HeadStart Kent Seminar 4: What have we learnt? Where are we going? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

HeadStart Kent Seminar 4: What have we learnt? Where are we going? @HeadStartKent #headstartmatters #bounceback

Plan for the Seminar Time Item 9.30am – 9.40am Welcome and Introductions 9.40am – 10am Overview of HeadStart Phase Three 10am – 10.30am Learning from Phase Two and the Knowledge Seminars 10.30am – 11am Creating a Theory of Change: the process so far and plan 11am – 11.15am Break 11.15am – 12pm Activity: Theory of Change for HeadStart Kent 12pm – 12.15pm The importance of providers developing their own TOC 12.15 – 12.30pm Next Steps for Knowledge Seminars: thoughts from the group @HeadStartKent #headstartmatters #bounceback

The HeadStart Vision for Phase Three Angela Ford @HeadStartKent #headstartmatters #bounceback

THE HEADSTART MISSION The Big Lottery Funded HeadStart programme aims to improve the mental well-being of at-risk* 10 to 16 year-olds by investing up to £75m in up to 12 local partnerships to facilitate and support: 1.the implementation of a locally developed, cross-disciplinary, multi-layered and integrated prevention strategy, with the young person and their needs at its core 2.the development of the necessary local conditions to enable that strategy to become sustainable in time 3.the development of a more robust evidence-base around ‘ what works ’ in the area of mental well-being to be pro-actively shared beyond HeadStart with the aim of contributing to the national and local policy debate. * At risk of developing mental ill-being 4

THE SPECIFIC ROLE OF RESILIENCE WELL-BEING Resilience Particularly relevant in the context of HeadStart given that many children in our target population might face more adversity than the norm 5

WORKING TOWARDS A COMMON OUTCOMES FRAMEWORK Main programme outcome Longer-term outcomes 2 Reduction in the onset of diagnosable mental health 1 Socially significant disorders improvement of the mental well-being of at- risk young people HeadStart Positive transitions: e.g.; exit Improved engagement in 3 school and improved academic attainment Baseline age 10 Reduced engagement in 4 Focus of HeadStart ‘risky’ behaviour: e.g.; activity • Substance abuse • Criminality • Teenage pregnancy 5 Improved employabilit y 6 Outcomes embedded within the local systems 6

THE FOUNDATIONS We need from the partnerships... • • Confidence in the proposed Robust programme strategy: • programme Local translation of HS mission • Clarity on target population • Combination of robust interventions and approaches • Articulation of integrated client journey • Clarity of short, medium and long-term outcomes We want…. • • Confidence in the local Strong and committed governance in place By May 2016 we • leadership Strong day-to-day management in place want to be able to take a firm decision on which • • Confidence in sustainability of Clear and robust articulation of how programme could partnerships, if any, programme beyond the Big continue to be funded after HS to fund, with clarity • Lottery Fund Strategy for achieving sustainability beyond HS on what we will be funding and to what end • • Confidence in the Robust implementation plan for the first 18 months of implementation the programme • Detailed budget based on clarity of current spend against the proposed programme versus required spend • Basic delivery infrastructure in place • Confidence in the willingness / • ability to engage Evidence of willingness and ability to engage with wide range of stakeholders: young people, community, other partnerships, external experts, S&D, Big Lottery Fund 7

BUILDING BLOCKS OF AN EFFECTIVE PROGRAMME STRAGEGY Definition • Purpose of the programme, what it is meant to achieve and how it will achieve it Definition What good looks like • The group of young people to • Clear statement of intent • which the partnership will Basis for determining whether holds itself accountable the partnership has succeeded • Expressed as a set of • Descriptive and unambiguous – enrolment criteria not a Vision • Mission • E. g. Age of entry into the Aspirational…but achievable programme, socio-economic • Holistic and enduring profile What good looks like • Clear operational guidelines • Target Population Clear thresholds Definition • Specific differences we look for the Definition programme as well as the individual • Documentation of which interventions, Outcomes interventions to make by whom, when, how often, how What goods look like: long…what exactly will happen in order • Clear basis to ascertain whether the to achieve outcomes (including the programme / the intervention has system mechanisms) Programme Design achieved its aim (after the fact) What good looks like • Clear basis to ascertain whether the • Shared understanding of what the programme / the intervention is “ programme ” means for everyone in achieving its aim (while it is on-going) the partnership • Clear rationale for how the “ programme ” will lead to the outcomes • Provides a clear basis for recruiting, 8 training and manage staff (competencies)

MISSION Big Lottery Fund mission for HeadStart The Big Lottery Fund’s HeadStart programme aims to improve the mental well-being of at- risk 10 to 16 year-olds by investing up to £75m in up to 12 local partnerships to Local mission for HeadStart facilitate and support: 1.the implementation of a locally developed, • Clear articulation of what cross-disciplinary, multi-layered and Each of the partnerships to the programme is meant to integrated prevention strategy, with the translate the overall HS achieve and how it is going young person and their needs at its core to achieve that mission into a statement of 2.the development of the necessary local • intent for their local Common interpretation conditions to enable that strategy to become across the partnership programme strategy sustainable in time • Drives decision-making 3.the development of a more robust evidence- base around ‘what works’ in the area of mental well-being to be pro-actively shared beyond HS with the aim of contributing to the national and local policy debate 9

OUTCOMES THE RESILIENCE FRAMEWORK CAN HELP DEFINE SOME OF THE SHORT-TERM OUTCOMES • Access to a trusted adult available over time • Access to and engagement with activities, hobbies, sports, etc. • Improved problem-solving skills ( how to measure ?) • Access to a safe space (what does that mean in practice?) • A realistic yet aspirational plan for the future • Improved self-management skills ( how to measure ?) • Access to and engagement with activities that contribute to others (e.g.; volunteering, peer mentoring) Source: BoingBoing 10

PROGRAMME DESIGN DIFFERENT PROGRAMME ‘LAYERS’ Universal as well as targeted interventions specifically aimed at improving the mental well- Young people being of young people (in school, in alternative provision, in the community) Integration into a cohesive Universal and targeted interventions aimed journey with Parents / at improving parent’s ability to support the the young carers mental well-being of their children people at its core Interventions aimed at improving the ability of Professionals (including teachers) / schools / other services to support the mental practitioners / volunteers well-being of children/ young people Activity that does as it says Awareness raising on the tin Again, each of the partnerships will need to decide how to balance activity across those different ‘layers’ of activity 11

LEADERSHIP WITH A BIG ‘L’ • Commitment and engagement from the ‘top’ • Commitment and engagement from all key stakeholders (organisations and relevant individuals) • Clear accountability • Common purpose with clarity on individual roles and responsibility amongst all partners • Clear decision-making processes based around the presentation of The people and the insights structures in place to drive the • Strategic thinking programme and realise its full • Change agent(s) potential • Solid day-to-day programme management • ‘Young people in the lead’ 12

SUSTAINABILITY IN THE CONTEXT OF PHASE 3 We are expecting... • An understanding amongst the partnership that embedding HS within the local context long-term is absolutely part of our aims for HS – if this doesn’t happen in the long-term, we will not consider the programme a success • A partnership governance structure that facilitates We are not expecting ... sustainability by including key decision-makers and providing links into the wider agendas at local level • A firm commitment from the partnerships by July 2016 to • An understanding amongst the partnership of the fully replace BLF funding to but existing relevant funding pots, including an cover HS activity once the understanding of the current spend against HS activity initial funding commitment has run out • An understanding of what would need to happen for funds to be able to shift to HS activity: e.g.; • What evidence • Milestones to achieve • Leverage explicitly considered when developing the budget 13