evaluation of the children and young people strategy 2006

Evaluation of the Children and Young People Strategy: 2006 - 2010 Fire Research 21/2011

This research was commissioned by the previous government and is not necessarily a reflection of the current government’s policies and priorities. DCLG is publishing this report in the interests of transparency.

Evaluation of the Children and Young People Strategy: 2006 - 2010 Fire Research 21/2011

GfK NOP Social Research

Health and Safety Laboratory This research was commissioned by the previous government and is not necessarily a reflection of the current government’s policies and priorities. DCLG is publishing this report in the interests of transparency.

Department for Communities and Local Government Eland House Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU Telephone: 030 3444 0000 Website: www.communities.gov.uk © Queen’s Printer and Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 2011 Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the publication specified. You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected]. If you require this publication in an alternative format please email [email protected] DCLG Publications Tel: 030 0123 1124 Fax: 030 0123 1125 Email: [email protected] Online via the website: www.communities.gov.uk 2011 ISBN 978 1 4098 2362 9

Evaluation of the Children and Young People Strategy: 2006–2010 | 3

Contents

Section 1 Executive summary 4

Section 2 Introduction 8

Background and objectives 8

Research method 10

Section 3 Current use of the existing strategy 13

Section 4 Role of the new strategy 15

Section 5 Content and focus of the strategy 17

National leadership 17

Funding and resources 17

Safeguarding 18

Structure of the strategy 19

Section 6 Strategy aims 25

Aim 1 25

Aim 2 26

Aim 3 26

Aim 4 27

Aim 5 28

Aim 6 29

Section 7 Conclusions and considerations 31

Summary and conclusions 31

Aim 1 32

Aim 2 32

Aim 3 33

Aim 4 33

Aim 5 33

Aim 6 33

Considerations emerging from the research 34

Appendix Telephone in-depth interview discussion guide 36

Focus group discussion guide 41

Quantitative telephone questionnaire 46

4 | Evaluation of the Children and Young People Strategy: 2006–2010

Section 1 Executive summary

Introduction

Communities and Local Government (CLG) commissioned research to understand awareness, use and desired revisions to the Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) Strategy for Children and Young People 2006–10.

Methodology

Qualitative and quantitative research was undertaken with FRS staff. This involved four focus groups, 14 in-depth telephone interviews (10 were with FRS staff who worked with children and young people and four with senior stakeholders with an interest in the Strategy), and quantitative telephone interviews with 36 FRS staff across 31 FRSs.

Main findings

The research found a high level of awareness and usage of the existing Strategy. Qualitative research identified three main themes in terms of respondents’ preferences for the future role of the new Strategy. The new Strategy should:

• clarify and justify the role of the FRS within the field of children and young people

• encourage and facilitate partnership working

• engage internal staff.

The research also identified a number of themes in terms of the desired content of the new Strategy. Notably, it should remain concise and its content should be directional, strengthening the current work with children and young people. It was felt that the new Strategy should be underpinned by:

• supporting detailed notable practice examples

• an evaluation toolkit, and

• an updated wider context section.

National leadership and guidance

Respondents hoped that the new Strategy would provide more strategic direction in the form of guidance on, and clarification of, the FRS remit in working with children


and young people. However, the new Strategy should also provide scope for tailoring to local priorities.

Funding and resourcing

Respondents felt that if the new Strategy were to promote the valuable engagement with children and young people that FRSs deliver, it would help the FRSs in accessing funding and resources.

Safeguarding

Safeguarding, or appropriate arrangements to ensure the safety of young people who come into contact with the FRS, was considered a priority by respondents and they felt strongly that the new Strategy should reflect the importance of this.

Wider context

There was a need to link the new Strategy with other organisations’ frameworks and work programmes.

The research gathered detailed comment on each of the aims of the existing Strategy. The content of the aims was considered appropriate, and reflected the core role of FRS work with children and young people. Some key issues emerged in relation to each of the aims:

Aim 1

Engage actively with children and young people.

Appropriateness of engagement was a concern and clarification was sought regarding the boundaries of responsibility of the FRS.

Aim 2

Prevent and reduce fire crime and firesetting by children and young people.

Concerns were raised with regard to vulnerable children and young people, and information was sought regarding quality assured training for staff working with vulnerable children and young people.


Aim 3

Divert children and young people from fire crime and associated anti-social behaviour.

It was hoped that the new Strategy would make it clear that the FRS had a key role to play in school education.

Aim 4

Educate children and young people in fire safety skills and responsible citizenship.

This was considered a core role within the remit of the FRSs, and it was hoped that the new Strategy would strengthen this activity.

Aim 5

Ensure that FRS staff working with children and young people are effective and professional.

It was felt strongly that this was essential to the work carried out with children and young people, although participants sought guidance regarding Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks. It was suggested that the new Strategy strengthen its stance and guidance in this matter.

Aim 6

Identify and disseminate good practice in working with children and young people.

