« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
6 SDF'S FUTURE ROLE IN RELATION TO 'THE ROAD TO RECOVERY'
6.1 This section outlines the views of stakeholders external to SDF on the organisation's contribution to developing the drugs strategy and its role going forward in the context of 'The Road to Recovery' strategy.
6.2 Interviewee views are included if there were six or more responses on an issue. Figures in brackets refer to the number of stakeholders. Where a direct quote from a stakeholder is included, the sector (in terms of the categories used in the List of Stakeholders, Annex 3) to which the person who commented belongs is noted.
Development of 'The Road to Recovery' Strategy
6.3 A total of 15 stakeholders commented specifically on SDF's contribution to the development of the current drugs strategy. It should be noted that the majority of those who commented did so in terms of their approval or otherwise of the content and manner of SDF's input, rather than seeking to judge how much influence it had exerted on the direction of policy.
6.4 The majority (9) of individual responses were generally positive:
"They did share comments and observations from members - I think they made a decent contribution." (Police stakeholder)
"They have long been arguing the need for an integrated approach: working on the self-defined problems of the user in a holistic way, not just administering treatment. It was very helpful to get that view into the system and it's now reflected in the new strategy." ( NHS stakeholder)
"I have never seen SDF as being anything other than constructive." (Police stakeholder)
"They engaged positively, raised concerns and made interesting points about the state of the workforce." ( NHS stakeholder)
6.5 The remainder of the comments were mixed.
6.6 Stakeholders' views in relation to SDF's effectiveness in contributing constructively to policy and in dealing with Ministers are covered in Contribution to Policy, paragraphs 5.74 - 5.77 above.
Implementing 'The Road to Recovery'
6.7 Once analysed, the average score for responses by 35 stakeholders to the question on the implications of 'The Road to Recovery' strategy for SDF's role was mixed. Within this there was a spectrum of views from positive to negative in relation to SDF's potential to contribute to implementation. The biggest single group of comments were mixed.
Focus
6.8 General comments about SDF's role going forward included the suggestion (11) that it needs to reconsider and clarify its role, with a view to defining its USP and/or making best use of its resources:
"The organisation may need to refocus on selected areas of drug use, because the issues have perhaps gone beyond their capacity in the organisation's current form." ( SG stakeholder)
" SDF will need clarity re what its unique role is within the marketplace." ( CJ stakeholder)
6.9 A tighter focus could also assist with the organisation's need to be able to demonstrate outcomes:
"They're not clear on their purpose…. Should focus on 3-4 areas and they should also be measured on outcomes." ( ADAT stakeholder)
Coverage
6.10 At the same time, some concerns were expressed about how comprehensively SDF covers the whole of the drugs sector, or its geographical reach.
6.11 One theme was that the organisation's perspective was too narrow, for example it did not encompass children and families:
"They look at the user as a drug user rather than as a person in society. They need to have contact with childcare services, health etc - but they are siloed." ( SG stakeholder)
"They have a very narrow focus. SDF do not speak for family/children's services - e.g. the social worker whose caseload is packed with drug related issues. Priorities should be all those who are significantly affected - communities and families are vital to recovery." ( VCS drugs stakeholder)
6.12 The challenges facing an umbrella organisation in linking in at local level across the whole of Scotland were also mentioned in the context of the Concordat:
"The focus is now much more on the LA level. Therefore the task for an umbrella organisation becomes quite complex in trying to understand 32 different outcome agreements, especially in the context of lighter touch reporting. It's more difficult to know where things are going wrong on the ground - and harder to get that intelligence." ( VCS [other] stakeholder)
ADPs
6.13 The issue of national coverage was raised as an implication of the new delivery framework, with stakeholders - particularly, but not exclusively, ADAT stakeholders - noting that the focus of delivery and accountability will be on the Community Planning Partnerships and their Alcohol and Drugs Partnerships. This raised questions as to SDF's role in the new structures and how it can stretch resources to be involved across the whole of Scotland.
