The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER THREE STRATEGIC APPROACHES TO PARENTING SUPPORT

Introduction

3.1 The following chapter details the development of strategic approaches to parenting support provision in the selected sample of 13 local authorities (see paragraph 2.21 for details of sampling technique), and in the 5 local authorities highlighted as potential exemplars by the Aberlour National Parenting Development Project (see paragraphs 2.3 - 2.15 for details on the selection of local authorities). Findings from the in-depth examination of the three draft parenting strategies are also discussed.

3.2 The Scottish Executive framework for the implementation of Parenting Orders stipulated that local authorities should seek to develop a "strategic and coordinated approach to parenting support in each local authority area to underpin the implementation of parenting orders" (2007:3). The framework provides clear advice that such approaches are necessary, as the support needs of parents change as children develop and different levels of need ( i.e. low to high) require different methods of support. While the framework indicates what some of these different methods and approaches are, and that they should be available along a continuum of local authority provision, it does not provide an ideal model of what a strategic continuum of support provision, appropriate to level of parental need and the age and stage of development of the child, might look like. This is left to the individual local authority to determine these finer details. For the purposes of the development of strategic and coordinated approaches, the Scottish Executive has provided local authorities with funding to the sum of £7m for the period 2004-2008. Further funding has also been accessed from sources as diverse as the Youth Crime Prevention Fund and lottery monies.

Strategic development within Community Health Partnerships

3.3 With regard to the Community Health Partnerships ( CHP) sampled for interviews, none have a fully established strategy for parenting/family support activities in place or under operation. However, health professionals now work within the Hall 4 framework described in Chapter 1 and are therefore the only body approaching family support in a consistent, systematic fashion as the same service is offered to all within a universal structure.

3.4 Of the 14 CHPs included in the study, while 4 had no family support strategy in place other than Hall 4, the majority had some form of structured approach to this work under development or already in place. For example, while three CHPs had no documented strategy they contributed to or were actively involved in a system of Multi-Agency Resource Groups to which families could be referred for support; another was involved with Joint Action Teams operating in a similar role. Also, one other CHP had over a period of time developed a 5-year outline plan for the delivery of co-ordinated, stratified parenting support services; however, the funding required for this could not be found.

3.5 Three of the CHPs were actively developing a strategic approach to the delivery of parenting and family support services, through the development of multi-agency working groups and commissioning full audits of the services in their areas, while one of these is due to appoint a parenting co-ordinator in their area. Although sight of relevant paperwork was given during the process of these interviews, because the official reporting stage had not been reached, it was not possible to obtain formal access to these documents to examine full details.

Strategic development within the local authorities

3.6 Local authorities had made varying degrees of progress in developing strategic approaches to parenting support and service provision. The full range of responses from each of the local authorities approached for this study is presented in a table in Annex 6. As this shows, strategic development was very much in its early stages amongst this sample of local authorities.

3.7 In two local authorities ( LA17 and 20) no overarching or strategic work was reported as presently being undertaken for parenting support provision. In one of these authorities ( LA17) it was claimed that parenting support was integral to children's services and therefore addressed fully within the integrated children's services plan. However, analysis of this plan revealed no strategic model employed. Little mention was made of parenting services beyond provision for the parents of under 5s and no attention given to the need to provide a continuum of parenting support in relation to need/risk and the age and developmental stage of the child. The second authority ( LA20) had put a youth justice strategy into operation and had incorporated parenting support within this in response to the parenting order legislation. However, there was no evidence or reporting of a model of support that considered the broader spectrum of parents and need/risk levels.

3.8 Six local authorities reported that consideration was being given to the development of a distinct strategy for the provision of parenting support:

• Two ( LA05 and 10) of these appear to have made some progress towards establishing a staged model based on 'what works?' evidence either in terms of stratifying services according to the levels of need/risk addressed, or by utilising a range of appropriate methods matched to key developmental stages of children
• One of these authorities ( LA05) documented family support as central to children's services, but did not yet have any strategic model of provision
• Two of the authorities ( LA10 and 11) appeared to emphasise parenting and family support as key to early intervention and early years work, but did not seem to acknowledge its place in relation to work with older children and teenagers. No models of parenting support provision, ideal or otherwise, were offered
• The other three authorities ( LA08, 22 and 23) in this group did not appear to be as far advanced in their planning or conceptualisation of parenting support thus far, but had nevertheless acknowledged the need to put parenting support on the agenda
• Notably, all six authorities had put in place multi-agency groups to take forward this agenda