It was felt that there is not currently enough sharing of notable practice, but that the new Strategy could emphasise and encourage this. It was envisaged that a nationally led group would have a website where best practice examples could be shared.


Considerations emerging from the research

The following issues were raised for consideration following the research:

National lead group

It was thought that a national lead group should be put in place to foster national leadership and direction. It was felt that either Communities and Local Government (CLG) or the Chief Fire Officers’ Association (CFOA) would be best placed to create and manage this group.

Directional and broad Strategy

Participants were seeking a concise directional Strategy that provides strong values that reinforce the current valuable engagement that FRSs carry out with children and young people. However, it is important that the new Strategy enables FRSs to have choice over delivery and scope for ongoing innovation.

Promote partnership working

It was considered essential that the new Strategy not only identifies the FRS as a delivery partner, but also reflects the roles of partners. Inclusion of partner goals such as Every Child Matters and National Indicators was seen as vital.

Support the Strategy

Whilst preferences were for a short and direct Strategy document, participants see great value in supporting documents for notable practice, an evaluation toolkit, and a wider context section that is updated when relevant.

Guidance for staff training and safeguarding

Guidance was sought in relation to appropriate and accredited staff training, and processes for safeguarding. It was suggested that the new Strategy reflect this need, and that a national lead group should ensure that FRSs were kept up to date with any future requirements.


Section 2 Introduction

Background and objectives

2.1 Since April 2006, all Fire and Rescue Authorities (FRAs) in England have been required by the National Framework for the Fire and Rescue Service1 to have regard to the Strategy for Children and Young People: 2006–2010: The Fire and Rescue Service in all work with children and young people.

2.2 Prior to the development of the existing Strategy, the Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) had an established tradition of working with children and young people. It delivered fire safety education and broader risk education to this group; operated a wide range of initiatives especially with disadvantaged young people and young offenders; and, worked with young firesetters and arsonists.

2.3 The existing Strategy built upon these strengths, ensuring excellence in work with children and young people (especially in disadvantaged communities), supported by effective partnerships and early intervention.

2.4 To these ends, it set two overarching objectives for FRAs: the prevention of fire crime2 and anti-social behaviour, and the prevention of accidental injury and death. Authorities address these through attention to six aims:

• Engage actively with children and young people.

• Prevent and reduce fire crime and firesetting by children and young people.

• Divert children and young people from fire crime and anti-social behaviour.

• Educate children and young people in fire safety skills and responsible citizenship.

• Ensure that FRS staff working with children and young people are effective and professional.

• Identify and disseminate good practice in working with children and young people.

2.5 FRAs are supported in implementing these aims by Communities and Local Government (CLG) and other key national stakeholders. Specific activities for these bodies are outlined by national action plans3.

1 The current version is the Fire and Rescue Service National Framework 2008–20112 Fire crime covers all forms of fire-related crime, including arson, anti-social behaviour, hoax calls and attacks on firefighters.3 For example, Strategy for the Fire and Rescue Service Working with Children and Young People: Action Plan for 2006/08


2.6 The existing Strategy was designed to aid FRAs in meeting the requirements of other policies, agreements and legislation. It will aid them in developing a strategic overview of their work with children and young people, and assist the development of their Integrated Risk Management Plans (IRMPs). Furthermore, it will promote local partnership working. The Strategy forms a vital part of the Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets for 2010, which are to reduce arson and accidental fire related deaths in the home. It helps FRAs meet the requirements of the Fire and Rescue Service Act 2004 to promote fire safety and to work in partnership with local agencies to create safer communities. Other than the FRS, the Strategy is relevant to a wide range of organisations, particularly, public local and regional bodies, and some non-government stakeholders.

2.7 The Strategy is part of a wider policy landscape concerned with promoting safe communities, public health, child welfare, and helping young offenders.

2.8 The key relevant policies are:

• The Prolific and Other Priority Offenders Strategy

• Choosing Health: Making Healthy Choices Easier

• The ‘Respect’ Action Plan

• Local Area Agreements and the Safer and Stronger Communities Fund

• Every Child Matters and Change for Children

• Youth Crime Action Plan.

2.9 CLG commissioned GfK NOP to undertake research into the awareness, understanding and current use of the existing Strategy within the FRS. The primary objective of the research was to inform the development of a new FRS Strategy for children and young people, so it sought views on how the existing Strategy could be improved.

2.10 The overall aim of the research was to understand how FRSs currently perceive and use the existing Strategy and to identify changes that should be incorporated into a future Strategy document.

2.11 The specific objectives were to:

• establish the level of awareness of the existing Strategy within the FRS

• understand how the existing Strategy is being used

• evaluate the content of the existing Strategy, in particular whether its aims are still the most appropriate and relevant, and thoughts on the usefulness of its ‘wider context’ section

• establish how a new Strategy should be developed, such as whether the existing Strategy is missing any information

• develop detailed case studies that provide a range of good practice examples of FRAs working with children and young people.


