Agenda item

Purpose: To provide information on the local implementation of the Department for Communities and Local Government’s Troubled Families Programme: 2012-2013.

Rachael Wardell introduced the Turnaround Families Programme to Members of the H&WB Board, which was being managed by the Department of Communities and Local Government. The Programme had been initiated as a result of the riots which had taken place in London during 2011. There were specific areas that were taken into account when families were referred onto the programme and these included work related benefit dependency, anti-social behaviour, youth offending and school attendance. A cohort of families had been identified. Payment by result was the method being used for the programme.

West Berkshire was considered advanced as it already had the Family Intervention Programme (FIP) and a Family Intervention Team (FIT). The first year of the Turnaround Families Programme had largely been foundation laying and planning.

Rachael Wardell handed over to Satdeep Grewel (Development Officer – Turnaround Families) and Ruth Adams (Turnaround Families Referral Coordinator) to give a presentation to the Board giving more detail on the programme.

In summary:

• There were ten families on programme so far for whom payment was being sought;
• The programme promoted a whole family approach;
• Participation by the families was voluntary and the aim was to move the families towards economic independence.
• Research had been carried out on the families using data from RAISE, which showed that 70.1% had mental health issues and 69% had experienced domestic abuse.
• The local Turnaround Families Programme aimed to turn around services delivery; turn around the lives of 145 families and turn around aspects of strategic funding and partnerships.
• The Department of Health would carry out a re-evaluation of the service.

Cathy Winfield questioned how the programme fit with health visiting and secondly how FIP sat with Family Nursing Partnerships. Rachael Wardell confirmed that this highlighted a weakness of the programme as families were not eligible until their children came of school age whereas Health Visiting supported birth to 5 years.

Lesley Wyman stated that the Turnaround Families Programme overlapped with the Public Health agenda in a number of success indicators. A number of common issues, which had been raised, formed part of the Public Health Action Plan. It was vital that joint working took place to avoid duplication.

RESOLVED that the Turnaround families Team meet with Public Health to discuss collaborative working.

Adrian Barker questioned how the Police were involved in the Programme and secondly asked if plans were in place to try and sustain the programme.

RESOLVED that: Rachael Wardell would look into the latter part of Adrian Barker’s question regarding sustainability.

Regarding the involvement of the Police force it was reported that Susan Powell and Police representatives sat on the Safer Communities Partnership, which was aware of the Turnaround Families work. The Police were able to make referrals to the Turnaround Families Programme and close working also took place with the Youth Offending Team.

Leila Ferguson reported that Empowering West Berkshire (EWB) were the umbrella organisation for voluntary organisations. Leila Ferguson noted that 70% of the families had disabilities, of which it was likely that some were leaning disabilities. There was little mention to the voluntary sector however, they had a lead role to play. People were often more likely to open up to voluntary organisations. Satdeep Grewel reported that in the first year services had been funded through the Innovative Fund. The funding associated with the programme would become less as it continued.

Satdeep Grewel confirmed that the programme was due to come to an end in 2015. It was hoped the programme would continue however, thought was needed on how it could be sustained.