Session Two: Referral Programmes

Sue Rastall, Project Manager Leicester Family Intervention Project

Project Aims (1)

• To work with families who are homeless or at risk of homelessness due to ASB

• To identify and resolve the root causes of families ASB

• To improve health, social and learning outcomes for children and families

• To enable families to live in peace with their neighbours and community

Project Aims (2)

• To be proactive in preventing families being evicted

• To work within a strong multi agency framework

• Effective partnership working to benefit females, communities and vulnerable children

Project Objectives

• A better quality of life• Reduction in ASB• Avoidance of high cost options

Delivery

The Team• Project Manager• Two Seniors• Administration/Finance support• Five Key Workers Sub Project• One Senior• Two and a half Key Workers

Outreach support

• Offer nine hours of support a week to families that are still living in their own homes

• Mixture of planned and unannounced visits • Practical help to sustain tenancies• Positive activities for children and families

Dispersed support

• Offer 14 hours’ support• Work with RSL’s and LA• Six month assured short hold tenancy

agreement

Core Residential Unit

How we work with families:

• We are “24/7” and “365”• We have round the clock staffing plus volunteers• The project takes a ‘whole family’ approach• Twin approach of high challenge and high support• We design a support plan together with the family• Engage families in project activities • Measurement of progress and outcomes• Core unit: restrictions, observations and intrusions• Close work with other agencies• Empower families to reach their full potential and take

control of their life• We build and maintain a strong link with the local

community

High Challenge and High Support

High Support Low Support

High Challenge

• Leads to learning and change • Builds on what is already there • Will start new activities

• People become hostile, anxious and defensive • They will become fearful of changing

Low Challenge

• People become too warm and cosy • Learning may be minimal

• Become bored, depressed, lack motivation • Behaviour will not change

The goal of challenging is ACTION

1. Start new activities relating to their problems, and developing opportunities

2. Continue and increase activities that contribute to problem management

3. Stop activities that either cause problems and limit opportunities or stand in the way of opportunity developments and problem management

What we don’t do

• We are not a ‘soft option’ for families or agencies - people have to face up to their problems, take responsibility for their situation and make the necessary changes

• We do not advocate on behalf of families against other agencies

• We do not do things ‘for’ families, we empower them to do those things themselves

• We are not a homeless unit, we can’t be used just to resolve homelessness issues

Types of Parenting Intervention

We currently offer:• Webster Stratton Parenting Programme which is

aimed at parents of children aged two years – eight years

• Riding the Storm Parenting Programme which is aimed at parents of children aged eight years – 16 years

• We also offer Play Therapy which is aimed at Parents who struggle to interact with their Children

• We also offer a 1:1 Parenting Programme

Types of Parenting Intervention

• The Senior Parenting Practitioner for Manchester is partly based at NCH Foundations and co-ordinates courses, crèche, materials, recruitment etc.

• The Senior Project Worker at Foundations is responsible for pre course assessments, delivery of courses and gaining new referrals.

• We currently have nine members of staff trained in Webster Stratton Parenting and deliver a rolling programme.

• All the above parenting programmes are reinforced during observations and any staff will check on homework given and key messages for that week.

• We have also started to offer the parenting programmes to the local community, after close liaison with local schools.

Team Structure

• Project Manager• Three Deputy Project Managers• Senior Project Administrator• Part-time Project Administrator• One Senior Parenting Practitioner• 12 Project Workers • Three Waking Night Staff• Two Security Staff• Four Sessional Workers• Three Volunteers

Referral and assessment

• Housing/Police/Children and Young People’s Services

• Multi agency meeting/Family contract• Support planning process

Key interventions

• Parenting programmes• Anger management• Budgeting skills/tenancy management• VIG

Leicester FIP outcomes achieved

Outcomes of the first 11 cases closed:

• Over 80% of tenancies stabilised - six tenancies now secure and eight with SPO and no evidence of further action

• No ASB reported on ten families since intervention ended

• 12 Children removed from the CPR during intervention• Average school attendance at referral =63%• Actual school attendance during November 07 =92.6%• Number of young people involved with YOT at referral

=13• Number of young people involved with YOT after

intervention =3• 31 service users engaged in community activities as a

result of the projects intervention

Case Study

Case Study

• Mother – 36 years old

• Daughter – 16 years old

• Three sons – 11, 10, 8 years old

• Two young daughters – two years, six months

Case Study

• Relationships between all family members were aggressive/10yr old – LAC

• History of DV

• Extreme levels of ASB e.g – Terrorising neighbours, criminal damage, use of weapons

• Windows boarded up, graffiti

Case Study

• Youths congregating in and around the property, underage use of substances

• Non engagement with agencies

Family were evicted in September 2007

Intervention

• Multi agency meeting held – agreed that the family would be offered a FIP dispersed property, L/A agreed to provide the property

• Six month assured short hold tenancy agreement/EMH

• Intensive package of intervention

• ASB addressed the tenancy will become more permanent

Dispersed tenancy

• Meetings held with all family members

• Family agreements signed

• Expected behaviour- consequences of not keeping to agreement

• FIP would assist with the decorating and furnishing of the property

Outcomes

• Family have been living in the property for four months

• Changes that have been achieved have been amazing

• Home is comfortable and clean

• Garden is clear of rubbish

• Family members have respect for the house and one another

Outcomes

• Mum attends meetings by herself and behaves appropriately

• VIG – working on family relationships

• Eldest daughter attends college

• 11 yr old has 100% school attendance

Outcomes

• ASB being addressed by using creative methods

• Sessions taking place to address anger and behaviour management

• The garden has been transformed

• Healthy eating has been transferred into the home

Outcomes

• No violence between siblings

• Children have not returned to the old address/area

• More contact with extended members of family

• Two year old is beginning to reach her developmental milestones

• No complaints of ASB

Your response