Research method

Qualitative method

2.12 The qualitative phase of the research involved a series of four focus groups and 14 telephone in-depth interviews with FRS staff who work with children and young people. Using a mixed methodology allowed the complementary benefits of each method to be harnessed. Focus groups provided an interactive forum for participants to compare experiences and share views on the existing Strategy. The focus groups were used to gather an overall sense of how the existing Strategy was utilised in a variety of FRSs, and to generate suggestions for how the Strategy could be improved. One-to-one telephone in-depth interviews were used to gather a detailed understanding of how the existing Strategy was working at the local FRS level.

2.13 All focus groups and telephone in-depth interviews took place in July 2009.

2.14 Separate discussion guides for use during the focus groups and in-depth interviews were approved by CLG. The discussion guides sought to:

• establish the level of awareness of the existing Strategy within the FRS

• understand how the existing Strategy is being used

• evaluate the content of the existing Strategy, in particular whether its aims are still the most appropriate and relevant, and thoughts on the usefulness of its ‘wider context’ section

• establish how a new Strategy should be developed, such as whether the existing Strategy is missing any information.

2.15 The sample for the research was provided by CLG. A range of FRS types were included in the sample overall, including:

• Combined Fire Authorities

• Non-metropolitan County Fire Authorities

• Metropolitan Fire and Civil Defence Authority

• London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority.

Focus groups

2.16 Four focus groups were conducted in total, each lasting two hours and including an average of six participants. The focus groups took place in regional hubs across the country, drawing from a spread of FRSs. The focus group locations were:

• London

• Manchester

• Leicester

• Exeter.


Telephone in-depth interviews

2.17 Fourteen telephone depth interviews were carried out with FRS staff. Ten of these were with FRS staff who work with children and young people, whilst the remaining four were conducted with senior stakeholders who have an interest in the Strategy, to gather a strategic perspective. Each interview lasted approximately one hour.

Quantitative method

2.18 The quantitative phase of the research was undertaken after the focus groups had been completed. As with the focus groups, the quantitative survey concentrated on those who worked with the existing Strategy and were either responsible for:

• fire crime and/or

• accidental fire deaths.

2.19 The questionnaire was developed from the focus group discussions. The first draft of the questionnaire was provided to CLG for comment before being finalised. The survey was conducted via computer assisted telephone interviewing (CATI). Overall, the average interview length was twenty minutes. Fieldwork took place between 7 and 25 September 2009.

Sample

2.20 In total 36 interviews, spread across 31 FRSs, were completed. Ten respondents were responsible for fire crime only whilst a further 26 were responsible for both fire crime and accidental fire deaths. The target had been 60 interviews but there were a number of potential respondents unavailable during fieldwork. We also found that in 26 cases, one person was responsible for both fire crime and accidental fire deaths whereas the original design had assumed that one person would have responsibility for one area. This then meant that fewer people were needed to get a picture of both responsibilities.

2.21 When reading this report please note that:

• the quantitative data reported in this report is unweighted

• all figures are the number of respondents and not percentages, due to the small numbers interviewed.

2.22 Out of the 36 interviewed, 24 had also taken part in the qualitative focus groups. Nearly half of those who had taken part in the qualitative research indicated that they were either very familiar (eight) or fairly familiar (nine) with the existing Strategy before they had taken part in the qualitative research.

2.23 All of the FRSs who participated in the interviews were actively involved in working with children and young people. All respondents were asked whether and how they or other members of staff currently engage with


children and young people. As can be seen in Chart 1, the vast majority of respondents were engaging with children in various ways.

Chart 1: Do members of staff from your fire service currently …? (Q4)

Run a young offender programme

Visit schools

Engage with children and youngpeople in another way

Engage with partners who run youthsheme

Run a youth scheme

Base: All (36) Please note chart shows actual number of respondents

Out of the 36 respondents:

28

35

36

36

36

2.24 When respondents indicated that they were not doing specific activities, they were asked why. The reasons given included:

• no funding/money (3 respondents)

• another department does that (2 respondents)

• not effective (1 respondent)

• looking to set it up (1 respondent)

• don’t know if we are looking to do it (1 respondent).


Section 3 Current use of the existing strategy3.1 Out of the 36 interviewed in the quantitative research the majority, 32, said

that they used the existing Strategy (17 a great deal and 15 a fair amount). Only four of those interviewed did not currently use the existing Strategy.

3.2 Overall, the existing Strategy was considered useful in helping FRSs work with children and young people.

3.3 All respondents in the quantitative research who use the existing Strategy were asked about the purposes it was used for. The main use, cited by 30 respondents, was as a framework for their own local strategy. Seventeen respondents mentioned using the existing Strategy for working with Integrated Youth Support Services, setting up partnerships and for guidance on how to work with young people. All responses by 10 or more people are shown in Chart 2.

