Contents
5 6 9 10 19 28 30
Introduction The Process Consultation and Beyond What they said Child Development Grant In Brief Appendix 1
3 deadcatdreaming
Introduction
As part of Knowsley’s continued commitment to stake holder involvement, the active decision was taken to commission an independent organisation to support and enable parents and carers to have their say about Children’s Centres in Kirkby along with the current Child Development Grant Pilot (CDG). Dovetailing with the current Ipsos Mori research ‘Improving Local Services for Children and Families’, the remit in supporting this unique service user evaluation was to develop a qualitative understanding of parents and carers experiences, running alongside the more quantitative survey. Knowsley’s Children’s Centres continue to grow, expanding upon SureStart’s development, in order to best meet local needs. Offering a wide range of integrated services and information for children under five and their families; the Centres aim to improve outcomes, ensuring that every child gets the best start in life. The Child Development Grant Pilot (CDG) in Kirkby is part of a broader appraisal across Knowsley, which in turn is part of a national programme of assessment. The programme is exploring targeted ways to help families that are failing to take up services offered by the Sure Start scheme, such as health jabs, help with children’s reading and parenting amongst others. The Pilot’s aim is to test whether offering incentives can encourage socially-excluded parents to participate in agreed programmes of action to improve their children’s well-being. Ten Pilot projects in low-income neighbourhoods are currently being trialled across the UK as part of a £125 million three-year drive to encourage social mobility. Knowsley, as one of these Pilots, is offering a number of variations of incentive across the different areas within the borough; in Kirkby this involves a financial incentive of one-off grants totalling up to £250. The Kirkby focused consultation, included families in receipt of the CDG Grant. To be eligible for the Grant families needed to: • Live in Kirkby • Have a child aged 0-35 months • Have had limited engagement with a Children’s Centre. Either: • Not registered • Registered but never attended • Not attended in the last 6 months • Be eligible for one or more of the following: • Income support • Income-based Jobseekers Allowance • Child Tax Credit at a rate higher than the family element • Extra Working Tax Credit relating to a disability • Pension Credit Ultimately the Pilots are part of a considered push to reenergise aspirations amongst the most disadvantaged families; encouraging learning and improving long term educational standards to help put an end to child poverty.
5 deadcatdreaming
The Process The consultation process deliberately invited both new ‘service using’ parents and carers, some of whom were currently eligible to the Child Development Grant (CDG) and some of whom were not; as well as more established attendees with an active history of ‘participation’ in local provision. For a voluntary gathering, the consultation workshops were very well attended; with records indicating an evenly distributed balance of attendance at each. Three ½ day workshops took place across three Centres for ease of access:
The Star Centre The Pride Centre Eden Centre Childcare facilities were made available throughout the Centres. As consultation facilitators, the decision was made to only take on the broadest of overviews prior to the workshops about the Children’s Centres’ purpose and functioning as well as the CDG’s criteria and ethos. A more detailed introduction could have, it was felt, inadvertently influenced the interpretation and direction of the information gathering process. The conversational techniques used throughout the workshops focused upon building a comparative model of the parent’s and carer’s views, based upon how they perceived and understood the various components being discussed. In this way, the exploratory process opened itself to the values, beliefs and feelings of those involved, to better reflect ‘the reality’ they recognised. To this end, some of the information gathered might be factually incorrect in terms of current practice and procedure, however as such it represents the experience and understanding of those involved. In cases of divergence an additional question may need to be posed in regards to how participants had come to hold particular beliefs and perceptions.
6 deadcatdreaming
To maintain client confidentiality and to again avoid prejudicing the translation of the participant’s views and individual’s status in regards to CDG, eligibility for CDG was not shared with the facilitators prior to the respective workshops. Instead, the groups were all informed that the information they provided would be aggregated as a collective representation. This helped to build trust in regards to confidentiality surrounding individual contributions, giving participants the choice of disclosing their own status, if they felt comfortable to do so. As such, the main body of this Report is divided thematically, rather than from the specific position of one particular cohort, unless explicitly expressed as such. Where stated as representing one particular sub grouping’s views, the statement will have typically been alongside a declaration (i.e. ‘as someone who does/does not get the Grant....’) and then opened for discussion with other cohort members. The workshops made use of several ‘tools’ to help support and shape the consultation’s format. Various fun games were used to generate an informal and light hearted atmosphere, mindful that many of the participants felt both anxious and self conscious having never taken part in anything similar before. Whilst the emphasis was on putting participants at ease, the questioning and elicitation was given due respect; enabling participants to explore their own concerns in the round, using open questions to plot new tangents and conversations.
