Making plans: Using Group Conferencing to reduce the impact of caring on young people

Naomi Clewett Martha Slowley Jane Glover

1 Introduction

Young carers are ‘children and young use with young carers is limited (but persons under 18 who provide, or intend growing). Five Barnardo’s projects to provide, care, assistance or support to now off er FGC to young carers, aiming another family member. They carry out, to establish support networks that often on a regular basis, signifi cant or prevent young people from taking on substantial caring tasks.’a/1 Census data inappropriate or excessive caring roles. identifi es 175,000 young carers in the This briefi ng demonstrates how FGCs UK,2 although a 2010 survey by the BBC can be used with young carers, taking indicates the fi gure could be four times Barnardo’s Bolton Service for Young as high as this.3 Due to the hidden nature Carers (BSYC) as a case study. We of caring, even this fi gure is likely to be draw on the experience of and an underestimate. professionals, the expertise of FGC UK policy recognises that young people practitioners across the UK and research should not be expected to undertake literature, to describe how FGCs can excessive caring. In and be used to improve outcomes for young , for example, the Carers’ Strategy carers. We outline the benefi ts, challenges (2008) says that by 2018 ‘Children and and some important considerations for young people will be protected from developing similar services. inappropriate caring and have the support they need to learn, develop and thrive…”4 Headline fi ndings

Barnardo’s has 17 services for young ■ FGC was found to help young carers carers working with around 3,500 and their families to reduce the level young people and their family members and impact of caring by involving every year. These services provide a wider support networks. range of support including social work ■ Children and young people felt and counselling, family advocacy and empowered using FGC, and felt that activities where young people can adults listened to them. establish a friendship group, develop ■ In addition to addressing the social skills and have time away from central issue of caring, FGCs helped caring responsibilities at home. families to take control of their own One Barnardo’s service in the North West support, increase their confi dence is trailblazing the use of Family Group in dealing with universal, front-line Conferences (FGCs) to improve outcomes services, and reduce dependency on for young carers in a cost-eff ective way. specialist services. FGC is a short-term method of service ■ FGC represents a structure for local delivery that empowers families to come authorities to strengthen partnership together and fi nd sustainable solutions, working around the family. which reduce the need for specialist ■ School involvement is particularly services. It is increasingly popular among important as is often a statutory and third sector providers key area of concern for families, and across the UK in many fi elds such as schools can off er consistent support to safeguarding and youth justice, but its young people.

a The term ‘young carer’ is used throughout this briefi ng for ease of reference, but we recognise that it can be problematic for both families and services. Barnardo’s and other providers of services tend to focus on minimising excessive or inappropriate caring by a young person, and would argue that the term ‘young carer’ can sometimes reinforce the caring role.

2 ■ It is important to work with families families to cope with future changes. at the right level of need. If need is This can be achieved through a focus too low it is diffi cult to engage both on building strong wider family professionals and family members, support networks. while if the risk is too great the family ■ There is evidence of improvements would need to be referred to children’s resulting from families’ plans that are services for safeguarding. sustainable six months after the FGC. ■ FGC services have a short-term However, more research is required involvement with families and must to determine the cost-eff ectiveness of ensure that contingencies and FGC as a method of service delivery sustainability are built in to help with young carers.

Lucy’s story Lucy is 15 and lives with her mum, quite good listening as well”’. Lucy Mary, who suff ers from post-traumatic and her mum’s plan included: an stress disorder (PTSD), severe assessment from adult services to depression and frequent blackouts. identify additional support for Mary, Mary does not like to leave the house a befriender for Mary, some benefi ts and is anxious of people that she help from Welfare Rights, putting doesn’t know. Lucy was the sole carer Lucy in touch with a local arts group, for her mum and was in charge of and a Connexions personal advisor to paying bills, doing the shopping, help Lucy apply for college and a part- cleaning, helping with personal care time job. for her mum and providing emotional The family situation has improved support. Although Lucy wanted to signifi cantly since the FGC. Lucy help her mum, she was sometimes attends an arts club and the missing college because of her caring, Barnardo’s Young Carers Youth and often felt lonely and isolated Council. Her brother and his girlfriend – socialising with friends only once now live close by and come to stay every couple of months. Mary felt to give Lucy a break, and she has guilty about the burden on Lucy, and started a childcare course at college. sometimes shouted when she was She says that her confi dence and ‘stressed out’, which was causing self-esteem have improved, and tension in the household. she feels less isolated. Mary now Lucy and Mary were referred to receives fortnightly visits from a local Barnardo’s by Connexions. Their befriender who provides company conference took place in the family and emotional support. Following an home because leaving the house made assessment from Adult Mental Health Mary very anxious. The family invited Services Mary has been off ered help Lucy’s brother and his girlfriend, with her benefi ts, and access to an alongside representatives from local allotment to give her a focus outside support services. Lucy says she liked the house. Mary is starting to leave the FGC because it was friendly – the the house on a regular basis –she says laughing and joking made her feel ‘I can manage a lot better now ‘cos I comfortable and she felt she was in know places I can go to or I can email control ‘if there was something we and they’ll help me out. Now that didn’t like I’d just say “I don’t want I know about all these places I can to talk about that… and there was handle things a lot better.’