Chart 2: If you currently use the Strategy document, what is it used for? (Q11)

Getting funding for youth schemes

Working with Children's Trust

To set targets/plan work with young

people

For guidance on how to work with

young people

Setting up partnerships

Working with Integrated Youth Support

Services

Framework for your own strategy



10

14

15

16

16

17

30

3.4 The qualitative research indicated that the existing Strategy was typically used as a document to support existing work programmes and initiatives. Those interviewed discussed using the existing Strategy as a document that


was referred to if they needed to justify the work that they were carrying out. However, it was evident that for many, this was the extent to which the existing Strategy was used.

3.5 Some participants said that they had initially used the existing Strategy to identify areas where they currently did not engage with children and young people. One respondent described how they had carried out a gap analysis of their delivery against the existing Strategy to see where they could deliver further engagement.

‘When this was introduced, what it did for me was allow me to say well, okay there’s my strategy, and here’s this one, what are we missing … it allowed me to do a gap analysis’

3.6 Finally, a small number of participants noted that the existing Strategy had prompted the development of new work programmes and initiatives. Overall, most felt that the existing Strategy lacked guidance on actual delivery, and this was cited as a key reason for infrequent use.

‘I don’t think it helps you to know where, when and how to deliver things. It stays on the shelf apart from when I need to justify something.’


Section 4 Role of the new strategy4.1 Respondents agreed that the existing Strategy had been a good starting

point for working with children and young people in 2006. However, they felt that it was now out of date and required revision. This was strongly supported by the quantitative survey where out of the 36 interviewees, 33 indicated there was a need for revising and updating the Strategy.

4.2 In the qualitative research, participants hoped that the new Strategy would provide a usable document that would:

1: Clarify and justify the role of the Fire and Rescue Service within the field of children and young people

Participants felt strongly that the lack of legislative and statutory powers held by the FRS for working with children and young people had a negative impact on their work. They believed that an absence of legislation meant that they were not always considered a ‘key player’ within this field. Some felt that the existing Strategy did not provide a document that promoted the work and value of FRS engagement.

‘I’ve spoken to other agencies and they haven’t even read it. I don’t think we’re seen as an important player in this.’

Not being recognised as a key player within the field of children and young people was perceived to have a detrimental effect on access to funding. Some participants felt that they were not immediately considered for inclusion in their Local Area Agreements or Children’s Trust boards which meant that they could potentially miss out on funding streams made available via these boards.

‘Working at a level with children’s trusts, local area agreements, the FRS is new in that arena and legislatively there’s no requirement for us to be on those boards … to actually enable us to … influence and support we need to be there.’

Ideally, participants would like to see a statutory role for the FRS in engaging with children and young people. However, in the absence of this they advocated the importance of a strong and directional Strategy which clearly identified where the FRS can deliver valuable engagement.

2: Encourage and facilitate partnership working

Partnership working was considered a mainstream activity by participants. However, they were keen to note that the existing Strategy did not


reflect the way in which partners work. This meant that they often found themselves interpreting the existing Strategy to fit partner aims and language. Participants felt that the new Strategy had scope to provide a powerful tool for partnership working if it reflected the ways in which partners work, and the way in which the FRS should engage with partners in working with children and young people.

‘Engaging with partners who probably have more direct access to young people and showing where the work that we do will actually complement or add value to the work that they do.’

Recognising and referring to Every Child Matters and National Indicators was seen as an important starting point for this and is further discussed as part of wider context information that participants felt should be included to support the new Strategy.

3: Engage internal staff

Most participants felt that the existing Strategy was under-used across FRSs, and predicted that few staff knew about it. It was suggested that the new Strategy could be used to promote work with children and young people within FRSs. In particular, they felt that a strong and directive Strategy would rationalise the promotion of this work internally (and gain buy-in), and also provide them with justification for seeking internal funding and resources. This was also highlighted in the quantitative survey where out of the 36 interviewed, 31 respondents agreed that ‘a new Strategy must provide justification for seeking internal funding and resources’ (20 agreed strongly and 11 tended to agree).


Section 5 Content and focus of the strategy5.1 A number of overarching themes emerged in the key issues that participants

felt the new Strategy should take into account.

National leadership

5.2 It was felt that currently the FRSs involvement with children and young people lacked national leadership and guidance on notable practice for working with children and young people. Participants hoped that the new Strategy would provide more direction. The quantitative research concurred with the qualitative findings. Of the 36 interviewed, 35 agreed that ‘the new Strategy should demonstrate better leadership and provide clearer direction strategically’ (21 agreed strongly and 14 tended to agree).

5.3 It was thought that a national lead group should be put in place, and which either CLG or the Chief Fire Officers’ Association (CFOA) would be best placed to create and manage. Participants hoped that this group would provide a centre and focus for work with children and young people, whilst promoting the importance of the work and engagement with children and young people that FRSs currently deliver. Many respondents envisaged that a national lead group would not only add credence to and emphasise their roles to internal colleagues and partners, but provide an area where notable practice could be shared.

5.4 However, in the qualitative research, participants were keen to note that whilst the new Strategy should be strategically directional, it should provide scope for tailoring to local priorities, enabling choice in how the aims are delivered whilst encouraging innovation. These themes were again supported by the quantitative survey with 35 agreeing that the new Strategy ‘should permit innovation and allow for local priorities and needs’ (25 agreed strongly and 10 tended to agree), but also ‘demonstrate better leadership and provide clearer direction strategically’ (21 agreed strongly and 14 tended to agree).

