Scottish Government

CHAPTER FIVE MAPPING OF SERVICES

Background of the Data

5.1 In its Consultation on Draft Guidance on Parenting Orders, the Scottish Executive noted that existing provision of parenting services across Scotland was patchy (2004:4). With this in mind, the Scottish Executive provided additional monies to assist local authorities ( LAs) to plan and develop the provision of their parenting services. It emphasised the importance of key agencies working together to develop a strategic overview and to plan the way ahead. Part of that planning process required LAs, in collaboration with their partner agencies, to set out an 'agreed approach' for the use of POs to ensure coordinated and consistent practice.

5.2 Agreed approaches were to be set within the context of all available local parenting support activity and include the steps to be taken to engage with a parent before a PO was considered ⁵. As a precursor to that strategic planning, and to prepare for the pilot, LAs were asked to 'map' existing parenting services in their area, both statutory and voluntary, that provided some form of parenting support, either as a universal or a targeted provision. The mapping exercise was intended to assist local strategic planning for the pilot by ensuring that all involved would have a clear idea of what services were available, what client groups they were designed for and what additional services might be required. In turn, this information would provide the basis for the LAs to develop their agreed approaches to POs. The responses to that mapping exercise are examined in this report. The template provided by the Scottish Executive for the mapping exercise can be found at Annex 9.

Quality of the Data

5.3 Initial analysis of the mapping exercise were based on returns from 26 of the 32 Scottish local authorities, an 81% response rate. The mapping exercise was to be completed by 31 March 2005 and it was agreed with the Scottish Executive that returns submitted by the end of July 2005 would be included in the analyses. Of the returns received, three were self-stated by the LA as being 'incomplete'. Of those that did not respond by the due date, 4 were small authorities, one was medium sized and one was large. For the purposes of classification for this report only, 4 local authorities returning data were classified as 'large', having populations of over 300,000; 13 authorities were classified as 'medium' with populations between 100,000 and 300,000; and 9 were classified as small.

5.4 Despite earlier discussions by the Executive about the purpose of the mapping exercise in preparing LAs to make strategic plans and the Executive's letter to LAs which asked for the inclusion of all available universal and targeted services, it is clear that some LAs interpreted this widely while others interpreted it narrowly. The form of some presentations also made analysis complex. For example, one medium sized authority included eight family support teams under one return. Finally, it seems likely that some returns on individual agencies within an authority were made by those agencies and may reflect differences in perceptions of such services. For example, one medium sizes LA reported one health visiting service and described it as a preventative service offering formal education, parent training, advice and information, home visits, peer support and therapy or counselling. In another health visiting service in the same authority, however, the service was described as therapeutic and preventative intervention for individuals and groups, through the provision of advice and information, home visits and therapy or counselling. These differences may be real but they may also reflect differences in perceptions of the services.

5.5 By way of further illustration of these problems, one large local authority ( LA05) reported 5 individual services, 4 of which were provided entirely by the voluntary sector. This authority appears to have omitted universal services provided by its own social work and education departments and by the health services. In contrast, a medium sized local authority ( LA21), with a fifth of the population of the large authority, reported 48 services, 19 of which were schools and eight were health centres (not all of which were include in the analyses as they did not provide any parenting services or support), whereas a small local authority ( LA02) reported 32 services, 9 of which were schools.

5.6 Given the nature of the Scottish Executive's request and its purpose, it is difficult to say why certain authorities interpreted the request narrowly. It may have been that they felt that certain universal services were self-evidently available and that the purpose of the mapping study was to identify only special and targeted services that could be brought into play in the difficult circumstances that would be likely in the context of a PO.

5.7 In the draft ⁶ of its Framework for Implementation of Parenting Orders - Best Practice Guidance the Scottish Executive reasons that local authorities "…need to consider all parenting support services when developing a strategy for a consistent and co-ordinated approach to the use of Parenting Orders" (page 4; unpublished draft version). The Framework provides a focus both on the provision of parenting services generally and the service provision for POs specifically. One implication of this might be that any service that would assist parenting could also feature in a menu of provision to be provided in support of a Parenting Order.

5.8 One problem with this broad perspective may be, of course, that almost anything could be called into the service of counselling or guiding parents. The Framework document maintains that the use of services should be guided by existing evidence from research and practice (page 5; unpublished draft version). An examination of the likely risk and protective factors outlined in the Framework (pages 61-62 draft version) would suggest that these are extensive and that, consequently, the range of possible support services is also extensive. This is confirmed by the menu of parenting services listed in the Framework which range from universal services such as 'drop in' facilities to peer support to targeted services such as Sure Start, befriending, mentoring, family group conferencing and dyadic developmental psychotherapy (pages 59-60; unpublished draft version).