3 What are Family Group FGCs in UK policy Conferences and The political conditions that prompted why is there an the introduction of FGCs in New increased interest? Zealand appear to be at least partially refl ected in the current UK climate: a Family Group Conferences (FGCs) cultural shift to individual, family and originated in New Zealand in the early community responsibility for welfare 1980s in response to the needs of the and social policy, and spending cuts that indigenous people (Maoris). There were question the continuing viability of the concerns about the high percentage welfare system.8 of Maori children in prisons, youth facilities or accommodated by the The new coalition Government is still local authority and placed with white in the process of fi ne-tuning many of families without regard to their cultural its policies, but there are some heritage.5 FGCs provided a form of emerging themes that would suggest family decision-making that could FGC has a key role to play in future protect children, while strengthening service provision: families and preserving culture. The ■ Families – The Government New Zealand Government made FGCs is committed to whole family a mandatory requirement for serious approaches, promising to investigate a welfare cases and for all youth new approach to helping families with justice cases in 1989.6 multiple problems.9 ■ FGCs are underpinned by the principle Social responsibility – The of empowerment. They shift traditional Conservative notion of Big Society power relations between statutory favours less reliance on public authorities and the family, so that services and a culture where people families actively participate in making ‘feel both free and powerful enough decisions and fi nding solutions. FGCs to help themselves and their own 10 also aim to build partnerships among communities’. ■ families, neighbours and local support Personalisation – The Coalition’s services to ensure that a family receives Programme for Government sets the necessary support from within their out priorities for giving recipients own community. of long-term care, and their carers, more control over the care that they In the UK, FGC practice is now receive.11 It commits to extending the being applied to a wide range of roll-out of personal budgets and to use child welfare contexts. A recent direct payments for carers.12 FGC is survey by the Family Rights Group well-placed to support families in (2009) found that 71 per cent of local designing care plans that meet their authorities in England and Wales have particular needs. some form of FGC project (in-house or commissioned) and there has been a recent growth in the size of FGC services, with the proportion of services in England carrying out 50 or more FGCs per year doubling (from 30 per cent to 60 per cent) in the last four years.7 Barnardo’s has 26 services across the UK using FGC in their work with children and young people.

4 Under the Labour Government, policy 20 projects in England, of which six are and services increasingly recognised using FGCs with the objective of lifting young carers as a vulnerable group young carers out of inappropriate caring whose families require strong networks roles and strengthening joint working at a of joined-up support. In England and local level.c Wales, policy moved towards a ‘Think Family’ approach in recognising the Notably, while guidance to many interdependency of individual family diff erent public services advises members and the need for a coordinated that they should be identifying and and tailored approach to support.b supporting young carers, local authorities in England and Wales are The Carers’ Strategy (2008) focused on currently under no legal duty to provide how local authorities can support the targeted young carers services. whole family to prevent inappropriate caring, raise awareness of young carers’ In Scotland, a 2007 review for the issues in universal services and expand Scottish Executive found that FGCs had and improve targeted services for a part to play in working with children young carers13. A 2010 update on this and families and that they should be strategy emphasized the need for early further developed.18 Getting it Right for identifi cation and support for young Every Child (2008)19 recognises that carers, particularly through schools achieving outcomes for children requires and GPs, and advocated a whole family joint working across children and adult approach to reducing inappropriate services, and a new strategy for carers caring.14 Guidance recommends that builds on this by promising that ‘support adult services should ensure that for young carers will be provided are supported in their role so that no earlier and become more integrated and care package should depend upon the responsive to their needs’.20 inappropriate caring role of a child.15 In Northern , Our Children and In Wales, the new Carers Strategies Young People – Our Pledge (2006)21 (Wales) Measure (2010)16 will allow the pledged to develop an assessment model Welsh Assembly Government to put a that built on the strengths of the family duty on the NHS and local authorities and promoted inter-agency involvement. to produce a joint carers’ strategy. This family-centred approach is refl ected Barnardo’s believes that services available in the Families Matter Strategy22 to adult carers under this measure should where key themes such as a whole be equally available to young carers. child model and integrated working between services were prioritised. In The interest in FGC has also gained the use of FGCs is momentum in recent years, and in 2008, driven by targets across the Health and the former Department for Children, Social Care Board.23 National standards Schools and Families (now Department for have recently been published by the Education) recommended FGC as a tool for Family Group Conference Forum for working with families in child protection Northern Ireland to identify the basic cases.17 In 2009, the DCSF allocated a £1 requirements that can be expected million Young Carers Innovation Fund to from an FGC.24

b For example, see Social Exclusion Task Force (2007) Reaching Out: Think Family: Analysis and Themes From the Families at Risk Review and Department of Health (2007) Putting people fi rst – A shared vision and commitment to the transformation of adult social care c Details of projects awarded from the Innovation Fund can be found here: www.carers.org/press-release/national-young-carers-coalition-awards-funding-for-20-young-carers-projects