"They need to look at the structure and the practice of [working at local level]…. If SDF is to engage with local communities, they need to engage with the substance forum in every area; there are representatives of community groups, carers and providers on these. A crucial group to engage with at local level." ( ADAT stakeholder)
6.14 Another theme was the changed ways of working that will be required by all partners, including the adoption of more open and transparent ways of working in partnership:
" SDF have contributed over the years. But they need assistance to focus in the future and on how they operate. They need to be clearer in terms of accountability, outcomes and transparency." ( ADAT stakeholder)
6.15 There is an expectation that the new delivery framework will seek to bridge historic divides between alcohol and drugs work:
"More and more joint work with alcohol will be needed, so more joint work between AFS and SDF will be needed." ( ADAT stakeholder)
6.16 It may be that exploring closer partnership working and forms of collaborative working could offer one option for SDF in seeking to cover the new structures effectively.
Co-ordination
6.17 Some stakeholders suggested that a more strategic co-ordinating role could usefully be carried out by SDF:
"They should tackle the current competitiveness in the sector. There is a difference between collaboration and competition. We need to work smarter and better together. SDF could have a key role in working out who could deliver and evaluating outcomes." ( VCS Drugs stakeholder)
"A map of who does what would be helpful. We're doing a similar scoping exercise within criminal justice - who does what, and then look for effective ways of working: therefore who's best placed to offer what, and get agreement on that. People will have to be prepared to give up doing some things for the sake of greater effectiveness across the board." ( CJ stakeholder)
6.18 There was also some support for the role of arbiter or 'honest broker' in relation to disseminating good practice:
"They should see if they could become an honest broker of sharing good practice. Maybe they do that through training but I don't know." ( VCS drugs stakeholder)
Recovery
6.19 In relation to recovery, a mental health stakeholder endorsed "with nuances and caveats" the relevance of the principles of recovery as developed by people with mental health problems to problem drug users. One of these caveats was that it has to evolve from the bottom up and cannot be imposed from above.
6.20 A spectrum of views was expressed about 'the recovery agenda', from suspicion that it represents a shift away from harm reduction, to the view that "what is striking and forgotten is that work in Scotland is progressive and advanced." The predominant tone was that " SDF has to emphasise the road part of 'The Road to Recovery'". (Academic stakeholder)
6.21 It was suggested by 8 stakeholders that SDF has an important role in bringing forward examples which illustrate the great diversity in what recovery might mean for different individuals in different contexts; and helping to temper unrealistic expectations which could be held by people who are distant from the realities of problem drug use.
"We need to be realistic and SDF can perhaps provide some balance about what success might look like. E.g. guard against expecting that everyone will be moving on to employment, especially now in the situation we find ourselves in. Acknowledge that small steps could be significant for people." (Police stakeholder)
6.22 In the context of the recovery strategy, 9 stakeholders saw an important part for SDF to play in challenging perceived public attitudes that demonise drug users. This was an element of promoting change in the dominant culture. Undertaking more proactive media work was seen as one way in which SDF could contribute.
"One of the things that I think is missing is to inform a wider public debate and engaging the media with that." ( VCS drugs stakeholder)
"They could do more to be the public voice, especially in a proactive way. The Director is often quoted in response to negative headlines; I would like to see SDF promoting the good things that are happening, proactively." ( NHS stakeholder)
6.23 A great many respondents cited SDF's role in representing the customer, or user, in the development and implementation of 'The Road to Recovery' as very relevant to the strategy: users' feedback on successful interventions, essentially what has helped or hindered them, is critical to a developing a way forward that achieves better outcomes. The view from the mental health field is that recovery is not just about services, but rather represents a different paradigm in which service users are at the centre of driving cultural change. The implications of the new strategy for the approach to user involvement are explored in Section 7.
Services
6.24 There was significant support for SDF to be involved in driving up the quality of services 9.
"My worry is that some services will respond to the different strategy by saying that they are already doing it. SDF should challenge that view. It is NOT the case that services are currently operating in accordance with 'The Road to Recovery'. The greatest threat to the strategy is if services think they are already doing it.