Funding and resources

5.5 Across the focus groups, funding and resources were cited as key challenges in delivering work programmes with children and young people. Accessing funding through partner organisations was key but, as previously described, many FRSs felt that their lack of legislative powers was often a barrier in this regard. Participants felt that if the new Strategy were to promote the valuable engagement with children and young people that FRSs can deliver,


they would not only be better placed to access funding and resources through partners, but also internally.

5.6 In addition, it was noted that funding tended to be short-term, which made long-term planning very difficult. They found that this had an impact on staffing, with some members of staff being on temporary contracts resulting in high staff turn-over. This seemed to be particularly the case for uniformed staff who were seen as more likely to move on to another role after a couple of years in post. Some felt that this had a negative impact on relationships that staff had established with children and young people.

‘Especially with the uniform members, there’s such a high turn over of people. One thing young people like is continuity … but in [location] we have a very high turnover of people so that a young person might develop a positive relationship but then that person’s gone’

5.7 In addition to the potential lack of continuity, it was noted that new members of staff often came into a job role, picked up the work programmes and ran with them rather than reviewing and questioning the rationale behind them. In some cases this could perpetuate bad practice.

5.8 A further impact of short term funding was the difficulty in setting aside funds to train staff. Many participants were currently reliant on accessing training provided by partners, but noted that this was ad hoc and not ideal.

‘We’re all accessing bits and bobs from partner agencies, on partner agencies’ good will. But that’s not always appropriate training.’

5.9 This overall concern about funding was echoed in the quantitative research with 31 of the 36 interviewed agreeing that ‘a new Strategy must provide justification for seeking internal funding and resources’ (20 agreed strongly and 11 tended to agree).

Safeguarding

5.10 The implementation of appropriate arrangements to ensure the safety of children and young people who come into contact with the FRS was considered a priority by respondents. They felt strongly that the new Strategy should reflect the importance of safeguarding. All who participated in the quantitative survey agreed that ‘the new Strategy should support FRS by signposting to relevant safeguarding guidance and authorities’ (24 agreed strongly and 12 tended to agree).

5.11 Key issues for safeguarding were Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks and keeping personal details of children and young people secure.

‘We need to CRB check all our firefighters … to undertake youth work … you will need CRB checks to do that.’


‘What isn’t here [in the existing Strategy] for national guidance, is that you’re going to be holding really sensitive data … how are you going to organise it?’

5.12 Recent incidences such as the Baby Peter case in Haringey and the Victoria Climbie Inquiry had only served to highlight the importance of safeguarding.

5.13 It was thought that the following Acts and reports around safeguarding should be addressed in the new Strategy. Many of these stem from the Children Act 2004 and Every Child Matters:

• Local Safeguarding Children Boards4

• Working Together to Safeguard Children5

• The Protection of Children in England: A Progress Report by Lord Laming6.

Structure of the strategy

5.14 Across the qualitative research, improvements to the structure of the Strategy were suggested. Many felt that there was confusion regarding whether the main points in the existing Strategy were values, aims or standards. Many found the term ‘methods’ at odds with the points made under each aim. Participants found some of the current methods too vague and lacking guidance.

5.15 There was a preference for methods to be streamlined into stronger statements and objectives. It was envisaged that these would be backed up by a document detailing notable practice examples for delivering the aims.

5.16 Overall, it was suggested that the new Strategy should remain concise, and that its content should be directional, strengthening the current work with children and young people. It was felt that the new Strategy should be underpinned by supporting documents that detail: notable practice examples; an evaluation toolkit; relevant and up to date wider context.

Notable practice

5.17 There was a desire for the new Strategy to provide examples of notable practice endorsed by CLG/CFOA.

‘It [the Strategy] needs examples of best practice to show how its done and how its evaluated.’

4 http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/everychildmatters/safeguardingandsocialcare/safeguardingchildren/localsafeguardingchildrenboards/lscb/

5 http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/everychildmatters/resources-and-practice/IG00060/6 http://publications.everychildmatters.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/HC-330.pdf


5.18 Out of the 36 who participated in the quantitative survey, 31 agreed that ‘the new Strategy should provide examples of notable practice endorsed by CLG/CFOA’ (24 agreed strongly and seven tended to agree). Preferences for notable practice are fully discussed at Aim 6.

5.19 Similarly, the majority who participated in the quantitative survey also thought that notable practice examples in relation to engaging with other organisations were important. Out of the 36 interviewed, 34 agreed that the ‘new Strategy should give examples of how the FRS should engage with other bodies’ (20 agreed strongly and 14 tended to agree).

Evaluation

5.20 It was agreed that evaluation of work programmes was essential in ensuring that delivery is effective and efficient. This also had an impact on availability of funding, and it was felt that if evaluation showed that work programmes were effective, they would find it easier to renew or access further funding.