5 What is already families to make decisions about young carers, and to enable professionals known about FGCs and to work in better partnership with young carers? the family.27 There is substantial research exploring There is only one published research the FGC model,25 but the outcomes of report looking specifi cally at the use of FGC have never been compared with FGCs with young carers.28 Although the other types of service delivery. Instead, report does not analyse impact, it most evaluations provide evidence of the showed that young carers reacted positive impact of FGCs. For example, positively to the idea of a conference, Sawyer et al (2008) showed that it wanted to be involved in the decision- signifi cantly reduced the number of making process, and felt that follow care proceedings.26 Research highlights up conferences would be necessary to the potential value of FGCs in enabling ensure that ‘things happened’.

d The FGC model (see diagram on page 7) Although there are no statutory time are a fundamental requirement of standards for FGCs, the Family Rights the process. To ensure standards are Group (FRG) are widely considered to be met, the organisation provides a three- the leading organisation in delivering day training course, attended by all good practice, developing and promoting Barnardo’s FGC services. In addition, the model.e While variations of the there is now a postgraduate certifi cate standard model exist, the FRG argue available for coordinators. The diagram that preparation and private family below outlines the FGC model.

d Detailed principles and practice guidelines on delivering FGCs can be found in Family Group Conference. Principles and practice guidelines by Barnardo’s, Family Rights Group, NCH. www.frg.org.uk/pdfs/FGC%20Principles%20and%20Practice%20Guidance.pdf e The Family Rights Group and the Offi ce of Public Management are currently running a series of regional training events on behalf of the Department for Education, for local authority senior managers on setting up, sustaining and developing family group conference services

6 The FGC model

THE REFERRAL

■ Agreement between family members and referrer that a family would benefi t from FGC.

■ Independent coordinator appointed to work with the family and arrange meetings.

PREPARATION FOR THE MEETING

■ The coordinator, in conjunction with the young person and immediate carers, identifi es the network, which may include close friends.

■ The coordinator sends out invitations and agrees a venue, date and time for conference.

■ Family members and friends invited to the conference will be contacted by the coordinator who will let them know what the meeting is about and discuss any concerns.

THE MEETING

■ Family members explain their own position and professionals provide the family with information about resources and support that they can provide (information giving)

■ Family members have time to talk among themselves and develop a plan that addresses their issues. Professionals and coordinator are not present (private family time)

■ Coordinator and professionals rejoin the family and discuss the services and support that the family are going to need. Adjustments to the plan will need to be made if professionals cannot identify resources.

■ The plan, a monitoring process and a contingency plan are agreed by all (agreeing the plan)

REVIEWING THE PLAN

■ A review family group conference or other meeting is usually arranged to review how the plan is working and to make new plans if necessary.

7 Learning from the Referrals and funding experience of Bolton BSYC receives 53 per cent funding Service for Young Carers from the local authority, and 47 per cent from Barnardo’s voluntary funds. Bolton Service for Young Carers (BSYC) Referrals are accepted from a wide range was developed by Barnardo’s children’s of agencies and there is a self- referral services with the support of the local option. In 2009-10, the service worked authority, to provide a solution for with 113 young carers from 82 families. young carers that off ered a joined-up, The main referrers were local authority whole-family approach. children’s services, self-referral and ‘It has been my view, very strongly, that health [see chart]. I don’t believe that children should be The manager actively promotes the young carers and if they are, that caring service and encourages referrals responsibilities that they undertake through attending strategic level should be as small as possible and there meetings, practitioner training and should be other services in place that inputting into the Local Safeguarding should do that job.’ Children’s Board (LSCB). BSYC also Children’s services commissioner, publicise the service to Connexions Bolton workers and attend assemblies in The service aims to reduce the level and schools to increase awareness among impact of caring through the use of FGCs. staff and pupils. This enables young carers and their A joint visiting protocol has been families to produce a sustainable plan established with adult social care. If there that ensures they can access the right is a child in the family, the ’s social support at the earliest opportunity. There worker automatically notifi es BSYC who are currently three project workers at then conduct a joint visit and assessment the service who work on FGCs for young on the child. BSYC received 10 referrals carers, as well as the service manager. from adult social care in 2009-10.

