The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHILD POVERTY IN SOCIAL INCLUSION PARTNERSHIPS

CHAPTER FIVE TACKLING CHILD POVERTY IN SOCIAL INCLUSION PARTNERSHIPS

5.1 This chapter is concerned with understanding what SIPs are doing across Scotland to tackle child poverty (in its widest sense). It draws on 2 sources of evidence: an initial telephone survey of 41 SIP managers (the survey) and 23 in-depth interviews in 4 case study areas. Further details of methods are presented in Appendix 3.

5.2 The chapter begins by asking the question: what does the term 'child poverty' mean to people working for or with SIPs? Two important findings are that SIPs are generally not focusing on child poverty as a key priority and, as a result, coherent local strategies for tackling child poverty are not in evidence. SIPs have a broad remit for social and economic change, and consequently they tend to regard child poverty as just one aspect of wider local problems.

5.3 The chapter then turns to consider in more detail the range of initiatives identified by SIP managers as impacting on child poverty. A typology of services is developed which distinguishes between the intended recipients of the service and whether it is alleviative or preventative in nature. It is noted that the non-strategic approach means that SIPs display no clear preference for particular types of initiative.

5.4 Finally, the chapter explores what SIP managers and other local staff consider to be the gaps in services which need to be addressed at both a local and at national level if child poverty is to be successfully tackled. A number of suggestions for improvements are presented.

Defining child poverty

5.5 SIPs' understanding of child poverty is important, because defining 'the problem' is fundamental to designing and implementing solutions. It is apparent that SIPs' broad understanding of child poverty is at the root of their wide-ranging attempts to tackle it. In this section it is notable that perceptions of 'the problem' do not really vary across SIPs, despite different local issues and priorities.

5.6 It is striking that the majority of research participants in both the survey and the case study interviews chose to define child poverty broadly. Definitions typically referred to lack of opportunity, low aspirations and low expectations, as well as low family income. Reference was also made to the social problems affecting many children in poverty, such as substance misuse by parent or child, anti-social behaviour, prostitution and abuse or neglect within the home. Participants did not generally differentiate between the cause of poverty and its impacts on a child's life and life chances. Therefore both cause and impacts are reported here together.

5.7 The telephone survey revealed that few SIPs have explicitly identified child poverty as a substantive theme in their work. Yet, while child poverty is not a specific priority, many SIPs have prioritised related themes such as children and families, training and employment, and poverty and inequality. Further, while child poverty is not explicitly targeted by SIPs, the majority of SIP management staff surveyed regarded child poverty as touching most, if not all, of their core objectives. One SIP manager remarked that child poverty lay "within the remit of every SIP" while another stated that child poverty "touches everything the SIP does". The understanding was that the long term improvement of the area must start with the younger generation. A number of SIP managers remarked that government policy has strongly indicated that child poverty must be considered a fundamental part of the social inclusion / social justice agenda.

5.8 Respondents did not typically distinguish between individual / family poverty and the poverty of the area. The absence of good quality neighbourhood facilities (such as leisure, affordable childcare, healthy food and primary health care) or the presence of an unstimulating, dismal or unsafe local environment, were held to impoverish local children. One SIP manager summarised this broad definition of child poverty as: "You don't necessarily have a rich childhood if there's money in the family".

5.9 The 4 recurrent themes of child poverty - low income, opportunity, aspiration and social problems - are separately discussed below. The chapter later explores how the 4 case study SIPs are tackling these aspects of child poverty, investigates perceived service gaps and identifies barriers to responding to local need.

Low income

5.10 A low income, or insufficient income to meet the family's needs, was typically the first part of any definition of child poverty offered by respondents. 'Common sense' definitions of low income were offered, rather than established measures such as those used in the HBAI reports.

5.11 The reasons for financial poverty were identified as worklessness, low paid work, and the interactions between work and benefits.

5.12 Often employment opportunities in SIP areas are few, with Greater Govan and the Coalfields case study SIPs in particular suffering the effects of industrial decline. Those jobs which are locally available often do not match the work skills of residents. Furthermore, available jobs are often insecure, part time or low paid. Respondents argued that where residents do work they continue to suffer both the unemployment and poverty traps, each made worse by an increasingly complex means tested benefits and tax credit system. Income from benefits alone is regarded as holding families in poverty: benefit levels are not considered sufficient by respondents to lift families out of poverty.

