Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Perry and Thomas.

The minutes of the meeting of the Crime and Disorder Panel on 14 November 2016 were AGREED as a correct record.

To discuss the process and procedures of the Troubled Families Programme with representatives of Barnados, Havant Academy, Supporting Families Employment Advisor and Motiv8 and in particular to ascertain

1.               The representatives experience of the Troubled Families Programme;

2.               Any problems or difficulties experienced by the representatives; and

3.               Any changes the representatives would like to make to the programme

The Panel invited Karen Gamblin (Supporting Families Employment Adviser, Department of Work and Pensions), Sam Cofie (Havant Service Manager, Motiv8) and Sarah Goodwin (Team Leader for Fareham, Gosport, Havant and East Hampshire, Barnardos) to discuss their experiences of working in the Troubled Families Programme and any issues they had faced. The Neighbourhood Support Team Leader and Community Safety Officer were also present to answer any members questions.

The discussion covered the background of the programme, the experience of the agencies working within the programme and any areas that could be improved moving forward.

The following areas were discussed:

• One of the key aims for the Troubled Families Programme had been to improve partnership working between the relevant agencies. It was the view of the officers present that this had been successful;

• The experience of the Troubled Families Programme had initially presented a steep learning curve as officers adapted to new working practices, but these were now considered to be ‘business as usual’;

• It was the experiences of the officers present that families had been more receptive to multiple agencies being involved in their support. In each case, a single contact was established to lead on their support and this helped ensure a person was available to co-ordinate any issues;

• The success of the Programme was evident in the reduction of families repeatedly visiting the Council in need of support;

• The addition of the DWP to the Troubled Families Programme had enabled access to important advice and guidance for families;

• The use of quantitative aspects to measure the success of the scheme such as school attendance or employment status did not reflect all the positive impacts on families. The predicted success rate under these criteria for families with intensive support was 30%. However, officers commented that almost every family that had agreed to participate had benefitted from the process.

• There had been instances where differences in IT platforms had resulted in issues in the past. This had been resolved however with improved co-ordination between the agencies.

In response to questions from the Panel, the officers identified the following areas as possible changes to be made to the programme:

1. Relaxation of timescales in relation to the contracted intensive support service for working with families – this would allow for work to continue when needed past the scheduled timescales. It was accepted however that budgetary and contractual obligations made this a challenging area. The Panel were reassured that no family was left without support at the end of the intensive support package.

2. Restraints on data sharing – While the programme had greatly improved the circulation of data between agencies in the programme, it was difficult to get any information from DWP. This could improve the programme as several potential nominations visit Job Centre Plus, but current processes do not allow for them to be referred this way; and

3. Extension of Grants – An extension for County grants to be given over a 3 year period would allow for long-term planning and resource  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.