/VNCFSPGSFGFSSBMTGSPNSFGFSSJOHBHFODJFT

"EVMUTPDJBMDBSF  4DIPPM  &EVDBUJPO )FBMUI  TPDJBMXPSLFS 

7PMVOUBSZ PSHBOJTBUJPO  $POOFYJPOT  4FMGSFGFSSBM 

0UIFS 

$IJMESFOmTTPDJBMDBSF 

8 Holding the assessment and Practitioners told us that, in statutory managing the risk run safeguarding FGCs, families understand the risk of child protection While the FRG model holds that the proceedings if a workable plan is not coordinator of the FGC should be achieved. For the families of young independent, at BSYC the coordinator (a carers there are usually less serious Barnardo’s practitioner) carries out the consequences; nonetheless, the initial assessment of the family and acts motivation to engage can come from as the lead professional in the Common the desire to prevent the situation from Assessment Framework (CAF) process. escalating into a child protection concern. By involving the same BSYC practitioner in the assessment and the coordination The individual circumstances of of the FGC, the team is well-placed to each family identify safeguarding concerns and refer to social services if required. An The issues that are faced by families assessment or re-assessment from adult referred to the service are varied. In social care is often triggered by, and 2009-10, of the 113 referrals made, occurs alongside, the FGC process. 28 per cent concerned a young person’s care of a person with a physical An additional distinction is that in Local disability, 27 per cent with mental health Authority run safeguarding FGCs, where issues, 19 per cent with substance the level of risk is signifi cantly higher, the misuse issues, 14 per cent had a serious plan must be signed off by the lead social illness and 12 per cent had other issues worker. Whereas, BSYC uses FGC with that required caring. Referral criteria families below the threshold for statutory are that the young person is ‘providing services involvement and the process is care, either physical or emotional, to voluntary, so the plan does not require another family member’. In theory, the this additional sign off . issues that a family is facing should not Considerations for a young aff ect the success of an FGC because the carer’s FGC model fi ts around the individual needs of each family. However, case workers found This section provides insights into some of it more challenging to engage with: the drivers for and barriers to a successful ■ Substance-misusing parents and young carer’s FGC, through the eyes of those with mental health needs due the families and professionals involved. to chaotic lifestyles and a signifi cant number of missed appointments. Intervening at the right stage ■ Families with multiple problems Project workers observed that families where they ‘struggled to focus on the who were most successful at agreeing issue of caring and were therefore less a workable plan had reached a crisis satisfi ed with the process’. signifi cant enough to motivate change, ■ Unresolved family disputes have but not suffi cient to aff ect their ability to presented barriers to engaging focus on the issue. Similarly, it has been extended family, or to the likelihood observed that professionals and extended of extended family meeting the family members are more likely to requirements of an agreed plan. engage when the situation is considered Families told the researchers that to be at a ‘serious’ level. old arguments threatened to ‘hijack’ conferences. When these issues ‘By the time the referral is received most arise, it is particularly important that families are asking for help and therefore coordinators invest signifi cant time at you are in a good position to start.’ the preparation stage to try to resolve Project worker

9 these issues before the family meeting and ownership back to the family, others takes place. In addition, skilled felt that the families’ choices sometimes management of the meeting is crucial confl ict with the needs of professionals. in ensuring that focus is maintained For example, it may be diffi cult to on the child’s needs. persuade professionals to attend FGCs out of work hours. ‘[FGCs work well] when there are no ‘I think the young carers fi nd it very underlying issues between the family benefi cial, a lot of work goes into it and members, there are no problems that they feel it’s there for them and they’re have been going on for a long time in control of it.’ that haven’t been dealt with. It’s very Senior health practitioner diffi cult to bring them together with those issues there, to then be focused on ‘FGC works well because the whole something else.’ family is involved… and them being able Barnardo’s FGC practitioner to ask, to say to the Barnardo’s worker “I want this person involved… I want that ‘The project worker was the facilitator person involved”’. and she did really well… the Connexions personal advisor walked out… and family members were harking back to the past There are a couple of times we’ve and it was “you said this, you did that”. expected people, other professionals, And we’re trying to focus it back to this and they haven’t turned up for whatever is what the child wants.’ reason... I suppose it’s down to what Mental health social worker time they can get the room, what time it fi ts with everybody.’ ‘Family-led’ preparation Parenting practitioner As FGCs are family-led, the preparation Managing expectations stage involves the family making informed decisions about participants, Barnardo’s research highlighted the the venue, questions that they want to importance of involved professionals ask, and the small details that would having a good understanding of the value help them feel comfortable during the and the process of family-led working. conference, such as choosing their This ensures that they will attend the favourite snack. While some experts FGC, even at inconvenient hours or emphasised the value of handing power locations, and are able to contribute

How did Barnardo’s Bolton measure up on empowerment? BSYC off ers the young people a choice on whether to use an advocate or not. The advocate is usually a sessional staff member or a trained volunteer who is not involved in the case. ‘[Barnardo’s] are very strong on making sure that their [young people] voices are heard and young people get the opportunity to speak up about what they need to help them to be young people and not just young carers.’ Connexions personal advisor ‘[The advocate] was OK, so you didn’t have to speak if you didn’t want to.’ Young person from BSYC’s youth council Questionnaire results from a small sample of service users showed that 12/13 young people agreed that adults listened to what they wanted to say and that they were believed during the conference.