3.9 Seven local authorities had reported that the development of a parenting strategy was underway. Three of these ( LA16, 26 and 27) were undertaking this development work in conjunction with the Aberlour National Parenting Development Project, with two aiming to have completed the initial strategy by the end of 2007. All three had begun the development process by commissioning the Aberlour Project to conduct an audit of the available parenting services. Another local authority ( LA04) had commissioned Aberlour to conduct their audit but was using a separately recruited development worker to take forward the strategic work. Only one other local authority ( LA12) reported that it had undertaken an audit of service. It is clear that these seven local authorities in this group are at various different stages of development, with some making encouraging progress towards the production of a strategic approach, and others very much in the early planning stages in terms of getting the appropriate structures in place to facilitate the task.

3.10 Three local authorities ( LA13, 21 and 29) had produced a draft strategy document that detailed the current state of parenting provision in the local authority area and set objectives for the future provision and practice. All three had done so in conjunction with the Aberlour National Parenting Development Project, and were happy to be utilised as exemplars of the work that is currently underway and to be analysed for the purposes of this evaluation.

3.11 However, it is crucial to note that none of the local authorities has yet reached the final stages of their strategy development and it must be borne in mind here that each of the cited strategies is still very much a 'work in progress', with each of the authorities hoping to complete the current documents by the end of 2007. Moreover, it is important to acknowledge that the strategy documents are not static entities, as what they provide is a set of objectives for the local authorities to work towards in terms of parenting support provision. Therefore, the strategies will be subject to considerable change over time and should not be seen as an end product. Nevertheless, the evidence on 'what works?' provides a conceptual framework for assessing progress to ensure that authorities adopt an approach to parenting support that is 'fit for purpose'.

Analysis of the Strategic Approaches

3.12 The following section discusses the findings from analysis of the three strategy documents provided by the local authorities detailed above in paragraph 3.10. The findings are presented in line with the structure of the analytical framework (see Chapter 2 for a full discussion of the method of analysis), with each question from the framework providing a section heading as follows:

• Is the strategy the outcome of multi-agency work?
• Does the strategy consider baseline measures of need within the local authority area?
• Does the strategy use a tiered or staged model of intervention re risk/need of parent and family? What types of support are available at each tier/stage? Are the methods of service delivery documented?
• Does the strategy consider a continuum of support appropriate to the age and developmental needs of children (re: method, sequencing, duration, intensity of provision)? Does this tie in with a tiered or staged model of intervention?
• Does the strategy document entry and exit criteria for services and provide for follow up or maintenance work with families?
• Are gaps in service provision based on evidence of need and capacity data acknowledged?
• Does the strategy identify criteria for the use of compulsory measures, such as supervision or Parenting Orders?

Is the strategy the outcome of multi-agency work?

3.13 Each of the three strategies is the outcome of multi-agency work, whereby the input of several agencies involved in parenting support was required. Each of the local authorities had adopted a similar approach to the development process, bringing together a strategic group to bear responsibility for the production of the strategy. A wide range of agencies and organisations were cited as represented on the strategic groups, including social work, education, health, Scottish Children's Reporter Administration, the police, and the voluntary sector. These agencies acted in an advisory capacity within the groups, and facilitated the sharing of existing resources for parenting support.

Does the strategy consider baseline measures of need within the local authority area?

3.14 The use of baseline measures of need to inform the strategy development was, apparently, weak in each of the three local authorities. Each of the strategy documents provided a context or justification for the increased focus on parenting work but none linked this to identifiable levels of need within their area.

3.15 LA13 is the strongest in this respect, including a section providing a statistical 'snapshot' of the region that contains some indicators of levels of need amongst parents and their families, for example the number of referrals to the reporter in the previous year, the numbers of children on the Child Protection Register, and the numbers of children 'looked after' or accommodated. While such indicators are important, they are partial and do not provide any information as to levels of need at the lower end of risk spectrum.

3.16 LA21 does not provide any discussion on levels of need, while LA29 only acknowledges need in stating that each locality within the local authority region must seek to provide a parenting action plan that is reflective of local assessed need. This of course limits the analysis of need to families already assessed by key agencies and is not representative of need across the region. Moreover, it is very dependent on the mechanisms for assessment being fit for purpose, an area highlighted for attention in each of the three approaches.

