West Berkshire – Family Group Conferences
IYPP PROJECT
4. Project Development
4.1 Barriers
4.1.1 Referrals
It became clear quite early on in the project that the referral process was not as good as it could be. Several referrals were received and on the first visit to the family, the co-ordinators were told that they did not really like the idea of a Family Group Conference, but that they had been told to have one by the agency worker. On other occasions, referrers had given the family incorrect information about the process of the FGC.
These examples gave us the message that we needed to think again about:
- what information the referring agencies had about the project
- referrers understanding of when an FGC would be helpful
- how to ensure that families were empowered through the process, not forced to do something that they did not want to do
- how referrers felt about their role in the process
4.1.2 Referrer’s concerns
Another issue highlighted during consultation with staff was the issue of professional resistance to the FGC model. Historically, social welfare services have been driven by a political agenda, which is paternalistic in its approach. Services are often planned and delivered in this way, which puts the focus on the social worker as the ‘expert’ and families being ‘told’ what to do to resolve their difficulties. Family Group Conferences seek to share the responsibility for a situation between the formal and informal networks around a young person. However, the decision-making is given back to the family in recognition that they are the experts. This turns the role of the social worker on its head.
In discussion with workers, it was clear that the role of being the only representative of their organisation in a meeting with a large – sometimes angry family – is very difficult. Unsurprisingly then, some workers are uncomfortable in this new role and this has lead to referral reluctance. One service user stated:
I think that social workers offer FGCs to families who are like them or that they like.
Family Group Conference training had been undertaken during the first six months of the project, but with high levels of work, many other projects to offer to families and turnover of staff, agency workers seemed reluctant to refer.
4.1.3 Family concerns
Family resistance to the model was also an issue. Many families did not wish to take part in the process for a variety of reasons, such as:
- they did not feel it was “for them”
- parents did not wish to share their difficulties with wider family
- families were “fed up” with meetings and felt that nothing was going to help their situation
- suspicion of new approaches from agencies
- concern about conflict or safety at meetings
All of these concerns are understandable and many families discussed these issues and went on to have a successful FGC.
4.1.4 Multi-agency working
Working with a range of agencies has many positive benefits, both for workers and families alike. In the view of project staff the sharing of information, resources and responsibility involved in the FGC process should increase the likelihood of positive outcomes for children. However, some of the organisational difficulties of working in this way have been that:
- agencies had their own criteria for working with the project
- other decision making meetings running alongside the FGC process
- a wider group to engage with and a wide range of diverse agendas
4.2 Overcoming the Barriers
The following changes and strategies improved the effectiveness of the service:
- At the beginning of the IYPP Project a multi-agency steering group was set up. The group included the IYPP Project Co-ordinator, the local project co-ordinator and representatives from the YOT, Education Welfare and Social Services. This group met every three months and had an overview of the work undertaken. They were able to guide the direction of the project, as well as offer help and support to the project staff
- Five co-ordinators undertook all the referrals and subsequent conferences. This group met as a practice development forum every six weeks during the life of the project to share experiences, develop their practice around working with this specific group of families and identifying training needs both for them and training for potential referrers
- The initial months of the project were seen as a development phase. Building partnerships between the agencies was key to ensuring that everyone had a clear understanding of what a Family Group Conference was, how it worked and in what circumstances they could be used. An important element of this work was visiting each agency to discuss their needs and the outcomes that they wanted from the project. This was done at all levels of each organisation. Whilst time consuming, it became apparent as the project developed that this groundwork had been very worthwhile
- In order to empower people, our co-ordinators gave information to families, talked through the issues and let them make their own decisions about whether to go ahead
- The coordinator practice group talked through the issues regarding low levels of referrals. It was agreed to visit agency teams to talk about this reluctance to refer, and to listen to what they had to say about some of the practical difficulties they were facing when talking to families about a Family Group Conference
- Following that consultation, it was agreed that we would change the referral process and ask agency workers to contact the project direct to talk the case through with a co-ordinator prior to referral. Following that meeting, the referral was pursued by the co-ordinator, who visited the family and filled in the referral form with them. Not only did this save a lot of time and effort for referrers, but it also enabled families to be involved in the discussions around the question for the Family Group Conference. Several family members considered that they had referred themselves, rather than having been referred by an agency and they felt this was the start of an empowering process