10 in a meaningful way. This is quite ‘He wanted me to tell the other teachers diff erent to a traditional approach where that his mum had cancer, it was written appointments tend to be made to suit down for me on a little card which I’ve professional, rather than family needs. kept. It was quite a moving moment when that happened.’ The preparation stage is also the critical Head of Year 10 period for managing a young person’s and their family’s expectations. Families ‘The really good thing about FGCs is need to understand that they are part that the young carers have a voice and it of the solution, rather than expecting allows them to say how they feel which professionals to ‘solve their problems’. often the adult who is being cared for won’t have heard before. The adult is ‘It was a diff erent concept for me to often taken aback by what the young get my head around because I’d always carer has to say.’ made decisions rather than asking the Project worker, BSYC young person who they would like to invite… it was quite a nice, positive role ‘I will admit its always a bit nerve in the sense that the family are in the racking… beforehand you’re always driving seat.’ thinking about what’s going to be said Project worker from a social work and will I off end people and things like background that… but I think it was really good, I felt really confi dent.’ Listening to young people Young person, 19 A key feature of an FGC is that the agenda and outcomes are decided by FGC and schools the family, so the child’s voice is central Research has consistently found that to the process. This diff erentiates an caring can put young people at risk of FGC from traditional planning meetings bullying, poor school attendance, poor (e.g. Team Around the Child meetings) punctuality and fatigue, leading to poor which should include children’s views school attainment.29, 30 but can often feel to families that they are led by professionals. Some FGC services use advocates to help young people to express their views and ask questions at the conference. In line with recommendations from the FRG, most experts that we interviewed said that an advocate independent of existing services was considered to be important in enabling the child’s thoughts and feelings to be heard accurately.

11 At BSYC, schools are particularly to develop and maintain supportive important to families’ plans as they have relationships independent of specialist a continued presence in the lives of the services, and the need for families to children, and are therefore able to off er share experiences with other people in easily accessible and reliable support similar circumstances. The research at over the long term. Nine of 12 families BSYC identifi ed an example of how this we spoke to who had experienced their dilemma could be resolved. FGC in the last year invited a school BSYC received Comic Relief funding representative to their FGC, and a further to run a ‘young carers’ youth council’ two families had a Connexions worker (YCYC) where young people who have present. Many of these families still had previously used the service could meet school support in place up to two years monthly as a local consultation and after their involvement with Barnardo’s. participation group. The YCYC aims to School staff told us that they fi nd the give local young people a say in creating FGCs useful as they can gather more universal services that are inclusive for information about the home situation, young carers, for example by providing and can come away with clear actions guidance on the design of a support to help address these concerns. Schools guide for young carers. Informally, the were able to off er families pastoral group is used as a place to socialise support and more fl exibility and with other young carers and openly consideration for students’ home lives. discuss issues that aff ect them in an understanding environment. The young ‘Because we don’t have time for people also develop the confi dence and breakfast in the morning they said we skills necessary to speak out on young could have breakfast at school. And if we carers issues and the local children’s ever want someone to talk to we can go services receive meaningful input into and talk to [teacher] he is a one to one planning. The funding for the youth teacher… if you don’t feel confi dent in council has now ended, but other ways your lesson you can ask him to sit in his of enabling young people to benefi t lesson and do work there.’ from peer support in a cost neutral way Young person, 15 were highlighted in the research. These ‘Even though the Barnardo’s meetings suggestions included, informal support have stopped I still see one student groups in schools and one to one peer regularly and make a point of seeing befriending that can be facilitated by the him even just to ask if he’s ok or check service if requested by the young person. that things are still in place.’ ‘I know that being with kids… that were Head of Year 10 in the same position as her, she’s made some good friends there and she had Additional activities for young carers done on the fi rst visit and I was very Many young carers and their families surprised. So she can talk to them as told us that they welcomed the well and I know she does.’ opportunity that arose from an FGC to be Mother of two involved in social activities. Young people Partnership working particularly valued support from peers Professionals from children’s and in a young carer-specifi c environment. adults’ services in Bolton that worked Parents thought that time out was good with BSYC believed the FGC provided for their relationship with their child and a good opportunity to strengthen reduced the child’s isolation. partnership working around the This presents a confl ict between the family. They told the researchers that FGC service aim to empower families attending FGCs encouraged them to

12 work proactively with families and provision in the future if a plan ceased to share information with partner to function eff ectively. However, agencies. They also explained that FGCs can bring extended family having clear actions formalised in a and friends together, increasing plan provided more impetus to follow support networks. The emphasis on through with commitments. involving other mainstream services, particularly schools, in FGCs provides ‘Because you’re bringing everyone an additional source of support for the together, and you have the action plan young person should a plan start to at the end that they have decided upon… break down. it’s a much more coordinated approach… bringing everything together.’ ‘The whole point is putting in place Adult mental health social worker things so that the family are not dependent on services, so we hope ‘It got things put in place, it got things that if her mum did take a turn for the moving, and it gave things a focus... it worse health-wise, there would already was a focus around the family, the whole be support around her that she could family dynamics really.’ access… that has been put in place as a Year 9 Learning and Welfare Leader result of the initial plan.’ Professionals from other services, Project worker particularly adult social care and ‘I want [BSYC] to work in a certain way education, told us that they need that reduces caring responsibilities regular reminders to keep the service and that the plan is sustainable so that on their radar. we’re not just going back and forth into people’s lives.’ Long-term sustainability Children’s services commissioner, Bolton One concern expressed by service Barnardo’s FGC practitioners have managers was that young carers suggested ways of strengthening the may be left ‘stranded’ without service impact of the plan to avoid its breakdown: ■ realistic, achievable actions ■ building in contingencies (if A or B doesn’t work we’ll try C) ■ allocating a family member to be monitor or guardian of the plan ■ keeping expectations realistic ■ using the review to adapt or take out elements that aren’t working.