5.9 The decision on which agencies to include in this analysis has been based on the suggestion that they could say 'yes', in principle, to a specific request for services that would address a parenting need or problem. It would seem unlikely, for example, that a victim support scheme or a library would be able to specifically address such a need. If a social worker decided that a parent who had lost self confidence as a parent as the result of being a victim of crime might gain a more realistic perspective by visiting a victim support scheme to hear how other victims had learned to cope, then it might be argued that the social worker was providing the parenting service and had skilfully utilised victim support.

5.10 This hypothetical example alerts us to the complexity of deciding what a parenting service is, while also identifying the fact that it requires a professional assessment to establish the nature of a parenting problem and how to tackle it.

5.11 On the basis of the classification outlined, it might be reasoned that schools should be excluded; after all, schools generally are most unlikely to be able to offer to help with a parenting need or problem. This probably explains why many of the individual entries for schools provided no answers to the questions asked in the mapping exercise. Some individual schools did, however, provide relevant answers, for example maintaining that they provided parent training and skills building by way of, for example, a 'supporting parents group'. This was the case for two of the 19 schools listed by a medium sized authority and they have been included in the analysis.

5.12 Answering some of the questions does not, however, necessarily mean that the service is relevant. A small authority's secondary schools provided guidance on choice of courses, drugs misuse and ran parents' evenings. The services offered were intended to help parents support their children, could involve home visits and were intensive. These services are, however, part and parcel of what one might expect secondary schools to offer and, it is argued here, are not specifically focused on solving parenting problems and meeting parenting needs. This is not to argue, however, against the possible efficacy of using these services in the context of a PO. Again, this highlights the complexities of deciding on the definition of a parenting service and is something that any future mapping exercise would need to clarify.

5.13 The template for the mapping exercise supplied by the Scottish Executive to local authorities also gave rise to difficulties in obtaining a clear picture of service provision. Firstly, the template did not facilitate the recording of any structure around service delivery, such as a set number of group sessions or any outcome measurements. Secondly, there was no capacity to consistently record the parameters of a service, i.e. age group covered, level of need addressed etc. From the interviews with LA and health personnel it was clear that the majority of structured services were only available for those considered to be in the greatest need and would therefore not be utilised in a more preventative fashion in lower-level cases.

5.14 As mentioned in Chapter 4, a further difficulty in accurately mapping service provision is the transitory nature of funding for many programmes, which can make it difficult to anticipate how long a service will be available and what its capacity will be. Funding is also a factor in providing consistent provision across an entire local authority or CHP, with different sub-divisions of these larger areas relying on different levels of financial support. These sub-divisions also come into play with regard to availability of specific services, with a particular programme perhaps being available in one locality but not another. Given all of the issues discussed here regarding the mapping template, it would seem reasonable to state that it is unlikely the exercise will have presented an accurate picture of parenting services and support across Scotland.

Responses to the Mapping Exercise

5.15 In total, 385 services/agencies were reported in the original mapping exercise. Of these, it was decided that 52 services either could not be considered as having a parenting element ( e.g., Victim Support, who will have parents as 'clients' but are unlikely to have a parenting specific elements to their service), or were explicitly stated as having no parenting element, and were therefore excluded from the analysis. In addition, the information supplied for a further 22 agencies required important clarification and was also be excluded from the analysis. At the start of this study a total of 311 services were recorded.

5.16 The mapping responses were revisited in three ways during the course of the study. The first of these was to return to those LAs that had not submitted a response within the timeframe set by the SE to establish whether or not they would indeed be completing the exercise. One further LA submitted their mapping exercise in the format laid out by the SE, giving a new total of 27 responses (84% of all 32 LAs). Additionally, two further LAs commissioned audits of parenting and family service provision that the research team have accessed however, as these cannot be translated into the template format, the services detailed within those report cannot be included in the quantitative analysis (the audit findings are discussed in Chapter 3 of this report). With regard to the 3 remaining LAs, despite repeated attempts at contact (by both telephone and e-mail), factors such as staff leave, illness and work pressures at each of those LAs have resulted in no response regarding the mapping exercise being achieved. In total, therefore, information on the services available in 29 local authorities (91% of all 32 LAs) has been obtained.

5.17 The second method of revisiting the mapping exercise was to return to each of the 29 LAs that had submitted material to ask if they wished to add any information and/or services to their original submission; the research team pursued this information into August 2007. In one case, by agreement with the Scottish Executive a local authority was not approached, as they were already involved with an extensive evaluation around the GIRFEC agenda. Although in close contact with the team conducting this evaluation, at time of writing (November 2007) no information on services had been made available.