5.13 Low income, however, was considered by almost all survey respondents and interviewees to be an insufficient definition of child poverty. A lack of money was only part of the wider problem.

Opportunity

5.14 Poverty of opportunity is where children are unable to have the same experiences as their better off peers, because their choices are restricted by their family's financial situation. SIP staff spoke of children's access to play, sport, arts, holidays and consumer products. There was also mention of children's limited opportunity to access high quality mainstream services, compared to children living in non-SIP areas of Scotland.

5.15 Perhaps of more immediate concern was children's poor educational experiences and low attainment at school; health inequalities; safe play space and facilities; and their general living environment. Child poverty was seen to lead to reduced life chances, with a cycle of deprivation being identified. Breaking into this cycle, by increasing children's opportunities, is regarded as important although it is a long term solution to addressing child poverty: in this generation the effects are of alleviation.

5.16 Exclusion from community life and local decision-making processes was also highlighted by SIP staff in the survey. The need to play a full part in the community - whether through similar experiences to peers or through participation in the regeneration agenda was considered by respondents to be an important area for SIPs to address.

Aspiration

5.17 Poverty of expectation was explained as children developing lower aspirations for their own future. This may be expressed through disaffection with school, truancy / self-exclusion and low career aspirations.

5.18 It was argued by case study respondents that where children grow up in workless households they may follow their family role models and grow up as adults who chose benefit dependency. For this reason, as well as that of immediate income maximisation for families, it was thought critical to develop training and employment programmes and acceptable childcare services so that parents can be supported to move into work.

5.19 Further there is a need to raise children's skills and confidence, and hence their future employability.

Social problems

5.20 Finally, a number of social problems which are linked to child poverty were also identified. These include drug use, prostitution, domestic abuse, anti-social behaviour and exclusion from school. Little detail was given here, although there was an indication that a number of respondents were reluctant to pathologise the state of poverty by indicating a causal link in either direction between such social problems and accompanying child poverty.

5.21 SIPs could identify a number of projects which aspired to reduce these social problems, but pointed out that poverty is an underlying cause and needs to be tackled if these problems are to be overcome.

The case study SIPs

5.22 As indicated above, 4 SIPs were selected for in-depth consideration to exemplify different approaches to tackling child poverty. The reasons for selecting these particular SIPs are set out in Appendix 3, along with details of the projects they identified as playing a role in tackling child poverty.

5.23 Three area-based SIPs were selected, along with one thematic SIP:

• Greater Govan
• Blantyre and Hamilton
• East Ayrshire
• Dundee Xplore

5.24 The case studies were chosen to include both very urban and more rural / dispersed populations and two have a particular focus on children and young people. Brief contextual information on each of the case study SIPs is provided below, with a particular focus on each SIP's priorities.

The range of child poverty initiatives

5.25 As noted above, there is general agreement by those involved in SIPs that a broad definition of child poverty is necessary. From this, it follows that diverse attempts must be made to tackle the problem. This chapter now turns to a typology of child poverty initiatives developed from responses to the survey and illustrates this with examples drawn from the case study SIPs.

5.26 It should be noted that many of the projects identified by SIPs as 'tackling child poverty' may not necessarily identify 'children' or 'poverty' as key objectives. Rather, the positive impact on children is a welcome by-product of services developed for some other purpose. A positive decision was taken to include such initiatives within the scope of this research.

5.27 The initiatives identified by the telephone survey of SIPs as tackling child poverty are wide-ranging. On average, area-based SIP respondents highlighted 7 discrete projects or initiatives that the SIP supported to tackle child poverty. This ranged from none (in 3 partnerships) to 15. Thematic SIP respondents highlighted an average of 3 discrete projects or initiatives that the SIP supported to tackle child poverty. This ranged from none (in 3 partnerships) to 13.

5.28 Table 5.1 shows the frequency with which SIP managers highlighted different types of initiative.

5.29 The most commonly mentioned initiatives were childcare related, including play schemes, after school services, nurseries, crèches, and initiatives to encourage the provision of quality childcare locally. These included schemes that trained local residents in childcare and supported them into childcare jobs or into becoming registered childminders (Table 5.1).