Locality and Resources Bolton is a metropolitan borough with a range of mainstream services and activities available to support families’ plans. Theory suggests that the FGC model should work equally well in rural localities where services may not be so readily available or accessible as it draws on support from within extended family networks. However, we recommend further research to establish how eff ective this is in practice.

13 Michael’s story Michael is 15 and lives with his attack in which a close friend and dad, John. Michael was referred neighbour agreed to be the fi rst to Barnardo’s by the adult social point of contact for Michael in an work team after John suff ered a emergency. It was also agreed that serious heart attack. As a result Michael would go to a counselling of the heart attack John was service and get involved in activities at housebound and unable to work a local youth club. or undertake basic household At the review meeting, Michael was tasks. He had been suff ering from still seeing his mum regularly and was depression due to his situation. engaging well with the counselling Michael took on many household service. John’s social worker agreed to responsibilities and often woke up in contact children’s services if any new the night to check his dad was OK. concerns about Michael arose. There were concerns that Michael’s Two years later John’s condition has emotional wellbeing was suff ering improved but is very precarious and and that this might impact negatively he fi nds it diffi cult to move around. on his behaviour at school and at Michael still does some jobs round the home. A major concern was about house but he regularly sees his friends what would happen to Michael if his and still goes to the local youth club. dad had another heart attack, and the He continues to have regular contact family wanted to have a contingency with his mum and feels he could talk to plan in place. her if he was worried about anything. At the FGC it was decided that Michael The extended family continue to help would stay overnight with his mum out and although John still worries twice weekly which would help him about what would happen to Michael re-build this relationship. His and if he had another attack, knowing that would help round the house at there are people there for Michael and least once a fortnight and be there to having the contingency plan in place support John and Michael emotionally. helps. John said if it wasn’t for having They agreed a contingency plan in the meeting, he and Michael wouldn’t case John suff ered another heart have known what to do.

Impact and outcomes confi dent to access support and had a of FGCs wider support network. ■ One parent said that they felt better Our research fi ndings, to be published in equipped to deal with problems: ‘there 2011, will be able to say more about longer- haven’t been any more crisis points but term outcomes. However, it is possible to if it did go back too far I think I’d know draw some tentative conclusions from the where to start from now.’ work completed to date. ■ Many family members were still providing support as intended by Barnardo’s research found that all 12 the plan – in one family the children families we spoke to who had received an still went to stay with their aunt FGC more than six months ago were still every fortnight. experiencing benefi ts: ■ Many young people still had regular ■ Several young people told us that they support from school. One young would ‘know where to turn to if things person had been allocated a teacher to got worse’ as they now felt more

14 talk to if she was upset and this was following outcome measures: still in place months later. ■ resilience ■ impact of caring In addition to (and sometimes ■ access to education, employment irrespective of) the outcome on a or training young person’s caring role, FGCs were ■ peer relationships described by interviewees as a useful, ■ material/fi nancial needs solution-focused, decision-making tool. ■ access to services ■ stability of family life Project workers at BSYC summarised ■ choices (especially about level of care). that all FGCs have been successful in: ■ enabling families to make choices that All of the 49 young people who received a have a positive impact on their life full FGC in 2009-10 had improved choices ■ enabling family members to about their level of care, and the vast understand each other’s wishes and majority showed improvements across the feelings (‘often for the fi rst time’) other outcomes measures, for example: ■ enabling families to take ownership of ■ 96 per cent showed improvement in their own support the impact of caring ■ encouraging better, open ■ 94 per cent had improved access communication between the family to services and professionals. ■ 94 per cent had improved resilience.

‘It makes the “asking for support” a What do we know about costs? lot more formal, and it’s put in place FGCs aim to increase access to then. The setting makes them more mainstream services and strengthen likely to follow through on what they informal support networks to prevent off er and makes the off ers of support problems escalating to a point where they more structured.’ require expensive specialist intervention. Project worker, This means that while initial costs may be high, signifi cant savings can be made Measuring outcomes of FGCs in the long term. One area where this can Barnardo’s is currently developing be demonstrated is education. methods for evaluating the longer-term eff ectiveness of FGCs. Barnardo’s FGC In 2003, 22 per cent of young carers services in the South West of England aged fi ve to 15 were missing school or have agreed a core set of outcomes and experiencing educational diffi culties31. a common scale to record progress We know that persistent absentees made by families. The referrer, parent are seven times more likely to be not and young carer agree outcomes at in education, employment or training the outset, then grade these outcomes (NEET) aged 16,32 with long-term at regular intervals and at a fi nal implications for their future prospects. outcome assessment, to assess whether A recent report by the University of improvements have been achieved. York33 estimates that a young carer BSYC records outcomes in a similar way: who has support to reduce their level an assessment is made by the referrer, of caring and therefore improve their project worker and family at the initial education and employment outcomes meeting and at the closure meeting (after saves the state £56,657 over the course of the review), then scores are recorded a lifetime. This calculation includes the for each outcome using standard costs of supporting a parent through full- guidance developed by the service to time residential care – a more expensive ensure consistency. BSYC records on the solution than usually occurs as the result

15 of a FGC. Services that use FGCs with young carers and utilise support from within the family network are therefore likely to save even more than this. BSYC worked with 82 families in 2009- 10. The cost of supporting each family varies depending on the number of family members, the complexity of the issues, the distance to travel between family members, and whether families engage with the entire process. In 2009- 10, 32 families completed an FGC. Fifty did not complete the process for the following reasons: ■ they were referred by a social worker for one-to-one intervention as part of their care plan, or ■ they were assessed and referred to social services as the level of need was high, or ■ they disengaged from the service after the initial assessment before an FGC took place, or ■ they were assessed and signposted to another service as it was deemed a full FGC was not necessary.