7 deadcatdreaming
Chief amongst the creative process used was the use of Graphic Elicitation and Graphic Recording. Stepping outside of traditional processes, Graphical Facilitation invites participants to focus and make clear their thoughts and feelings as a series of visual representations. Working collaboratively, each group has to formulate a shared metaphor that symbolically embodies their combined viewpoints. These images are expressed in real time as a large scale painted record. In this way, groups clarify and consolidate their opinions in a consistent and coherent way, adapting and adjusting the representation so that it resonates for the majority. These powerful visual anchors help keep track of the conversation, mapping the areas of greatest importance, whilst evidencing that the group has been heard. The Graphic Record was built upon progressively over the 3 workshops, as an amalgamation of key ideas. The images often act as markers along the consultation’s journey, indicating areas of enquiry that branch out into associated aspects. The Report makes use of the images to support the feedback, contextualising the additional commentary.
8 deadcatdreaming
Consultation and Beyond Running concurrently alongside the consultation process, participants were also invited to inform and direct the design and development of a ‘Practitioner’s Consultation Toolkit’. The origination of this bespoke Resource is seen as a purposeful strategy by which ‘service user engagement’ can become an integrated and ongoing aspect of service delivery. The intention is to move beyond ‘end of programme’ evaluations or simplistic surveys, so that participants can contribute a continuous voice to service improvement. Whilst the development of the Resource was woven throughout the consultation, the three workshops each closed with a different activity/emphasis:
Workshop 1
Focused on the relevance and structure of a potential Resource and the implications for its use, from a service user perspective.
Workshop 2
Explored the areas that, as service users, they would most want to be consulted on and how to best categorise these.
Workshop 3
Refined the input from workshop 1 + 2; generating images to best illustrate the main components and suggest a framework for its use.
The contributions and material that emerged, and their impact upon the Resource’s development, are included as an annex to this document. The participants enthusiastically welcomed the potential Resource, fully endorsing Knowsley’s drive to increase engagement and actively involve them as stakeholders. The Resource is currently being drafted and is seen as being a unique set of Cards that will empower service users to take control of future consultations. The Toolkit’s development is on target for production and staff training is scheduled for early summer 2010.
9 deadcatdreaming
What they said: The overwhelming feedback surrounding the Children’s Centres was incredibly positive. Participants described well resourced and maintained facilities that operated professionally. Described as welcoming and open, the Centres and Services were seen as invaluable, providing fantastic access to great materials and resources. The regular timetable of events was described as a Lifeline, enabling families to plan for a structured week. Without the local provision, many worried that they would find it difficult to motivate themselves and could quickly become isolated, trapped in their own homes. The ability to access structured and resourced activities, not only ensured that their children enjoyed and benefitted from a broad range of experiences, but that they too also benefitted; “taking the pressure off”, improving their morale and well being. Participants were in general agreement that without the provision, the expense and effort of setting up similar activities independently (as well as ‘tidying up from’) would be too great. However, as a result of feeling lifted by their involvement and motivated by the enjoyment their children gained, they all described being inspired to do more themselves with a much better understanding of what can be done and how to do it.
The image of a Lifeline was transformed into a Washing Line with a Heart, symbolising the ‘fresh start’ that the Service gave families.
10 deadcatdreaming
Each week I find something new that I like
Access to increased experiences was directly linked to increased expectations for those that took up the opportunities and fully engaged with the Service. The Open Gate represented for one group of parents the opening up of new provision and support that ordinarily they would never have considered or felt confident enough to make use of; from something as simple as the Library Service to more specific medical help. The opinion was that the Children’s Centres formed a clear gateway into a whole range of provision within the community and beyond. This was seen as very important as, for many, it formed the first step in a journey consisting of multiple ‘gateways’ and opportunities. The group that formed this metaphor felt that more credit needed to be given to the Centres and staff in terms of this hidden benefit of sign posting families on to new experiences. The group wondered whether the progression individuals made, indirectly as a result of accessing the Centre’s, was being tracked and evaluated. Strongly embedded in this metaphor, is the confidence that the Centres and the provision offered gave to parents and children to progress, opening up new ways of being.