‘You have to be able to prove [the value that you deliver], and that can only be done by outcomes.’

5.21 Evaluation was also considered a key way to demonstrate to partners the value that the FRS can add when working with children and young people.

‘This new Strategy must contain an aim around evaluation because otherwise our credibility amongst our key partners is going to fall down.’

5.22 However, it was noted that there is a lack of national guidance regarding evaluation and current evaluation was ad hoc. A number of FRSs had developed/were developing evaluation tools but noted that it was often difficult to measure fire prevention outcomes. However, many used evaluation tools such as follow-ups and peer reviews. Others cited toolkits such as Community Safety Toolkits and Onset7 (Youth Justice Board), which were adapted to their purposes with mixed success. Participants suggested that the new Strategy include an evaluation toolkit and examples of how tools were being used successfully.

‘Some guidance on different ways of evaluating it [work programmes and initiatives]. If there’s a [Fire and Rescue] Service that have actually got it off the ground, how they go about it.’

5.23 These views were supported by practically all of the participants in the quantitative survey. Overall, 35 agreed that ‘the new Strategy should provide some guidance on best methods of evaluation or an evaluation toolkit’ (27 agreed strongly and eight tended to agree).

7 http://www.yjb.gov.uk/en-gb/practitioners/Assessment/Onset.htm


Wider context

5.24 Understanding the current climate and national goals for children and young people was seen as critical not only to delivering effective work programmes, but also key for working with and understanding partner organisations.

5.25 With this in mind it was felt that the ‘Wider Context’ section of the existing Strategy was important, but currently out of date.

5.26 It was agreed that most partner organisations look to deliver inline with goals and priorities defined in Every Child Matters and therefore the new Strategy must reference this.

‘I think we should be linking it straight away to Every Child Matters … that’s what everyone is working towards.’

‘You couldn’t design a [work] programme now without looking at the five goals of Every Child Matters … because that’s what everyone else is doing … everyone else will ask you, how does it fit in with Every Child Matters?’

5.27 Other goals and objectives discussed in the qualitative research included:

• National Indicators8

• Local Authority Agreements9

• Public Service Agreements10.

5.28 The need to link the FRS children and young people Strategy with other frameworks and work programmes was also seen as important in the quantitative research. All interviewed agreed that ‘the strategy should link with other important documents in the area of children and young people’ (32 strongly agreed and four tended to agree). Chart 3 provides details of the different strategies and guidance used by FRSs.

8 http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/localgovernment/finalnationalindicators9 http://www.communities.gov.uk/localgovernment/performanceframeworkpartnerships/localareaagreements/10 http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/about_the_cabinet_office/publicserviceagreements.aspx


Chart 3: Which other strategies or guidance documents do you use? (Q13)

Base: All who use other strategies or guidance when working with children and youngpeople (33) Please note chart shows actual number of respondents

Out of the 33 respondents who used other strategies or guidance documents when working with children and young people:

Every Child Matters

Safeguarding children

Children’s Act

County Council children and young people strategy

Youth Matters

National Community Safety Plan

Child Trust documents

Lord Laming

Integrated Youth Support Services

Children and Young People Plan

1

2

2

2

4

4

5

7

10

20

5.29 Every Child Matters, the strategy referred to by the most respondents (20), sets out five outcomes in relation to children and young people. Respondents were asked whether these outcomes should be supported by the new Strategy. Chart 4 indicates the levels of agreement with these five outcomes amongst FRSs. The least likely outcome to be supported was economic well being; 23 participants thought that the new Strategy should support this outcome.

Chart 4: The ECM strategy sets out 5 outcomes. Which, if any, of these outcomes do you think should be supported the Children and Young People strategy? (Q14)

Economic well being

Enjoy and achieve

Make a contribution

Be healthy

Stay safe



23

31

31

31

36


5.30 While it was felt important to understand the context around working with children and young people, they also observed that this type of information quickly becomes out of date. Therefore, it was suggested that any ‘wider context’ element of the new Strategy should be regarded as a living document added to when appropriate by a specific group (such as the national lead mentioned earlier within this report). This concept of a living document was also given support in the quantitative phase. Out of the 36 who took part in the quantitative research, 29 agreed that ‘the wider context section, while useful, is soon out of date so would need to be provided as necessary rather than in the Strategy itself’ (11 agreed strongly and 18 tended to agree).

5.31 In addition to reference of relevant acts, reports, indicators and agreements, it was felt that the new Strategy needed to be clear on the boundaries of the role of the FRS within the field of working with children and young people. Many sought clarification regarding when they should be working with children and young people, and when any activity should be referred to another agency. This was particularly in reference to working with vulnerable children and young people. While it was considered likely that these were the types of children and young people that FRSs would engage with due to their likely involvement in anti-social behaviour (including firesetting), some sought clarification for when another agency or specialist should be involved.

‘Sometimes you get referrals through where kids have been through a lot, including child protection issues and so on. And you think, firesetting is just a symptom of their problems. It’s mental health issues. That’s not really firesetting.’