5.30 Second to this came a range of money services. This category encompasses benefit take-up campaigns (often with a focus on the Working Families Tax Credit), credit unions and debt advice. Also frequently mentioned were nutrition-related initiatives such as food co-ops, healthy eating guidance and breakfast clubs.

Table 5.1: Types of child poverty initiative highlighted by thematic and area SIPS

Note: SIPs may have more than one of each type of initiative (e.g., several childcare projects)

Source: Telephone survey of SIP managers, 2001

5.31 It should be noted that the table above does not imply that only 3 of the surveyed SIPs have initiatives that provide services to the local Black and Minority Ethnic communities. Rather, only 3 SIP managers identified such services as playing a role in tackling child poverty. Furthermore, because it is based on responses to an open question during a telephone survey the list of child poverty initiatives can only be regarded as indicative of the range of services supported by SIPs. Other initiatives, where perhaps child poverty is not a central objective, may not have been reported.

5.32 It is worth commenting here on the comparative weight given by respondents to services initiated or financially supported by the SIP, compared to other services that may be operating in the SIP area. Although telephone survey respondents were specifically asked about non-SIP initiatives - intended to encompass mainstream local provision and projects such as Sure Start - these were rarely mentioned. This research is consequently unable to draw conclusions about the breadth of coverage such initiatives have in SIP areas, or about relationships between SIP initiatives and other initiatives.

A typology of child poverty initiatives

5.33 From the survey it became clear that child poverty initiatives may be distinguished in two ways: who the service is provided to, and whether that service alleviates the impacts of poverty or prevents future poverty. It should be noted that these distinctions do not rely on the stated objectives of services as the impact on child poverty may well be a welcome but unintended outcome of the service.

5.34 Firstly, services may be categorised according to their intended user. They may be provided directly to children and young people, they may be provided to adults who have responsibility for children, or they may be provided to all residents of the SIP area and incidentally benefit children.

5.35 Case study respondents did not show clear preferences for services provided to children or to parents. It was noted that services provided to children - such as after-school clubs - also benefit parents, while services provided to parents - such as literacy programmes - benefit their children, not least through the parent's increased self-confidence. One SIP manager reported that the SIP Board had argued for the need to think of families as a unit: children's needs cannot be met unless the needs of parents are also addressed.

5.36 Services provided to all residents which incidentally benefit children and parents were infrequently explored in depth, but this is probably a result of the clear child poverty focus of the research, rather than respondents not recognising the valuable impact of such services.

5.37 Secondly, services may be categorised according to whether they prevent poverty in the short or long term, or alleviate the impacts of poverty.

5.38 Again, case study respondents did not show a clear preference for preventative or alleviative measures. One SIP manager likened this to the tension between health promotion and the treatment of illness: current problems must be tackled but the longer-term work will reduce needs over time. It was felt that ideally SIPs would be working towards the prevention of poverty in their area, but there is an equal pressure to respond now to the needs of this generation of poor children. The 4 case study SIPs did not appear to be taking a strategic approach to child poverty.

5.39 Table 5.2 presents a broad typology of child poverty services in SIPs. This is then illustrated and further developed with examples of services provided in the 4 case study SIPs.

5.40 It should be noted that the typology above represents ideal types. In practice, services may well benefit both children and parents. Indeed it is hard to imagine a service or project of benefit to parents that does not also benefit their children. Similarly, services that alleviate the impacts of poverty will also, to some extent, either prevent poverty now or reduce the risk of poverty in the future.

Table 5.2: Typology of child poverty initiatives

5.41 The following sections illustrate the typology with reference to particular services explored in the 4 case study SIP areas. The chapter then goes on to identify local gaps in services and research participants' suggestions for national responses to child poverty.

Preventative services for children

5.42 This refers to initiatives that have the objective, or unintended outcome, of reducing children's risk of becoming impoverished adults. Generally they centre around educational services, and also include projects which broaden children's horizons, raise their aspirations and provide role models of employed adults.

5.43 They may be more intensive forms of mainstream services - for example additional learning support provided in school or the provision of extra IT equipment for schools - or may be projects in the voluntary sector which support learning.