11 deadcatdreaming
The ‘Events Timetable’ was strongly felt by many to be a critical feature of the Service; and during the consultations it formed the backdrop to many important and interconnected conversations, that have a direct bearing on Service improvement from the parent’s and carer’s position. The importance of the timetable was repeatedly reinforced and it was felt that a standardised position needed to be taken on how the leaflet is accessed. Currently, different areas were seen to operate different practices, with some choosing to mail it out, whilst others needed it to be requested at the Centre. There was considerable confusion surrounding how to get on a mailing list and if indeed some Centres did in fact operate a mailing list. Having the timetable mailed out was the preferred option, as it helped overcome issues relating to breaks in attendance due to illness or holidays etc; whilst also acting as a regular reminder. The differing timetables also threw up questions around the distribution of activities. Many parents felt that the ‘better’ activities were often at one particular Centre over the others. When this point was opened up across all three consultation groups, it was difficult to determine which Centre was running the preferred activities, as individuals had their own preferences. However, it was clear that in general terms the distribution of activities was not evenly spread across the Centres. The groups called for both an audit of existing provision as well as popular activities to rotate around all the Centres where possible. Picking up on the thread ‘better activities’, the participants initially struggled to reach a consensus as to what made an activity ‘better’. On aggregate, ‘well ordered and clearly explained’ was settled on as a universally applicable measure. The groups went on to share the thought that not all activities achieve this same high standard, with certain programmes lacking structure. The majority of parents agreed that the ideal sessions should follow a consistent pattern, adhering to a definite timetable. Clear communication between staff and parents/carers was also prioritised; a theme that resurfaced throughout all three workshops at various points. As such, communication is treated as a separate topic within this Report. There was also concern about what was seen as often arbitrary and inflexible rules attached to some activities; e.g. a 23 month old not being allowed to join a potty training group aimed at 2 year olds. There were other examples highlighted, which consultees saw as predominantly issues associated with communication; however it was suggested that some staff approached their job in a detached manner, with distinctly drawn boundaries as to the limits of their role. This overtly rigid attitude was seen as unhelpful when working with families, who will never all fit the same criteria. The participants saw these issues as extremely rare and felt that they could be addressed via additional training and management strategies.
I really enjoyed the cooking, it gave me a different outlook and the kids loved the food
Sing and sign works really well
My little lad has picked up so much spanish, its amazing 12
deadcatdreaming
Despite some targeted criticism of isolated experiences, the staff were awarded an overall 10/10 score, which was added to the Heart on the Lifeline.
The overwhelming perceptions voiced, described the majority of staff as ‘excellent’, going beyond their designated roles to provide a personal service, targeting advice and guidance in a supportive manner. The image of the Incomplete Jigsaw came out of discussion around improving and building upon existing provision. Chief amongst the ideas put forward was the difficulty faced by parents who have older children as well as children eligible for activities. There was seen to be little or no provision that accommodated older children during school holiday periods, forcing parents to have to miss sessions with the younger child(ren).
“Bridging this age divide” and putting an end to exclusion was portrayed by the image on the Jigsaw. The parents’ ideal was to have joint or additional activities made available during school holidays. In fact many of the parents felt that generally more activities needed to be streamed during the spring to the autumn, with a reduced service during the winter period. This was primarily due to difficulties accessing Centres during periods of poor weather, whilst wanting more to do in the summer.