5.18 Of the remaining 28 local authorities, 16 reported that they would not be updating the mapping exercise within the timeframe of the evaluation. Twelve of these 16 LAs reported either being in the process of redoing their mapping and having difficulty doing so, or having commissioned their own audit of services. Only 2 of these independent audits were available to the research team as the others were not completed within the timeframe of the study. Again, the information in these audits could not be included in the quantitative analysis presented in this chapter, as details of services were not supplied in the template format (see chapter 3 of this report for a discussion on these). At the time of finalising this report (November 2007), of the 12 local authorities that reported they would be updating their mapping responses only one of these updates had been submitted, with the remainder still in the process of being completed.

5.19 Finally here, at each of the interviews conducted with health and education personnel in between June and August 2007 questions were asked regarding what services were available in their area. Services mentioned during the education-based interviews were, in the majority, already recorded in the mapping responses submitted by their respective local authorities; the same could be said for the health-based interviews, though to a lesser extent. The few 'new' services that came to light during these interviews tended to be those operated on a voluntary basis in a particular area ( e.g. a mother in one area ran a group referred to as 'Buggy Walk', encouraging stay-at-home mothers to get together with others on regular walks), and as such interviewees had little concrete information on these. As to the other services mentioned, these all fell under the umbrella of provision provided by health visitors, and will be discussed in the reporting of the interviews conducted with health personnel.

Findings

5.20 As discussed above, in the original mapping responses information on 385 services was submitted. Of these, 52 were excluded as unsuitable, 22 required further clarification and 311 were included in the analysis. Of those requiring clarification, information was ultimately obtained in 6 cases, providing a total of 317 services from the original mapping exercise to be included in the final analysis.

5.21 In the second phase of the mapping exercise, information on 78 additional services was obtained. Of these, 10 were excluded because they did not have a direct parenting element (4 cases) or had already been submitted as part of the first phase of the mapping exercise (6 cases). One local authority reported having introduced new services to replace three of its original services. Adding the 68 new services therefore results in a final sample of 382 services from 27 local authorities to be considered here. This, of course, does not include the 2 LAs whose audits of parenting services were discussed in Chapter 3.

5.22 Although by no means a complete picture of parenting service provision across Scotland, given the limitations of the mapping template, the information collected by the mapping exercise gives an idea of the efforts being made to address parenting issues and provide support. Those categories most consistently completed ( i.e. information was recorded in the majority of cases) in the mapping template will now be utilised as illustrators of the services provided. As each service could provide a range of support, it should be noted that numbers in the following tables will not add up to the 382 included in the whole sample, nor will percentages total 100.

Level of Service Provided

5.23 Also referred to as the intensity of the service provided, this category indicates the level of interaction that clients can expect from service staff.

Table 5.1 Level of service provided

5.24 It was reported that two-thirds of services (68%) could offer an intensive service, with staff being able to work with clients either individually or in very small groups. Group work was offered by 49% of services while crisis support was offered by 54%. There were also 26 services (7%) that offered all levels of service to clients, and only a small percentage (5%) operating on a resource-only basis.

Method of service delivery

5.25 Methods of service delivery refers to the way in which an intervention or support is supplied to the client.

Table 5.2 Method of service delivery

5.26 The most commonly deployed methods of service delivery are the provision of parent skills/training (68%) and advice/information (68%). Home visits by professionals accounted for over half (58%) of approaches to clients; in reality, the majority of mother of newborn children will have contact with health visitors in this respect. The utilisation of peer support in almost half (45%) of services gives some indication of the input required from non-professionals in the delivery of parenting support.

5.27 Of the 17% recorded as having 'other' methods of service delivery, the most commonly recorded response to this (11 cases) was 'multi-agency work, although there was no capacity on the mapping template to describe what this refers to. The provision of education (10 cases), childcare (6 cases) and mediation services (5) was also recorded.

Approach to service delivery

5.28 Although referred to as 'type of service' in the mapping template, perhaps a more accurate description is the approach taken to service delivery. It is impossible to tell, given the way in which the template was laid out, what the relationship is between the mode of service delivery and the level of service provided, particularly as there appear to be some contradictions in the findings for each section. For example, under the section 'level of service provided' group work was recorded for 50% of services. However, this figure falls to only 36% under the current heading.

Table 5.3 Approach to service delivery

5.29 In the highest proportion of cases (41%) it was recorded that an individual approach to service provision was taken, which equal proportions (36%) took either a preventative or group approach. The 'other' approaches to service delivery included education (28 cases) and crèche/childcare (8 cases).