Preventative services for parents

5.44 This category covers projects which prevent child poverty by increasing parents' income through benefit take up or access to employment. Often such initiatives have a particular focus on lone parents.

5.45 Most area SIPs can point to examples of anti-poverty work, training and employment projects and services which allow parents to access work. As shown in Table 5.1, 24 SIPs could identify various money services and 15 pointed to employment services which they understood to play a role in tackling child poverty. However the nature of the survey means it is not possible to distinguish which of these services were specifically targeted at parents and which were available to all residents who may or may not be parents.

Preventative services for all SIP residents

5.46 Similar to services identified in the category above, are projects which benefit all SIP residents, not just parents. Here, 'all residents' refers to services that do not distinguish between parents and non-parents. Services may, however, distinguish between eligible and non-eligible residents in some other way: for example by targeting black and minority ethnic residents or those with poor literacy.

5.47 As discussed above, although SIPs identified a number of preventative services it is not possible to identify who is the intended recipient of such initiatives.

Alleviative services for children

5.48 Included under this category are any services intended to reduce the impact of poverty on children's lives. These might include projects which widen children's opportunities to participate in activities like their better off peers or projects which focus on health and well-being. They are intended to make the experience of being poor less painful.

Alleviative services for parents

5.49 These include services intended to reduce the impact of poverty by reducing parents' expenditure or increasing what they can purchase for their money. They may also be services that alleviate the effects of poverty, for example initiatives which concentrate on improving health or housing quality.

Alleviative services for all residents

5.50 These are services intended to reduce the impact of poverty by reducing residents' expenditure or increasing what they can purchase for their money. They may also be services that alleviate the effects of poverty, for example initiatives which concentrate on improving health or housing quality. Again, 'all residents' refers to services which do not distinguish between parents and non-parents.

Gaps in services

5.51 Although child poverty was not being addressed as a strategic priority within the case study SIPs it was an area of general concern. Based on local knowledge and experience interviewees were asked to identify gaps in services, the barriers to closing such gaps, and any national (Holyrood or Westminster) response which would improve the situation of children in poverty in that SIP area.

The local response

5.52 Although respondents could all point to positive developments or services that improve the situation of children in poverty in their local area, they were all able also to identify gaps in services or areas that could be improved. While some local patterns were apparent, the most frequently identified gaps, in all 4 case study areas, were: employment; childcare; recreation; mainstream services; targeting; food poverty; transport; housing; health; and education. While in each case, there were usually some efforts already being made to address the problem, respondents were calling for more, better or different provision in the area.

5.53 These suggestions for a local response are detailed below and returned to in the concluding chapter.

Employment

5.54 The need to increase the number of job opportunities for local residents was highlighted. Respondents argued that it is not enough to offer any jobs. Rather employment must be secure and reasonably paid to lift parents out of the poverty trap. There is also a need for services which support residents to apply for available jobs, teach them to sell themselves to potential employers, and which match residents' skills and capabilities with job opportunities. Continued postcode discrimination by employers was highlighted, and one interviewee identified both the inability to incentivise employers to employ local residents, and the inability to incentivise local residents to take employment.

Childcare

5.55 Closely aligned to improving employment opportunities was the need for more, varied, affordable and reliable childcare. While the 4 SIPs could all point to local initiatives, childcare continues to be a gap. Highlighted gaps include 'wrap around' childcare to enable parents to work, to comprise before and after school care, as well as school holiday services, the need to attach childcare to all projects which may attract parents (including social events), the need to identify what childcare exists and fill groups rather than duplicate provision. It was pointed out that good childcare is close to the child's home, not the parent's place of training / employment. Affordability was also highlighted, although childcare providers should be highly trained and well paid. This is also a mechanism for increasing local employment.

Recreation

5.56 The shortage of affordable accessible safe recreation and play facilities was also highlighted. This includes both structured services such as youth groups, sports classes and play facilities, as well as unstructured recreation such as places for teenagers to 'hangout', cheaper access to mainstream leisure services, including private sector facilities such as the cinema, and a safe space in the neighbourhood for younger children to play. In Govan, there was an identified need to make children from BME communities feel safe to use existing facilities. Making better use of existing facilities - in particular using schools during evenings and weekends and holidays - was highlighted by the Coalfields Area SIP. This was because in rural areas there are often no other community facilities.