On average, taking into account this variety of involvement and costs, the average cost of the service per family is £2,146f. Barnardo’s Bristol Family Intervention Project uses FGCs to prevent eviction and antisocial behaviour. These FGCs vary in cost between £840 and £2,200, with an average cost of £1,700. This is comparable to BSYC, demonstrating that FGCs off er a relatively low cost option irrespective of the make up of families involved.g ‘It just feels like the right model at the right time because we’re anticipating further cuts and we can’t sustain long- term involvement with families in the same way because there’s not the budget.’ Children’s services commissioner, Bolton f The service had an income of £176,000 for the year 2009- 10. During this time the project supported 82 families. £176,000 / 82 = £2,146.34 g For more information on this service please contact the Children’s Services Manager, Emma Bowman at [email protected]

16 Conclusion and carers and their families, with some benefi ts arising from the plans still recommendations evident six months later. Moreover, the for practice FGC process helps to make families feel This briefi ng has outlined the opinions of more empowered and improves their families and professionals working with support networks, which should make FGCs about the challenges and benefi ts them more able to cope with problems in of using this model with young carers. the future. We are continuing to collect data from service users and hope to Our research indicates that key issues to follow up with some fi ndings on long- consider for services looking to use FGC term outcomes in an updated version of with young carers include: this briefi ng in early 2011.h ■ matching the service to families’ level of need and individual circumstances This research suggests that the FGC ■ ensuring families’ understanding of the model has much potential to lift young FGC off er and process; and professionals’ people out of inappropriate caring roles. understanding of the empowerment It fi ts well with government priorities ethos of FGC for strengthening families and reducing ■ engaging and working eff ectively with dependency on public services, and partner agencies, particularly schools although it is a short-term and relatively ■ ensuring contingencies and low cost intervention, it has the potential sustainability are built into families’ to bring lasting benefi ts for young carers plans to avoid plan breakdown. and their families. Although defi nitive conclusions about For more information, BSYC has the eff ectiveness of the model cannot be produced a resource toolkit Family 34 made at this stage, evidence from the Group Conferencing and Young Carers . young people, families and professionals Please contact the service at bolton. interviewed suggests that FGCs have a [email protected] or visit the positive and lasting impact for young website www.barnardos.org.uk/bolton

Research method To write this report we interviewed: interview young people and parents ■ four members of staff from BSYC separately, however in six cases this ■ 12 professionals from partner was not possible and the family was agencies that work with BSYC interviewed together. ■ Local authority commissioner of BSYC Thirteen young carers completed ■ six Barnardo’s FGC practitioners from questionnaires that measured how services across the UK empowered they felt during the FGC. ■ 18 young people and 12 parents/ (from a total of 12 BSYC is continuing to collect families) that had taken part in an FGC data, alongside its sister service with BSYC. in Manchester, using validated questionnaires that measure the Young carers and their families amount and impact of caring.35 Young who were available and willing to carers are completing these before take part were interviewed in their they have an FGC and three months homes. Researchers attempted to later to give a measure of change.

h See methods section for more detail

17 Thanks The authors would like to thank our advisory group – particularly Martin Stevens at the Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King’s College London, Saul and Fiona Becker, and Hilary Horan, a former Children’s Services Manager in Barnardo’s South West – for their advice and expertise; all the Barnardo’s young carers projects for their contributions; the professionals in Bolton who spoke to us about the service; Rob Harrison, Rosie Critchlow, Gaynor Hudson, Rachel Pinglaux and the rest of the staff at Barnardo’s Bolton Service for Young Carers for all their hard work on this project. Finally, we are extremely grateful to all the young people and families who shared their experiences with us.