13 deadcatdreaming
Parents and carers also called for longer sessions and more activities aimed at adults, with an emphasis on holistic care for the family, such as yoga. This was offset by the need also to review the current 3pm finish time of some activities as some schools let children out at 3.10pm. Whilst others felt evening sessions (especially if able to cater for older children) would be very popular. This proposal was enthusiastically supported by working parents and was seen as a constructive approach to involving more fathers. The issue of engaging more male parents and carers was given huge importance by the predominantly female consultee’s. Whilst they enjoyed and valued women only groups, the lack of male role models was seen as very significant. The groups all noted that there were few male staff members at the various Centres and felt that this inevitably contributed to the reluctance of men to get involved. The groups were aware of ‘Dad’s sessions’ being run, but felt from their position these seemed ‘tokenistic’ and under attended. Many felt that traditional cultural values prevented many men from accessing the Service; whilst anecdotally aware of many more families in the area where the man was the main carer within the family while the female partner worked. The Oversized Hand with Bejewelled Fingernail pointing through the Open Gate signifies both the growing need on so many levels for improving male attendance, whilst also suggesting that more should be done to make use of existing women attendees to direct men to appropriate sessions. Joint activities where female partners or family members could accompany men to initial structured and targeted activities were seen as the key to unlocking this reluctance to get involved. This was later supported by the only two men to attend the consultation group, who both agreed with the idea and verified it was how they initially became involved. Further recommendations suggested workers making more of an effort to include male attendees, whilst avoiding indirect sexism.
and the worker said “ooh a man, we don’t get many dad’s”, and she meant it in a nice way, but you could see he was embarrassed The groups also suggested male focused incentives and maybe running a specific ‘Pilot’. Reiterated across all three workshops, the same theme saw male involvement as vital in contemporary society, with the underlying message that ‘it’s ok to spend time alone with your children’.
14 deadcatdreaming
This unusual image choice of a Sports Bra holding a Smiling Mouth and an Ear wearing a Judge’s Wig, was developed from the group’s shared discussion around staff support and intervention. Several parents voiced unfortunate examples of treatment where they felt that the worker had not ‘listened’ to their request/experience properly and instead had made judgemental remarks, unhelpful to their situation. Whilst these experiences were seen as extremely rare, the disclosure resonated with many of the other members in the groups, especially with those that were experiencing difficulties or had concerns about their child. ‘Better workers’, the participants described, actively listened before offering an answer; with the response always relating directly to the parent’s perceptions. The alternative, the groups explained, was over simplistic pigeon holing of the problem/concern and the worker inflicting ‘text book’ answers inappropriate to the needs of the family. Parents that felt they had been treated in this manner went on to explain that the impact was much greater than simply not getting the advice and support they needed; the inappropriateness of the intervention also caused many parents to question themselves, undermining their confidence, creating self doubt and exacerbating their fears. Improving communication skills was suggested as an approach to overcoming a repeat of similar situations in the future. Communication was about getting the right balance between listening and talking, before making a considered judgement and offering effective support. Successful communication was prioritised as critical to developing effective relationships with parents that build self esteem and confidence.
15 deadcatdreaming
Whilst negative experiences were considered few, the groups were in agreement that all staff could benefit from a greater understanding of communication, its role and importance in developing rapport and helping people feel included. Suggestions were made that more could be done to communicate and explain to groups what the groups/activities are about and why certain things are done in certain ways. The groups felt that there were often sessions where the lead professional assumed that the attendees understood what was going on. Having all staff members that run groups explicitly verbalising the various stages and processes would, the groups thought, ensure both a considered and structured session, whilst enabling parents and carers to appreciate the purpose and drivers, and so in turn develop a new understanding themselves. The groups also suggested that staff should give more feedback to parents and carers, both in terms of their child’s involvement in activities as well as the parent’s/carer’s own performance. Whilst its purpose would be to provide a constructive evaluation of strengths and weaknesses, the emphasis should, the group felt, settle on praising and reaffirming achievements and encouraging best practice in a positive way, linked to practical examples. This provoked debate about being new to a particular session or activity and how more could be done to include them in the group. Positive group dynamics were seen as essential to increasing retention and building long term commitment. Suggestions included a ‘warm welcome checklist’ as well as a ‘parent buddy scheme’ to ensure new members are fully included and understand what they are entering into. In terms of promoting the Services available within Children’s Centres, all the groups felt more could be done to advertise and extend awareness across the local area. Suggestions for how to market the existing provision included information/promotion through:
Schools Shops (next to Nappies!) Timetable in free newspaper Bounty Packs Midwives
16 deadcatdreaming
The Open Arms image though highlights how successful they considered the outreach promotional stalls in the shopping centres. This, for many, had been their first contact with the Service and had really sold the idea of getting involved. They had all found the one-to-one introduction to the timetable of activities extremely helpful in enabling them to come to terms with the broad range of choice available. This was something they would like to see made available to all parents/carers, as a possible ‘induction’ process to ensure all new attendees can get the most from what is on offer. Several group members said that they had initially found the timetable off putting but later come to find it essential. There was also a suggestion to make more of existing attendees at promotional events, acting as ‘champions’ on behalf of the Centres. The groups also discussed the stigma Sure Start, and by association the Children’s Centres, had for some people in the region. They believed many held the opinion that Sure Start was only for unemployed single mums; this was something they knew not to be true, however could see it was seriously affecting the take up as a core provision in the community.
