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

The Local Authority Research Consortium (LARC) Round 2

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

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

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

Level 4: Embedded change and practice Level 3: Changes to experiences for service-users Level 2: Changes to routines, experiences, attitudes Level 1: Changes to systems, structures, processes Time Population affected NfER’s Impact Model 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: 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 challenge of system change Children’s Trusts to have in place by 2010 consistent, high quality arrangements to provide identification and early intervention for all children and young people who need additional help

Laming 2 Strong focus on effectiveness of contact, referral and assessment arrangements – aim is ‘never do nothing’ Need to improve referral from adult services and response to domestic violence referrals Need for effective multi-agency working in practice on front line – need to strengthen health and police capacity in particular Highlights importance of early intervention and prevention through integrated practice

Laming 2 “It is still too early to make a judgement on the effectiveness of the CAF in improving outcomes for children and young people, and opinion from contributors to this report has been divided. There has been some evidence that the CAF has been helpful in bringing together a wider range of professionals to make joint assessments that are both positive in achieving better assessments of a child and as a learning experience for staff. However, it is in danger, like other tools, of becoming process- focused or, even worse, a barrier to services for children where access to services depends on a completed CAF form. All agencies need further help in using the CAF effectively and consistently.”

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 11

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

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

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 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

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

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

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)

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

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

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

Scaling 1

Scaling 2

Scaling 3

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) #

LARC 2 Final Report Final report due December 2009 LARC 3 currently recruiting. Contact RiP Director Jane Lewis