5.32 It is also worth noting that a half (18) of those who participated in the quantitative research did not think the existing Strategy document provided them with sufficient pointers as to where they can get help in dealing with children and young people.

5.33 Attitudes and practice for working with vulnerable children and young people tended to differ across FRSs and was often dependent on:

• FundingSome FRSs used funding to employ specialist members of staff to work with vulnerable children and young people.

• PartnersSome FRSs worked with partners in engaging vulnerable young people. For these, the partners often determined the boundaries of the work programmed delivered. For example, one FRS delivered sexual health education as part of a long work programme for young people, on which a local health group was a partner.


5.34 In relation to the boundaries of the role of the FRS, the following two points were also raised:

• there was some discussion around the lack of definition of ‘children and young people’ within the existing Strategy and it was suggested that this could be clarified in the new Strategy

• some noted that road traffic collisions were a key priority for their local area and felt that this should be addressed in the new Strategy.


Section 6 Strategy aims6.1 Feedback for each aim in the existing Strategy was gathered and is provided

below.

Aim 1


6.2 Participants in the qualitative research felt that Aim 1 was essential to the work carried out among children and young people across FRSs; it was considered a core role. This was supported by the quantitative data; out of the 36 interviewed, 35 thought it was appropriate that the FRS should be trying to implement this aim.

6.3 However, many were keen that the new Strategy place an emphasis on engaging both safely and appropriately with children and young people. Many felt that ensuring safe engagement with children and young people should be addressed through a standardised approach to CRB checks, recruitment processes and staff training. This is fully explored at Aim 5.

6.4 Appropriateness of engagement was a concern for some, with many seeking clarification regarding the boundaries of responsibility for the FRS. Participants were keen that engagement is carried out to a high standard, but felt that there were potential areas of FRS work where required skills sets were not currently present within the FRS. With this in mind, many were wary of engaging with children and young people outside of their comfort zone. Reassurances and national guidance were sought regarding the boundaries of their work.

6.5 In addition to engaging with children and young people, some respondents raised the importance of engaging with parents as well as relevant organisations and agencies and felt that this aim could reflect this.

6.6 Finally, it was observed that consulting with children and young people was an activity also undertaken by many of their partner organisations. They felt that the new Strategy should reflect this by acknowledging specific consultation activities such as participation strategies, and use language that reflected the way in which partner organisations discuss engagement and consultation.


Aim 2


6.7 This was felt to be a core role of the FRS. Both the qualitative and quantitative research bore this out. The vast majority of those interviewed (35) reported it was very appropriate that the FRS should be trying to implement this aim.

6.8 However, concerns were raised with regard to vulnerable children and young people. It was noted that children and young people likely to be involved in or at risk of fire crime and firesetting were likely to be vulnerable. With this in mind, they queried whether FRS staff had the appropriate training and experience to deal with the issues that these children and young people may have. Again, they sought clarification regarding the boundaries of their role, and where another agency should be referred to. Alternatively they wanted information regarding quality assured training for staff for working with vulnerable children and young people, and details for any funding available for this.

6.9 The importance of safeguarding was also raised here as was the need for a standardised risk assessment, particularly when working with vulnerable children and young people.

6.10 Finally, there was some comment that the new Strategy should refer to the Contact Point11 database, which provides services with contact details for other organisations currently working with individual young people.

Aim 3


6.11 Some participants queried whether the Fire Service Youth Training Association cited in the Strategy still existed.

6.12 Many of the methods at Aim 3 referred to partners and this led to discussion around partnership working. In particular, participants noted that in order to gain more involvement in integrated service delivery they needed more status, which they felt could be gained if they had a strong and directive Strategy to back up their role and activities.

6.13 In response to the mention of education at method 6, some highlighted issues regarding the role of the FRS in providing education in schools. This was considered to be a mainstream activity although some raised difficulties

11 http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/everychildmatters/strategy/deliveringservices1/contactpoint/contactpoint/


that they had experienced when approaching schools, as schools found it difficult to find time in the curriculum for FRS visits. They found that their role within schools tended to be targeted (focusing on specific year groups) whereas they felt that a more generic approach to information provision would be more effective. However, they felt that the existing Strategy did not provide adequate support for this and hoped that the new Strategy would make it clear that the FRS had a key role to play in school education.

6.14 Overall, the quantitative survey supported the qualitative research on this theme. Out of 36 interviewed, 34 indicated that it was very appropriate that the FRS should be trying to implement this aim. There was a view that there are considerable overlaps between Aims 2 and 3, and that these aims could possibly be combined in the future Strategy.

Aim 4


6.15 Educating children and young people in fire safety skills and responsible citizenship was considered a core role within the remit of the FRSs. Out of the 36 who undertook the quantitative interview, 35 thought it was very appropriate that FRSs should implement this aim.