17 deadcatdreaming
The addition of the Expanding Family Tree anchors the groups’ long term aspiration for Sure Start and Children’s Centres to address this unfair label and go on to be universally accepted as the ‘open to all’ service provider it is. With the Tree Trunk representing a Children’s Centre, the group felt that even more could be done though to encourage growth and expand provision into other areas. Links to other services, especially for older children, was seen as providing a long term focus for families. This also linked to many of the parent’s/carer’s concerns in regards to how to access similar support when their children are older. A long term expansion to ‘Family Centres’ with an intergenerational remit was amongst some of the suggestions that countered many of the concerns the participants had in regards to cuts and changes to Service delivery in light of the pending general election.
18 deadcatdreaming
Child Development Grant In regards to the Child Development Grant (CDG), the varied discussions eventually determined it to be an extremely positive early doors intervention, which really motivated people to attend; addressing real need in the local area. Many of the CDG beneficiaries openly admitted that the financial incentive had made a real difference in helping them overcome their reluctance to get involved. Many had described feeling shy and lacking confidence about taking up the opportunities available and had seen the reward scheme as a justification to invest in the project. The image of a Baby in a School Uniform goes some way to giving shape to the perceived benefits for those that had taken up the CDG option (as well as for the new non-CDG attendees); illustrating a ‘school ready’ child, access to the Centres was seen as providing the best start for their child(ren). Confident about their development, the parents and carers described ways in which they had seen the activities benefit their children; from improvements in their ability to interact socially and communicate better, to becoming much more active and less interested in the television. Many of the anecdotes illustrated how, as parents/carers, they had successfully moved through the transition curve to a stage where their drive to attend had little to do with the financial reward and was instead very much about the benefits for them and their child(ren).
He's so keen to go, he says "Go to school, go to school mummy". 19 deadcatdreaming
Existing attendees saw numbers increase dramatically following the introduction of the Grant. So much so that spaces became limited. Existing attendees welcomed the flexibility offered by some of the Centres, in putting on new groups to accommodate for the increases; however, there were felt to be too many occasions where people were turned away because an activity was oversubscribed. This ‘first up, best dressed’ approach saw long term attendees turned away at the door. The feeling from all sides was that this additional demand on places needed to have been planned for, especially in regards to future Pilots. The group felt that turning people away could damage relationships, undermining the overall success of the Centre’s, as existing members choose to opt out. Both sides also identified parents and carers who could not, or would not, engage and were seen as only attending for the money. Whilst the groups recognised the difficulties many of these reluctant CDG attendees had and the clear benefits, particularly in regards to improvements in language and behaviour for their children (seen as a real need in the area), the groups felt that the opportunity was being exploited and wasted. The groups also raised how many of this ‘hard to reach’ cross section elected to stop coming after the initial 4 weeks. This was attributed to the £50 pay out at this point. The consultation groups felt that some CDG parents perceived the cost benefit to them of continued attendance after the 4 week payout as not worth it. Perceptions that the programme became more intensive after 4 weeks was seen as the main factor in the pronounced drop out. £50 was seen by all as too large a sum for attending only 4 individual sessions. The groups, with members from across the cohort, made several suggestions to improve involvement, including: • • • • • •
Expanding the overall length of the programme, without increasing the financial incentives Shortening the programme with less financial incentive Increasing the number of activities a participant must attend during any given week Paying the Grant in the form of vouchers (e.g. shopping voucher for Early Learning Centre) Paying the Grant into a Child’s Trust Fund Paying monies at the end/completion of the programme
Whilst the consultation groups agreed that this would, for many, make involvement more difficult; the groups felt that the alternatives could be much worse.
20 deadcatdreaming
Danger
The image of the Unstable and Dangerous Wall represented the perceived harm done to children whose parents knowingly pull them away from their new friends and experiences, creating instability and confusion. It also embedded ideas of ‘division’ and the erection of ‘barriers’, as engaging parents feel overlooked and undervalued.