Mainstream services

5.57 Improvements to the way that mainstream services - such as health, education, social work, benefits and housing - are delivered in local areas were also identified as necessary. Many respondents pointed to the need for a single point of access for local residents, which implies the need for improvements in joined-up working and easier information sharing. Those employed by mainstream services pointed to the need for SIPs to become more aware of the agencies' core business. They also identified their own patchy awareness of SIP initiatives and the varied projects operating in the SIP area. It was argued by respondents from SIPs, mainstream services, and projects that a greater input is required from mainstream services in their local areas. Similarly, the need for a strategic and preventative approach by mainstream services was highlighted. Too often, it was reported, the role of social work in particular is restricted to firefighting.

Targeting

5.58 Some gaps were identified as to who is being served in SIP areas. Groups with unmet needs included: lone parents; teenagers; children and young people with mental health problems'; young mothers; excluded and self-excluded young people; young carers; the children of drug using parents; and children from BME communities. Further, several interviewees expressed a concern that the most vulnerable are not reached by services. Rather those with the lowest support needs are targeted to improve participation, retention and success rates.

Food poverty

5.59 Access to healthy and affordable food continues to be a problem in the SIP areas. Shops are inadequate, expensive or difficult to get to. There was felt to be a need to extend breakfast clubs, and some support for the idea of free school meals for all.

Transport

5.60 Expensive or inadequate public transport services were highlighted by interviewees as barriers to residents' participation in community life. Transport needs to be "safe, available, affordable" to enable young people to travel independently and access available services. It also needs to run into the late evenings. All 4 SIPs identified gaps in transport.

Housing

5.61 Low quality housing and a poorly designed and managed environment was identified as a service gap with high local priority. Greater Govan pointed to the need for housing development which is sensitive to religious and cultural requirements of people from BME communities. There is also an unmet need for a women's refuge that meets the needs of BME women fleeing violence. In Dundee, the need for independent and supported accommodation for young people was identified.

Health

5.62 Access to sexual health services, in particular contraception and guidance on safer sex, was identified as a gap in all but Blantyre and Hamilton SIP. While services may exist on a sessional basis this is not felt to be sufficient to meet the needs of young people, particularly in rural areas. In Dundee, access to mental health services for young people was also identified as a gap, particularly in respect of the transition from child to adult.

Education

5.63 Finally gaps were identified around education in both Dundee and Govan. These included: the need to train teachers to understand the difficulties faced by some children and young people; greater support for young people to continue in education or access training; and alternatives to school - such as vocational training - for excluded or self-excluded young people. It was also suggested that BME children in particular often do not have the space to study at home, and that homework clubs would therefore help their schooling.

The national response

5.64 Interviewees recognised that a local response to child poverty will never be adequate. They suggested a range of policy responses which need to be implemented either by the devolved Scottish Parliament or by Westminster if child poverty is to be alleviated now or prevented in later generations. These suggestions for a national response are detailed below, and returned to in the concluding chapter.

5.65 The context for these suggestions is, however, that both the Scottish Executive and the UK Government have shown a commitment to tackling child poverty. Interviewees appreciate the priority that this area is being given by government, and their suggestions were offered in a spirit of building on what has already been implemented or promised. As one interviewee stated, for those concerned with tackling child poverty "this is a time of opportunity".

5.66 Suggestions for change at the national level fall into 6 broad themes. These are:

• increasing families' out of work benefit income
• increasing families' in work income
• making agencies' work easier
• alleviative measures
• preventative measures
• childcare.

5.67 The themes are discussed in turn, below. All suggestions for national change were proffered by more than one interviewee unless otherwise indicated.

Increasing families' out-of-work benefit income

5.68 This theme was referred to in all 4 SIPs, and by almost all interviewees. There was a recognition that benefit income for families out-of-work had increased but this was felt to still offer an insufficient income. Children living in families on benefits are children in poverty. While it was felt that there is a need to create incentives to work, low benefits for those out of work are not considered the appropriate mechanism. While interviewees might offer longer-term measures to reduce the numbers of children in families dependent on benefit income, in the short term raising benefit levels, tackling high rates of benefit withdrawal and simplifying the benefits system were seen as critical steps.