Target Group

5.30 Client 'target group' was recorded for all but 15 of the services detailed in the mapping exercise, while 80 services had just one target group. The coverage for client groups across all of the LAs submitting a mapping response can be found at Annex 10. It is difficult to judge the full value of these categories, however, as it is not possible to extract from the template if services could actually adapt to the individual needs of each client group or simply delivered the same service to all. For example, 82 services are recorded as having fathers/male carers as one of their target groups - this is in direct contrast with information gathered during interviews with social work ⁷, education and health professionals where only three services adapted to suit the needs of fathers were mentioned.

Table 5.4 Target group for services

5.31 The highest proportion of services (44%) had 'parents and family' as one of their target groups, followed by a little over one-third (36%) providing a 'universal' service. However, as 20 services recorded their target group as 'universal' while also selecting other categories, it is unclear if the selection of this referred to provision for all, or only those within the further categories selected. Homeless families (4%) and the travelling community (1%) appear to be the least well served. Those services that recorded having 'other' target groups included 10 working specifically with children and young people, and 5 working with the families of young offenders or those at risk of offending.

Referral routes

5.32 How clients come to be involved with services was recorded in all but 24 cases, although a definitional issue again limits the value of any findings here. That is, it is unclear what 'mandatory engagement' refers to in terms of services provided to adults as, prior to the implementation of the Parenting Order legislation, there was no capacity to compel parents to engage with any service.

Table 5.5 Referral routes

5.33 Almost three-quarters of services could be accessed via an agency-based referral with voluntary engagement (73%) or by self-referral (71%). Although it was recorded that 14% of services were accessed via a mandatory referral, as discussed above it is unclear what this refers to.

Service provider

5.34 Services recorded in the template were primarily provided by local authorities and the health sector, with social work accounting for 35% of provision, education 29% and health a further 22%. The 30% of services provided by the voluntary sector gives some indication of the important role such agencies have in supporting children and families.

Table 5.6 Service provider

5.35 In order to give some depth to the findings from the mapping exercise, some key findings from the interviews with practitioners, along with support for these from the literature review, will now be discussed.

Type of Provision

5.36 Throughout the interviews the importance of being able to provide an intensive, individualised service to families was stressed. In addition, for families with young children it was emphasised that preventative work, preferably conducted in the home, was the most productive approach to addressing parenting issues. Therefore, factors relating to these have been drawn from the mapping template, namely:

• Intensive service provision (from 'level of service provision')
• Home visits by professionals (from 'method of service delivery')
• Individual work (from 'approach to service delivery')
• Preventative work (from 'approach to service delivery')

Table 5.7 Target group by service factors

5.37 A total of 47 services appeared to offer intensive provision in combination with home visits while taking both preventative and individualised approaches. The highest proportion of these (55%) fell within the 'universal' target group, while a further 32% were available in services targeted at parents and family. It is this target group that appears to be best served in terms of what may be considered 'ideal' service provision.

Table 5.8 Service provider by service factors

5.38 Social work departments provide the highest proportion (43%) of services offering all factors highlighted here, with the same being true for each factor individually. The importance of services provided by the voluntary sector is evident once more.

Summary

5.39 Responses to the mapping exercise were received from 27 of the 32 local authorities in Scotland. Of the remaining 5 LAs, 2 had commissioned their own audit of services while 3 did not respond to contact during the evaluation period and so their status is unknown. The mapping submissions received varied widely, with returns recording anywhere from 1 to 52 parenting services as being available in their areas. The format of the mapping template is cited by LAs as one potential reason for this variation. Ultimately, information was gathered on 382 services across Scotland that provide some form of parenting service or support.

5.40 Two-thirds of services were reported as being able to provide intensive support, with a high ratio of staff to clients, while 47% could offer crisis support and 42% group work. Work addressing parenting skills/training, or offering support/advice with regard to parenting issues, were the most common methods of service delivery recorded in the exercise (both at 68%), followed by home visits from professionals (58%) and peer support (45%). Individual work was offered by 35% of services, while preventative and group work was each offered by 30% of services.

5.41 'Parents and family' were the most common target group for services (44%), with homeless families (4%) and travellers (1%) being the least well served. A little over one-third of services (36%) offered a 'universal' service to all. The most common service providers were social work services (35%), voluntary organisations (30%) and education (29%).

5.42 Given the problematic mapping template design and the issues discussed above that may have impacted on its completion, the findings from the mapping exercise nevertheless present an interesting picture of parenting service provision across Scotland. It seems reasonable to conclude that, in the context of all findings presented in this report, that although provision may still need some work, in terms of services there is a reasonable basis to build upon.