21 deadcatdreaming
Illustrated by the Two Hands, weighing up a Pound Sign on one side and Question Mark on the other, the feelings of unfairness and disparity were echoed throughout all three workshops, as all participants agreed that the Pilot was divisive, with the potential to cause conflict and ill feeling. Friendship groups and new social networks were identified as a hidden yet major benefit to making use of the Children’s Centres; with nearly all the participants citing the importance of these alongside that of the distinct work done by the Centre’s and their staff. Anything that jeopardised this was seen as too great a price to pay. Parents eligible for the CDG felt guilty and awkward about receiving the funding, especially in regards to families in the same financial position as themselves, but who had not met the assessment criteria because they had accessed the Children’s Centre of their own choice prior to the Pilot’s launch. Whilst they felt it was unfair, they also very much appreciated what the Pilot had given them. Parents not receiving CDG also felt that the Pilot was unfair as it did nothing for their financial position, nor acknowledged their own ongoing commitment, both to the Children’s Centres and their Children. Though they felt it to be unfair, they were quick to add that they did not begrudge those in receipt of the Grant. Both parties felt that steps, both before and during the introduction of the CDG, could have been taken to minimise what they saw as the inevitable issues that the Pilot has both directly and indirectly caused.
22 deadcatdreaming
Returning to communication, many felt that there was considerable confusion about both the eligibility criteria for the CDG, its terms and conditions whilst on the scheme, as well as its role and purpose; with conflicting and contradictory versions shared by both sides that suggested different criteria and differing bands of funding running concurrently. Some people felt that the criteria was changing during the programme and wondered if this was due to certain activity sessions having achieved their targets. Many attributed meeting the criteria being down to ‘luck’, adding the 4 Leaf Clovers to the Board; as there were many people, in what appeared to be similar circumstances, starting to make use of the Centres at the same time, but some did not get onto the scheme where others did.
23 deadcatdreaming
The Magnifying Glass focuses on clearing up the confusion and examining the detail behind the Pilot. Several group members thought that information had been deliberately withheld, though probably with good intentions; in that the staff did not want to be seen to be applying a ‘label’. However, many of the participants had drawn their own conclusions, interpreting the Pilot as an ‘experiment’ linked to ‘deprivation’. Many felt uncomfortable with this implied status, whilst also seeing it as yet another ‘government initiative’ overly concerned with supporting/rewarding negative attitudes and behaviour in society. Hidden in the layering of images within the Graphic Record, the Magnifying Glass also focuses on the ‘naughty corner’, possibly paying too much attention to inappropriate behaviours. From this position, the general opinion was that the CDG could ultimately do more harm than good, removing the incentive to work and so holding people back. There was also discussion around alleged inequality and differences in treatment. This ranged from parents accessing the Grant who were not strictly eligible, to parents repeatedly leaving activities early and still being paid in full. There was also discussion around entitlement to support with transport, with eligibility to this extra provision being extremely vague, leading many to draw the conclusion that it was often misused by parents considered more vocal and proactive; at the detriment of more vulnerable families. Parents from all sides also agreed that entitlement to services and support should be according to need and not enrolment on the CDG Pilot. This point related mostly to the one to one outreach support that had been seen as fantastic by those who had received it. It also referred to organised trips that were only available to CDG families. Ultimately, the group felt that future Pilots would need to be totally transparent; suggesting that consultation/focus groups are established prior to their launch, to clarify the information to be shared and to help identify any potential issues in advance, contributing to possible solutions.
Getting the
focus
24 deadcatdreaming
The Loud Haler image came as a call for more parental involvement in informing and directing Service improvement. Nearly all participants were surprised to learn that there was an existing Parent Forum and many looked disappointed not to have been invited to join. All groups felt that they would appreciate more opportunities to voice their opinion and could make practical suggestions about how to improve both in house services and extended provision. There was also considerable interest in enabling more ‘user led’ activities, especially around areas of additional/specific need, such as dietary or language. One parent had endeavoured to establish their own group and had found it extremely difficult to get going, in regards to promotion and recruitment; only to be told afterwards that support could have been made available. To this end, the opinion was that more could be done to support the origination and development of parent initiated projects, as well as helping to formalise social networks.