5.69 One interviewee called for a recognition of the 'work' of parenting, and promoted the concept of a social wage / assured family income. Higher levels of child benefit were also regarded as necessary by many interviewees and there were calls to end, or at least reduce, the reliance on means-testing. Several respondents called for more explicit support for the choice that mothers may make to stay at home and care for their children, particularly but not only when children are young.

5.70 As well as improving benefit levels, interviewees called for benefit entitlement to be widened. Of particular concern was a perceived need to end the lower level of benefit entitlement to young people; and to provide a new benefit entitlement to pregnant women, throughout their pregnancy, in recognition of the increased costs of pregnancy and the probable benefits to the unborn child.

5.71 The final suggestions towards improving families' benefit income were on the theme of assisting people to understand an increasingly complex benefits system. One interviewee suggested the creation of a national integrated money advice / benefits service, while others argued that the Benefits Agency should focus on more entitlement, not fraud.

Increasing families' in-work income

5.72 Several mechanisms for increasing families' in-work income were identified by interviewees.

5.73 Firstly, increasing the number of families in work was felt to be critical. This has several components: increasing the number of full time jobs available to residents of disadvantaged areas; increasing access to employment; reviewing the interaction between work and benefits for parents and particularly for lone parents; and addressing the additional costs of working such as transport and childcare (discussed below).

5.74 Second, it was argued that there is a need to make work pay. Parents who wish to take paid employment should be better off than those not in work. Respondents argued that there is a need to increase the level of the minimum wage significantly, and to simplify the system of in-work benefits. One interviewee argued that the complexity of wage income, tax credits, in-kind benefits and cash benefits is confusing and makes it difficult to know whether parents would be better off in work.

5.75 Finally, suggestions were made for improving the support offered by the Working Families Tax Credit (WFTC). Several respondents argued that the eligibility rules should be amended so that informal childcare arrangements also qualify for payment. It was argued that this would particularly benefit parents with extended family living nearby and those from black and minority ethnic communities who tend not to use formal childcare structures. One respondent argued that the government should extend WFTC to include families with children aged 16-18.

Childcare

5.76 Improving the amount, quality, and affordability of childcare was also felt to be a need which must be addressed at the national level. More specific suggestions were rarely made, but this theme had a high priority for respondents. Without access to affordable and trustworthy childcare parents are unable to leave benefit dependency: respondents saw childcare as the foundations of tackling child poverty.

Alleviative measures

5.77 A number of measures which would alleviate the impacts of poverty were suggested by case study respondents. One key approach suggested was that schools should be required to be 'health promoting' schools. This would entail reducing the pressure on schools to generate income, which they currently do by offering school children access to vending machines and tuck shops. It was also argued that school meals should be of improved nutritional benefit, more varied, and available free to all pupils. Removing the means test from free school meals would remove stigma which is particularly important during teenage years. Improving the nutritional benefit of school meals would improve health in the longer term and may also improve educational outcomes as children are in a better position to study through the day.

5.78 There was also a focus on improving housing and the local environment which case study respondents felt needed to be driven nationally. This might include central funding for renovation work so that all households have dry, warm homes that are energy efficient and affordable to run even for low income families.

5.79 Finally, the need for increased subsidy for public transport in rural areas and the need to improve children's play space were each mentioned by one respondent.

Preventative measures

5.80 A number of measures that would prevent this generation of children from becoming the next generation of poor adults were suggested by case study respondents. These all focused on education, training and employment.

5.81 More specifically there was a call for further investment in teachers and school support staff so that disaffected and excluded children could continue in school. One respondent argued for more public spending on excluded children.

5.82 It was argued that young people may currently be making rational choices to opt out of education and training, and to choose to be benefit dependent adults. Respondents pointed to the need to raise the work aspirations of young people and to make employment worthwhile for them. As one respondent stated: "don't expect them to take McJobs".