The interpretation that 'The Road to Recovery' is all things to all people is the greatest risk to it. If that view pervades there will be an important role for SDF and others to ask, in more pointed way, what indeed is different now." (Academic stakeholder)
6.25 The NQS were seen as a tool in achieving this:
"The overarching priority must be NQS: I am not fussed what paths people choose in accessing support but it is the good quality of the service that is important. SDF need to have a national strategy on quality and research who has implemented the standards. Research has shown that quality is key to recovery.
'Road to Recovery' offers an opportunity to review and benchmark the quality of services people receive. SDF should be involved in getting services to think about how they achieve that." ( CJ stakeholder)
Independent voice and role as sector intermediary body
6.26 Several stakeholders (7) spoke of the importance of the continuation of an independent sector voice being funded by Government and a maturity in that relationship: on the one hand, an acceptance of the legitimacy of its occasional role as a critic and on the other, SDF's need to be "balanced, measured and make an informed intervention":
"I think it is very important that SDF or any equivalent body is able to act independently. We have some of that. On a subject like drugs, however, if SDF is performing well, there will be critics and that is part of the nature of the beast." ( UK stakeholder)
6.27 Many stakeholders, including those from the voluntary, statutory and academic sectors, value SDF's contribution to policy development. SDF's role as a critical voice for the voluntary sector and service users in policy processes is cited often in interview. One described this role as being able to "speak truth to power". ( UK stakeholder)
6.28 Nine stakeholders specifically talked about the role of a sector intermediary body. The challenge of being able to link in at local level was raised again in this context, with the suggestion that consideration of new ways of working in collaboration with other voluntary sector bodies would need to be considered.
6.29 It was noted that there can be tensions for an intermediary body between seeking to be fully representative of the range of members' views and the need to put forward a strong message. A Scottish Government stakeholder commented that the drugs sector could be "a minefield" with various tensions and people taking different positions and that " SDF do have a difficult task to walk through that minefield and be credible both to the grassroots and officials in the Scottish Government. I think sometimes our expectations of organisations are too high."
Conclusions and recommendations
6.30 Stakeholders confirm the value of having an intermediary body for the drugs sector and place particular importance on its ability to be a voice which is independent of government.
6.31 It is one of the organisation's strengths that SDF is recognised as having championed a focus on the need for drug use to be considered in its broader social context.
6.32 More proactive media work has been recommended following the findings of the value for money analysis. There is support for more proactive media work especially to counter prominent voices putting forward a different message. This could add a further dimension to SDF's role in promoting attitude change and tackling stigma.
6.33 There are particular challenges for national umbrella organisations in responding to the greater emphasis on the local level in planning, commissioning and performance management. The co-ordination and information functions become increasingly important for their memberships and sectors. New ways of working and greater use of up to date communication tools may be required in order to carry these out effectively and efficiently. SDF has already on occasion employed Survey Monkey for consulting its members, and it may want to consider whether use of its website and online communication can be expanded. This has already been touched upon in Recommendation 6.
6.34 There are concerns about the quality of services in the sector and how service improvement can be driven. There is a suggestion that SDF could play a role through a more strategic co-ordination function to assist this. The place of user involvement in service improvement is discussed in the next section.
Recommendations
R8 SDF should maintain its focus on the need for drug use to be considered in its broader social context and ensure that it is reflected going forward. SDF also has an important function in providing space for discussion on continued development and implementation of 'The Road to Recovery' strategy and in setting out examples that illustrate the diversity of what recovery can mean in the lives of individuals.
R9 Feedback from stakeholders suggests this is an appropriate time for SDF to review its role and specific locus in relation to the new drugs strategy; and indeed that such a review may be essential in the context of changes in its operating environment.
- These changes relate not only to 'The Road to Recovery' strategy but also to the new delivery framework, the Concordat and the new financial setting. SDF will need to consider how it can respond in order to operate most effectively as a national organisation which requires to be involved at local level. SDF should review its work at local level via e.g. ADATs, community groups and drugs forums and define what its core business is.
- This review should also include consideration of organisational structure and staff responsibilities; the rationale for prioritising greater involvement in some areas than others, and how this will be kept under review; opportunities for increased reach through formal or informal partnership working with voluntary sector drugs and alcohol organisations.
« Previous | Contents | Next »