To receive a presentation from Mr Tony McGovern, Extended Services Partnership Manager, on the Supporting Troubled Families initiative.
Minutes:
The
Panel welcomed Mr. Tony McGovern, Extended Services Partnership Manager, who
attended the meeting to give an update on the Supporting Troubled Families
Programme.
Mr.
McGovern updated on the national programme, advising that back in 2011 troubled
families in Hampshire had been costing the Government in the region of £119
million. A Troubled Families Unit had been established, which took a whole
family approach, through information sharing and devising individual family
plans. Some funding was available when the process started and the remaining
funding was available once a robust support system was in place.
Families
had to meet certain criteria to be part of Phase 1 of the Supporting Troubled
Families Programme. These included being involved in youth crime and/or
anti-social behaviour, having children not in school or an adult in the family
that was out of work and on benefits, at least two of these needed to be met to
be included in the programme. During Phase 1, all targets had been met allowing
all funding to be achieved. As a result, in 2015 Hampshire had been asked to
join Phase 2 of the project ahead of most of the country.
It was
advised that Rushmoor had joined with Hart in 2014 to establish a local approach
to the Programme. A structure had been established, led by Qamer Yasin, Head of
Environmental Health and Housing, and Phil Turner, Head of Housing Services at
Hart District Council. Quarterly meetings were held of the Local Co-ordination
Group, to which all partners were invited. The meetings were held to agree
working principles, share information and ensure all partners were responsible
for the work being undertaken. In addition, weekly “early help hubs” had been
established; these meetings were attended by all partners/agencies and helped
to identify families suitable for the programme. Once families had signed up to
the programme, monthly case conference meetings were held, when appropriate, to
determine the way forward.
Mr.
McGovern gave a summary of Phase 1, consisting of 70 families engaged in the
Supporting Troubled Families Programme; 53 had shown measurable progress
achieving the full £800 funding per family from the Department of Communities
and Local Government (DCLG). Overall, the Council had achieved slightly better
results than the county average and continued to make good progress. Benefits
included continued savings for Hampshire County Council (HCC), better working
practices, increased confidence in whole family working, increased co-operation
and co-ordination and a greater range of agencies helping each other and
focusing on the same issues.
It was
noted that the criteria for Phase 2 had been made broader, allowing more
families to become eligible to be part of the Supporting Troubled Families
Programme. The new criteria included mental health issues, alcohol and
substance abuse and domestic violence.
As a result, the number of families involved in year one of Phase 2
matched the number in total of Phase 1. It was noted that the co-location of
HCC’s Children and Adult Services, and the Police to the Council Offices had
been a huge benefit to the project.
The
Panel was shown maps that pinpointed where families were situated across the
Borough. Phase 1 had seen a concentration in Cherrywood and Aldershot Park but,
for Phase 2, families had been much wider spread across the Borough.
It was
advised that an amount of money was available to support families with small
problems that could easily be resolved, these were usually small amounts that
could remove barriers, such as £5 for a passport photo for a job application or
out of school diversion activities. In addition, funding of £30,000 had been
made available to projects managed by agencies/partners that supported
families.
The
Panel then discussed two case studies. The first relating to a single mother
with two children who hadn’t been attending pre-school; with the right help the
children were now regularly attending pre-school and the mother was studying
for an Open University qualification and was now able to help herself. The
second study was more challenging, it related to a single mother with six
children aged between 11 and 22 years. She had a difficult relationship with
authority and a number of the children had ASB’s and reprimands on file. The
mother was now on side and the youngest child, who had been out of school for a
year, had had his educational needs assessed and things were slowly improving.
Work would continue with the family. Mr. McGovern advised that the “tough love”
approach was sometimes needed to deal with families that were hard to engage
with for instance “if you don’t do this, you could lose your home”.
In
conclusion, the Supporting Troubled Families Programme had made a real
difference locally. It had made positive impacts on many families with
significant problems and allowed a focus on issues that mattered locally. The
programme was a good example of partnership working and had had four successful
years so far. The aim would now be to drive it forward to the next level.
The
Panel discussed the Nepalese community and the fact that there were none
engaged in the Supporting Troubled Families Programme, it was felt that the
Nepali community hid certain problems and it was advised that domestic violence
was the most prevalent issue within their community. A meaningful way to engage
with the Nepali community needed to be established. A discussion was also held
around those families that did not want to engage with the programme. It was
advised that some families were not ready to engage and there was nothing to be
done in those cases. Nevertheless, it was important for families to understand
that the door was never closed.
In
response to a question, it was advised that Members were not made aware of
cases within their wards due to confidentiality arrangements. Members could
refer families via Mr. McGovern who would be happy to pass on the information
to the relevant agency/partner.
The
Chairman thanked Mr. McGovern for his presentation.