For more information about this briefi ng, please contact Naomi Clewett – [email protected] – 020 8498 7065

18 References

1 Becker, S, Dearden, C and Aldridge, J (2001) 19 The Scottish Government (2008) A Guide to Young carers in the UK: Research, policy and Getting it Right for Every Child. www.scotland. practice. Research Policy and Planning, vol gov.uk/Publications/2008/09/22091734/3 18, no 2, pp13-21. 20 The Scottish Government (2010) Getting it 2 SCIE (2005, updated 2007) Implementing the Right for Young Carers: The Young Carers Carers (Equal Opportunities) Act 2004 Strategy for Scotland 2010-2015. The Scottish www.scie.org.uk/publications/guides/ Government, Edinburgh www.scotland.gov. guide09/fi les/guide09.pdf uk/Resource/Doc/319441/0102105.pdf 3 BBC (2010) Young carers are ‘four times’ 21 Offi ce of the First Minister and Deputy First the offi cial UK number. Minister (2006) Our Children and Young www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/11758368 People – Our Pledge: A ten year strategy 4 HM Government (2008) Carers at the heart of for Children and Young People in Northern 21st Century families and communities. Ireland 2006-2016. www.allchildrenni.gov. uk/tenyearstrategychildren1-2.pdf 5 Brady, B (2006) Facilitating family decision making: a study of the family welfare 22 DHSSPS (2009) Families Matter: Supporting conference service in the HSE Western Area, families in Northern Ireland. www.dhsspsni. Galway, Ireland. National University of gov.uk/families_matter_strategy.pdf Ireland, Department of Political Science and 23 Department of Health, Social Services and Health Service Executive, Child & Family Public Safety (2010) Priorities for Action Research and Policy Unit 2010/11. www.dhsspsni.gov.uk/priorities_for_ 6 ibid action_2010-12.doc 7 69 per cent of local authorities in England 24 Family Group Conference Forum Northern and 18 out of 22 authorities in Wales. Family Ireland (2010) Family Group Conference Rights Group (2009) DRAFT Report on the Standards in Northern Ireland. fgcforumni. impact of the Public Law Outline on Family org/cmsfi les/FGCF-Standards-document.pdf Group Conference services in England & Wales 25 Marsh, P (2009) Family group conferences. 8 Pakura, S (2005) The Family Group Highlight (248) pp1-4 Conference 14-Year Journey: Celebrating The 26 Sawyer, RQ, Lohrbach, S (2008) Olmstead Successes, Learning The Lessons, Embracing county child and family services: Family The Challenges. involvement strategies Olmstead County 9 The Coalition (2010) Our Programme for Child and Family services, Rochester, MN Government www.cabinetoffi ce.gov.uk/ 27 Aldridge, J; Becker, S (1999) Children as media/409088/pfg_coalition.pdf carers: the impact of parental illness and 10 David Cameron Speech, Monday 19 July disability on children’s caring roles. Journal 2010. www.conservatives.com/News/ of Family Therapy 21: pp303-320 Speeches/2010/07/David_Cameron_Our_Big_ 28 Frank, J (2000) Young Carers and Family Society_Agenda.aspx Group Conferences. In Lupton, C Ed 11 ibid (2000) Moving Forward. On Family 12 ibid group conferences in Hampshire. University of Portsmouth. 13 HM Government (2008) Carers at the Heart of 21st century Families and Communities 29 Social Care Institute for Excellence (2007) 14 Department of Health (2010) Recognised, SCIE guide 9: Implementing the Carers (Equal valued and supported: next steps for Opportunities) Act 2004. SCIE, London. the Carers Strategy. www.dh.gov.uk/en/ 30 Social Care Institute for Excellence (2008) Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/ SCIE guide 24: Experiences of children and PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_122077 young people caring for a parent with a 15 SCIE (2005, updated 2007) Implementing mental health problem. SCIE, London. the Carers (Equal Opportunities) Act 2004 31 Ibid www.scie.org.uk/publications/guides/ 32 DfES (2007) NEET strategy. guide09/fi les/guide09.pdf 33 Coles, B; Godfrey, C et al (2010) Estimating the life-time cost of NEET: 16-18 year olds 16 Deputy Minister for Social Services, Welsh not in Education, Employment or Training. Assembly Government (2010) Carers Strategies University of York, York. (Wales) Measure www.wales.gov.uk/docs/ www.york.ac.uk/depts/spsw/research/neet/ cabinetstatements/2010/100125carersen.doc NEET_Final_Report_July_2010_York.pdf 17 DCSF (2008) Revised statutory guidance for 34 Harrison, R (2010) Family Group Conferencing local authorities. Volume 1: Court Orders. and Young Carers. Barnardo’s North West dcsf.gov.uk/everychildmatters/publications/ 35 Joseph, J; Becker, F et al (2009) Manual for documents/childrenactguidanceregulations/ Measures of Caring Activities and Outcomes 18 Barnsdale, L and Walker, M (2007) For Children and Young People. The Princess Examining the Use and Impact of Family Royal Trust for Carers, London. Group Conferencing. Social Work saulbecker.co.uk/v1/downloads/young_ Research Centre. www.scotland.gov.uk/ carers/Young%20Carers%20Outcomes%20 Publications/2007/03/26093721/0 Manual%20April%202009.pdf 19 Making plans: Using Family Group Conferencing to reduce the impact of caring on young people

© Barnardo’s, 2010 All rights reserved

No part of this report, including images, may be reproduced or stored on an authorised retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, without prior permission of the publisher.

The report was written by the policy, research and media directorate

Some images posed by models. Names have been changed to protect identities.

www.barnardos.org.uk

Head Offi ce Tanners Lane Barkingside, Ilford Essex IG6 1QG Tel: 020 8550 8822

Barnardo’s Registered Charity Nos. 216250 and SC037605 12634ka10