3.17 It would appear that, so far, strategic development has been carried out somewhat 'blind'. The local authorities in question here have not utilised baseline measures to inform their approaches and this instantly limits the potential success of these strategies.

Does the strategy use a tiered or staged model of intervention re risk/need of parent and family? What types of support are available at each tier/stage? Are the methods of service delivery documented?

Models of Intervention

3.18 Two of the local authorities had begun classifying parenting services into a tiered model according to the level of need the services addressed. Both had developed a model of service provision and conducted a full audit of their parenting and parenting related services, classifying each service according to its corresponding tier in the model. LA13 adopted the following model:

Table 3.1 LA13 Tiers

3.19 There is clear distinction in this model of the level of need that each tier of service is responding to. LA13 acknowledges however that the boundaries between tiers two and three can be blurred and that the key difference is not always what the services provide, with both tiers representing intensive support, but rather the application of statutory measures on the child to gain compliance from parents. While parents requiring a tier two response may have been referred into the Children's Hearings System, it is documented as unlikely that they will be subject to statutory measures. It is also suggested that parents suitable for tier three support will require a greater intensity of support, with a greater number of agencies having to be drawn upon to resolve the difficulties within the family.

3.20 The model in LA21 is similar, bar the addition of a tier addressing geographical patterns of need and risk:

Table 3.2 LA21 Tiers

3.21 As in the one adopted by LA13, the model of services in LA21 states that it is only at the top tier 'Children at High Risk' that it is anticipated services will have to respond to parents subject to statutory child protection measures.

Types of support and methods of delivery

3.22 Examining the outcomes of the audits of services in LA13 and LA21 allowed an assessment of provision in each tier/stage of the models of intervention. The information on actual provision was available in different formats in each of the local authorities. LA13 had utilised the data gathered in the audit to compile a directory of services for the local authority area. The data from LA21 was available as it had been gathered for the audit, presented in simple tabular form (see Annex 7 for a complete list of services in LA13 and LA21). Service provision was assessed by the research team on the basis of the evidence cited in the literature review on effective parenting and family support. Crucially, evidence of home-based provision across the tiers was sought, and the appropriateness of method of service delivery was considered. As noted in the literature review (MacQueen et al, forthcoming) successful methods with parents and families presenting low-level risk/need include the provision of simple advice and information, progressing to more structured work, including cognitive behavioural programmes, for higher risk/need parents and families.

Summary

3.23 Although none of the Community Health Partnerships covered for interview had a set strategy with regard to the provision of parenting/family support services actually in place, health professionals were working within the 'Hall 4' framework. As such, they were the only body approaching family support in a consistent, systematic fashion with the same service being offered to all.

3.24 The sample of 19 local authorities examined with regard to the development of strategic planning for the provision of parenting support and services were at different stages in this process. Both LA17 and LA20 had apparently made little or no progress since the inception of the legislation and 13 others were in the process of developing a strategic approach, or were considering the necessity of doing so. Three local authorities ( LA13, 21 and 29) had made considerable progress in drafting a parenting support strategy and a framework was developed to analyse relevant documents from these authorities.

3.25 All three strategies examined in detail were the product of multi-agency work, while two of these ( LA13 and 21) had begun to stratify services according to levels of need. However, no LA had fully developed a baseline of need for their area, or provided a model of service provision according to the age and developmental needs of children. In the strategies from LA13 and LA21 there was a tendency towards the provision of centre or institution-based work rather than in-home provision. While centre-based work is best suited to cognitive development and future educational needs for disadvantaged children, the 'what works' literature suggests that home-based services and support are the most effecting in decreasing behaviour difficulties in children at risk. Both strategies were also lacking in the provision of structured, intensive family work for parents with high levels of need/risk.

3.26 At the lower stages of the model of provision, it appeared that a number of appropriate methods of service delivery were being employed, with a number of services documented as providing simple advice and support to parents on a voluntary, informal basis. LA13 detailed an 'ideal' model of provision in the strategy to work towards, incorporating many of the methods recommended in the 'what works' literature, although this model was also notable lacking in advice on the provision of home-based support and services.

3.27 Key target groups for services were very loosely defined in each of the three strategies with none discussing entry or exit criteria, or the use of follow-up and maintenance work with families. Voluntary engagement of parents was the key practice philosophy in each of the local authorities, with little comment on compulsory measures and their role, or 'fit' within the strategies.

« Previous | Contents | Next »