet: It was suggested that this may have been due to the difficulties that the family had in accepting how to best meet the needs of their child, but this is clearly something to which lead professionals (and Children’s Services more widely) may need to be alert.

15. Challenges for the CAF process 2 For lead professionals, the CAF process was still generally seen as an additional task on top of their normal duties. The CAF form was generally considered too lengthy and time consuming The role sometimes caused anxiety and was seen as burdensome, e.g. in connection with coordinating TAC meetings. Appropriate formal and informal support for lead professionals was seen as crucial Working with other agencies was frustrating if they did not engage fully in the process Lead professionals were not always certain at the outset as to what support was available for families 1st bullet: but it was noted that practice and familiarity with the form and the process tended to decrease the amount of time spent on completing it. Other challenges they faced were to do with the nature and responsibility related to the role of Lead professional:    LARC2 has provided useful insights into the role of the lead professional, only some of which are reported here. We anticipate that we will be able to provide a comprehensive list of practical good practice examples for authorities and practitioner groups to consider.  1st bullet: but it was noted that practice and familiarity with the form and the process tended to decrease the amount of time spent on completing it. Other challenges they faced were to do with the nature and responsibility related to the role of Lead professional:    LARC2 has provided useful insights into the role of the lead professional, only some of which are reported here. We anticipate that we will be able to provide a comprehensive list of practical good practice examples for authorities and practitioner groups to consider.  

16. Impact of the LARC research on participating authorities: Short term impacts included: Taking the learning from the research forward into practitioner training Developing new early intervention and prevention strategies Establishing clear guidelines for CYPS going from CAF to statutory services and out again Sharing findings locally and ensuring CAF is embedded in strategic approaches Improved willingness from schools to engage with CAF Establishing a baseline from where to measure progress in the future

17. Impact of the LARC research on participating authorities: Medium-term impacts included: Developing a consistent understanding of the lead professional role Creating user participation groups of CYPs and parents/carers to incorporate ideas and develop the CAF further Reviewing resources available to parents/carers to ensure that they are user friendly Starting to use the CAF to support the transition to secondary school Regularly monitoring and reviewing the CAF and integrated working practices Using the CAF to target specific groups of children and families  

18. Impact of the LARC research on participating authorities: The anticipated longer-term impacts included: Improved outcomes Increasing the amount of early intervention and prevention work Incorporating the CAF process into the strategic business plans of different services and the Children and Young People’s Plan Improving holistic working with families Developing a sustainable model of integrated service delivery Embedding the CAF process (NfER LARC research team September 2009)

19. One LARC 2 authority: Coventry(Cooper 2009) Promoting Children and Young People’s Well-being Model (2005) Levels of Needs/Thresholds Assessment/family support meeting/TAC Lead Professional Share Care Service Directory PCW Board sub-committee of LSCB Full Training Programme 1200 CAFs (70% Education) Strategic Lead/4 CAF coordinators/3 Multi-disciplinary teams All material on Coventry taken from presentation to LARC Workshop at Dartington, September 2009, by Cath Cooper of CCCAll material on Coventry taken from presentation to LARC Workshop at Dartington, September 2009, by Cath Cooper of CCC

20. Methods: Qualitative / Five Case Studies Young people aged 9-11 from North East area of Coventry Research Themes School life / home life / relationships / skills / behaviour / challenges / CAF process Information Gathered CAF Assessment Family Support Plan Reviews Semi-structured interviews Questionnaires (Young People / Parents / Teachers / Key Workers) Scaling pre and post CAF

21. Coventry’s proposition: “As a result of CAF assessment, children/young people with behavioural issues will show improvement and will be better able to access school experiences; because the CAF process will be able to affect measurable, positive and sustainable change for them and their families” Behavioural issues were defined as: Showing aggressive behaviour to teachers/peers Disruptive at school Difficulties maintaining relationships with teachers/peers Passive behaviour (quiet but not fully participating in order to reach potential Low self esteem “Risky behaviour” Low attendance Given fixed term exclusions

22. Scaling 1

23. Scaling 2

24. Scaling 3

25. So what do the LARC 2 interim findings tell us about integrated working? The CAF process appears to have supported better coordination of services and joint working to improve the outcomes for children, young people and families More needs to be done to engage all agencies in joint working but progress is clearly being made There is an improved understanding and appreciation the roles, remits and support offered by different services (NfER LARC research team September 2009) #

26. LARC 2 Final Report Final report due December 2009 LARC 3 currently recruiting. Contact RiP Director Jane Lewis jane@rip.org.uk