5.83 To make education and training more attractive was the third strand of preventative measures suggested. The quality of existing training schemes was criticised and respondents pointed to a mismatch between the skills developed through existing training and those required by available jobs. One respondent argued for a national strategy for vocational education, which would be available to young people below school leaving age if school was not meeting their needs. Another argued that to attract young people from impoverished areas into higher education there is a need to abolish student loans and reinstate the grants system.

Making agencies' work easier

5.84 Many suggestions were made for change at the national level which would make it easier for agencies to deliver services to SIP residents and tackle child poverty at the local level. These can be summarised as: funding; information sharing; monitoring and evaluation; and rationalising agencies.

5.85 As might be expected, funding issues received most attention from interviewees. There were calls to increase the funding available to mainstream services, in particular to local authorities, and to allow local priorities to determine how money is spent.

5.86 The system of bidding for funding, annualised funding and central direction on how money can be spent all came in for criticisms. It was argued that funding streams should be simplified, fewer in number, available for longer periods and with more realistic timescales for funding applications. The funding process as it stands was felt to impede the effective provision of services. Agencies must respond to government priorities rather than locally identified need. Such opportunism does not allow the best possible use of the money and often limits the ability to truly consult and work with existing community bodies.

5.87 More positively, it was felt that there was scope for the Scottish Executive to identify potential private sector donors and assist in matching their potential sponsorship with funding opportunities.

5.88 The role of government to disseminate information and assist SIPs' learning was highlighted by many. Interviewees felt that standards of best practice should be developed and disseminated at a central level, and that the Scottish Executive should be more proactive in identifying and disseminating examples of good practice from Scotland and elsewhere.

5.89 Distinct from this, but still on the theme of information sharing, many interviewees felt that service delivery was impeded by the requirements of data protection. It was strongly argued that the government should take steps to encourage agencies to share information with one another at the local level. Such local sharing of information on individuals can be done under the existing rules of the Data Protection Act, but agencies continue to feel uncomfortable.

5.90 Related to funding issues was the call for monitoring and evaluation requirements to be streamlined simplified and made less onerous. A single monitoring framework and timescale, agreed by all funding agencies, would reduce the overall burden of monitoring and evaluation that many interviewees felt to be excessive, even unsustainable. There was also a call to recognise the importance of soft indicators as well as quantitative data when judging the success of initiatives.

5.91 Finally, there were calls for reorganising and rationalising the way that agencies operate in Scotland. Several interviewees argued that the SIP approach should be extended across Scotland, as resourced partnership working which is capable of levering in additional funding is needed in all areas, not just where bids were successful.

5.92 In a climate that requires partnership working, interviewees argued that this can be impeded by the way that agencies are set up. In particular, joint work is felt to require coterminous local authority and health board boundaries, which is not always the case at present. The relationship which SIPs and partner agencies have with central government was also raised as an area where improvements could be made. These included calls for government consistency in the sense of both long term planning and joined up government. One suggested mechanism for doing this was to encourage civil servants / ministers to develop expertise and stay in that field, rather than moving into other fields for career advancement. Respondents argued that local government and local decision-making should be strengthened, with less direction from the centre.

Summary

5.93 This chapter has shown that child poverty is not being tackled in a strategic manner in SIPs. Rather, initiatives introduced for a range of reasons are fortuitously also impacting on child poverty. However, SIP managers and other respondents were consistent in the importance which they have given to the problem of child poverty.

5.94 Participants did not generally differentiate between the cause of poverty and its impacts on a child's life and life chances, nor did they differentiate between individual poverty and the poverty of the area. Low family income was one of 4 recurrent themes of child poverty. Respondents also pointed to a lack of opportunity, low aspiration and social problems as components of the problem of child poverty.

5.95 A typology which distinguishes between preventative and alleviative services was introduced, although no clear preference emerged for one approach over the other. The typology also distinguished between intended beneficiaries of services - children, parents, or all residents - and again no preferred approach was discerned. The impression is one of ad hoc services being developed in response to local issues rather than a strategic approach to child poverty within SIPs.

5.96 The research approach did not allow an evaluation of the effectiveness of such services or their popularity with children or parents. Case study participants did claim that their initiatives were having an impact on the quality of local childrens' lives and life chances. However, evidence was not available to judge such claims. In any case the final judgement cannot be passed on many of the projects until today's children have grown up.

« Previous | Contents | Next »