25 deadcatdreaming
When asked to consider alternative approaches to widening attendance other than CDG, many felt that closer links could be forged with medical services, tying attendance into assessment opportunities. Linking Centre’s and activities to early identification and intervention was seen as allaying the natural concerns parents had for their child’s development and making long-term support easier to access if required. This was seen as a systemic approach that would need to coincide with changes to people’s broader understanding of the Service as a whole. Of the parents who were accessing CDG, many talked about the importance of the funding to initially motivating them to attend, however went on to confirm that it was the ‘outstanding provision’ and the ‘benefits to their children’ that motivated them to maintain contact. Many parents pointed up that they attended in excess of their CDG Plan’s requirements and would continue to attend if the money was withdrawn. However they recognised that many of their peers were only motivated by the money and felt that this hardcore group would not continue to attend after the funding stopped. With this in mind, they felt the Grant was probably too long a programme to be cost effective and what was required was a shorter more targeted programme that got people through the doors, relying on the quality of the service to develop retention. For those reluctant to engage, long-term crèche facilities were suggested as one answer, with low-level activities targeted separately at the parents that could raise awareness and change mindsets..
It's great, it's got us singing songs in the the street together as we come here in the morning
I won't stop coming when the money stops, he loves it, I love it
It's been great, my daughter is just not clingy at all anymore
It gives me a reason to leave the house, i'd be lost without it
26 deadcatdreaming
The last image on the Board is of the Smiling Home, the parents and carers united representation of the overall success for them of CDG and the Children’s Centres. For them the benefits were seen far beyond what took place at the Centres, and were instead the lasting legacy they enjoyed on a daily basis in their own homes; ‘happy families’ aware of how their children’s and their own confidence had flourished as a result of being involved.
27 deadcatdreaming
In Brief Overall, Children’s Centres were seen as offering an ‘Excellent Service’; providing fantastic access to great materials and resources; with which parents very much valued being involved. What was valued included: Broad range of choice. Children’s increased confidence and social skills. Children’s Centres providing gateway to increased inclusion and use of other services. Staff support on the whole being ‘excellent’; an outstanding 10/10! Use of an Activity Timetable. Outreach promotional stalls were considered extremely effective. CDG seen as an excellent early doors intervention that has been extremely effective at enabling those on the cusp of attendance to fully engage and benefit from the opportunity. Involvement in the Kirkby Children’s Centres continuing to make a real difference for local families. Parents and carers cited, amongst other benefits, improvements for their children in:
Independence Confidence Behaviour Social Skills Speech + Language They also felt clear benefits themselves, including:
Confidence Friendship Improved Parenting Skills Better able to make use of broader community services
28 deadcatdreaming
In building upon this successful provision, suggestions for further development included: • Activities capable of accommodating older children; particularly during school holidays. • Standardised approach to circulating Activity Timetable by mail shot. • Audit of activity distribution and rotation of popular activities. • Programmes adhere to clear and consistent structure. With workers actively explaining the purpose of each session. • Increased activities from spring to autumn, with reduced provision during the winter. • Increased length of sessions; but revisit 3pm finish times. • More adult targeted activities. • Concerted push on promoting male involvement; including joint activities for females to invite partners. • More evening and weekend activities. • Communication training for staff; with an emphasis on listening and working with parents perceptions. • Increased feedback to parents on progress made. • ‘Warm Welcome Checklist’ – guidelines providing a structured approach to involving new attendees in a group/activity. • ‘Parent Buddy Scheme’ for new attendee’s. • Continue to increase marketing/promotion. • Introduction of ‘Outreach Champions’. • Forward message to Sure Start National H.Q. re. overcoming the current limiting perceptions of the Service. • Develop Children’s Centres as a centralised community hub for families, with links to other providers and services. • Future Pilots consider and plan for the impact upon current resources/ provision prior to launch. • Some aspects of CDG seen as unfair; participants welcomed the opportunity to be involved, as a ‘Pre-Initiative Consultation Panel’, to provide advice and suggestions to future projects. • Greater transparency and consistency for all in regards to information giving relating to projects and services. • Entitlement to services and support given in accordance with need rather than enrolment on a specific pilot/initiative. • Existing system for parental engagement e.g. Parent Forum better promoted and developed further. • Increased support for user led initiatives. • Develop a coherent approach to encouraging parent/carer social networks and inclusive friendship groups. • Forge closer links with medical services to provide an early intervention approach to child development issues. • Provide increased crèche facilities for ‘hard to reach’ families to encourage greater engagement.
