Troubled family program
The English government is committed to working with local authorities and their partners to help 120,000 troubled families in England turn their lives around by 2015. The family monitoring data was collected by Ecorys as part of the national evaluation of the programme. Please read the Ecorys interim report on family monitoring data for more detail and additional results.
|SWOT Analysis for
Troubled family program
|Strengths• Succeeded in reaching almost all the hardest to help homes in the country.
• Working with 99% of households in England identified as having multiple problems, including high levels of truancy, youth crime, anti-social behaviour and worklessness
• Councils had met payment-by-results criteria for turning around the lives of more than 69,000 families.
• Levels of youth crime and anti-social behaviour have been significantly reduced across the family
|Weaknesses• Wide variations in local practice: need for more standardised training, quality assurance.
• Mixed evidence regarding the extent to which scaling-up had been achieved without sacrificing some level of quality of family intervention practice
• Payment-by-Results (PbR) progress data counts the number of positive outcomes observed for families on the Programme (i.e. gross rather than net outcomes). It doesn’t estimate how many net positive outcomes there are over and above any positive outcomes that would have occurred in the absence of the programme (i.e. deadweight or counterfactual outcomes)
|Opportunities• Help bring security and opportunity to families and communities.
• Getting children back into school
• Cutting youth crime and anti-social behaviour across the whole family
• Getting adults into work
• Reducing the costs to the taxpayer of tackling their problems
|Threats• Questionable whether deep and sustained improvements were achieved to partnership working at a local level, beyond individual examples of good practice
• The requirement to work with greater numbers of families on reduced funding poses a risk of ‘diluting’ the intervention
• Lack of evidence that it has had an impact on the outcomes that it seeks to affect for families: PbR progress data counts the number of positive outcomes observed for families on the Programme (i.e. gross rather than net outcomes). It doesn’t estimate how many net positive outcomes there are over and above any positive outcomes that would have occurred in the absence of the programme