29 deadcatdreaming
Appendix 1 In order to encourage and enable service users to inform and direct service improvement, the consultation groups were given the opportunity to have their say on the development and implementation of an engagement toolkit. The underlying purpose in regards to the development of the Resource was to be better able to give ‘frontline’ staff a means by which they could provoke considered feedback from participating parents and carers. The initial proposal was warmly welcomed by all the groups involved; who felt it to be an excellent means by which to focus collective opinion as an integral part of service delivery. The groups also valued the way in which it would positively affirm the importance given to their views as stakeholders. The overall package is seen as a set of visual prompt cards capable of providing small groups with a focal point during discussions, supporting guidance materials and targeted training.
From Theory... As mentioned in the main body of The Bigger Picture Consultation Summary, the development of the Resource was woven throughout the consultation, with each of the three workshops taking forward a different stage of the developmental process.
Workshop 1
Focused on the relevance and structure of a potential Resource and the implications for its use, from a service user perspective.
Workshop 2
Explored the areas that, as service users, they would most want to be consulted on and how to best categorise these.
Workshop 3
Refined the input from workshop 1 + 2; generating images to best illustrate the main components and suggest a framework for its use.
30 deadcatdreaming
Into Practice... During the different stages, several important themes and ideas emerged, including:The use of third person characters, as a means of opening up conversations of a sensitive nature in a safe and controlled manner, was an idea that all the participants embraced. The third person was seen as a fun yet involved way in which groups could collectively pool opinions without disclosing personal details. This process has the potential to develop greater insights into local needs and values. Whilst this element was not factored into the toolkit’s physical production, the group’s enthusiasm for this process has suggested that a set of companion cards may help to make the most of this technique, which can be extremely revealing in itself. The groups went on to prioritise the areas that they would most want to be consulted about. Working collaboratively, the attendees consolidated a list of key words that encapsulated, as the lowest common denominator, conversational openers. These ‘triggers’ were very much seen as capable of provoking much broader debate than perhaps initially apparent. The way in which the participants expanded potential meanings gave rise to new ways of judging service practice and success. After much discussion and refinement, the group at Workshop 2 developed a list of 7 key factors: -
1. Satisfaction 2. Rewards 3. Access 4. Support 5. Comfort 6. Confidence 7. Feeling good Group 3 further refined this list to: -
1. Satisfaction 2. Rewards 3. Access 4. Support 5. Comfort
31 deadcatdreaming
This initial set of 5 Cards was seen as providing the context to a series of questions. Rather than limit each Card to a set of predetermined questions, the idea is that the Key Cards will be used in conjunction with 1 of 6 Question Cards: -
Who What Where Why When How Selected randomly, a Key Card and Question Card will be introduced to the consultation group. In this way, the group will be invited to generate their own questions. This will allow groups of all types to set their own agenda and develop conversations appropriate to the topic; and in doing so, increased control is given to the stakeholders. Due to the fact that there are 6 question types, we recommend that a 6th Key Card of ‘Change’ be introduced to balance the two respective sets. The Change Card has the potential to provide ‘the miracle question’ often used in coaching techniques to open up solution focused planning.
1. Satisfaction
Who
2. Rewards
What
3. Access
Where
4. Support
Why
5. Comfort
When
6. Change
How
The parental groups provided a range of images that for them represented the both the ‘key’ words as well as the ‘questions’. These ranged from a ‘Door with a Welcome Mat’ for ‘Access’ to a ‘Compass’ for ‘Where’ on the Question Cards.
32 deadcatdreaming
The groups also made recommendations for the Resource’s use. Chief amongst these were two main considerations. The first suggestion was that the Resource could also be used on a one-to-one basis to help inform initial assessments when developing packages of support. The second, was that they should not be used on day 1 with new groups. Instead the consultation group felt that the worker should allow time to develop effective rapport and cohesive group dynamics. The Resource is currently on target for production and staff training is scheduled for early summer 2010.
33 deadcatdreaming
.co.uk g n
eami dr
adcat de
www.