6.16 Educating via schools was considered a mainstream activity amongst respondents and they felt that access to schools and similar partners were key to the effective delivery of this aim. As discussed above, they hoped that a new Strategy would strengthen this activity. Many noted that personal, social and health education (PSHE) becoming compulsory should be seen as an opportunity for the FRS to increase their amount of in-school activity. Some discussed ways in which FRS activities could be linked to other areas of the curriculum and felt that it would be important to develop this in the future to increase engagement with children and young people.

6.17 One respondent suggested that in-school activities could be carried out by a multi-agency team that was seconded to deliver education. They envisaged that among the agencies involved, the FRS and the Police would play a key role. They felt that a multi-agency approach would be useful in ensuring quality, and in reacting to the expected increase of in-school requirements when PSHE becomes compulsory.

6.18 A small number of participants mentioned the Fire Safety Education Programme and the school resources that it provided. These were positively received, and it was suggested that there was scope to build on this and provide a wider variety of resources to be shared across FRSs.

‘The resources that they produced for education, there is some really good quality stuff in there … it came from the centre, it’s there and you can use it, we just need more of the same, I think, to support us.’


6.19 Ensuring that operational staff were trained and prepared to engage with children and young people was seen as important in delivering this aim. Some discussed problems that they had encountered when engaging operational staff in children and young people activities; some operational staff felt that this type of engagement was not part of their role. It was suggested that including engagement with children and young people as part of FF1 of the firefighter role map, which outlines the skills required as a firefighter, would help to alleviate this issue.

6.20 The issue of the boundaries of the FRS role also emerged when discussing this aim, particularly in reference to educating children and young people in responsible citizenship. Some felt that responsible citizenship was a broad field and were concerned that by covering elements of this they could spread their resources too thinly. While they agreed that they could contribute towards the education of responsible citizenship through diversion programmes etc. they did not feel that it should be a specific responsibility; they felt that fire safety skills should take precedence.

6.21 Finally, some participants queried whether the National Community Fire Safety Centre still existed.

Aim 5


6.22 The majority (34) reported it was very appropriate that the FRS should implement this aim. During the focus groups it was agreed that guidance for meeting this aim was required and that it should address CRB checks and staff training and development.

6.23 Participants sought guidance regarding CRB checks. They felt that the current position on this (FRS staff do not require a CRB check) needed to be addressed urgently. It was widely thought that all staff should be CRB checked, and that there should be plans made for the introduction of Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) procedures and processes. It was suggested that guidance for CRB checks should include clarification for who does or does not require a CRB check, procedures for carrying out checks, identification of who is responsible for organising checks (some suggested human resources), and who should fund the checks. There was a strong concern that continuing without CRB checks was risky, and that this should be addressed as a priority.

6.24 The topic of staff training and development generated much discussion. Current training provision was considered ad hoc and patchy. Whilst many wanted more training for staff, they felt that they did not receive adequate guidance or funding from CLG or the existing Strategy regarding quality assured courses. As discussed earlier, many felt that they were dependent on asking partner organisations to deliver training to their staff but noted that


this was not always possible, and queried whether the training was quality assured. They sought national recommendations on training standards and a greater emphasis placed on the importance of staff training and development.

‘If the Fire and Rescue Service wants people to be professional, it needs to set national standards for training.’

‘We train with what we think is the best provider, but we don’t have a standard. We are all using different providers. I would like to see a national direction for how we train firefighters in working with children and young people.’

6.25 It was suggested that the new Strategy strengthen its stance and guidance in this matter. They felt that this could be backed up by the inclusion of engagement with children and young people in role maps (FF1); and suggestions and support for accredited courses for staff to work towards.

‘A lot of firefighters are saying that’s not my job … it is, but we’re not giving them the skills to do it.’

6.26 It was also suggested the Integrated Personnel Development System should be aligned to the work undertaken with children and young people.

Aim 6


6.27 It was felt that there is not currently enough sharing of notable practice, but that the new Strategy could emphasise and encourage this. This was supported by the quantitative survey where out of 36 interviewed, 35 thought that it was appropriate (25 very appropriate and ten fairly appropriate) that the FRS should be trying to implement this aim.

6.28 Participants were keen to share current practices and were eager to hear what other FRSs were currently doing.

6.29 It was noted that notable practice examples would be particularly useful for FRSs with a small number of staff, as they could tailor them for their own FRS, and save ‘reinventing the wheel’.

6.30 However, there was discussion regarding who should be responsible for collating and disseminating notable practice. It was agreed that this should be nationally led and some envisaged that there would be a national group put in place to coordinate this (as well as manage other aspects of the new Strategy). Some suggested that CFOA assume this role but that practitioners should also be involved to develop a ‘centre of excellence’ or similar. It was suggested that this be supported by regional groups.


‘I would like to see this document be more assertive in the need for a regional approach... because you do share best practice, we share our problems, we share our concerns, we’re beginning to come up with solutions with each other.’

6.31 It was envisaged that this nationally led group would have a website where notable practice examples could be shared.


Section 7 Conclusions and considerations

Summary and conclusions

Role of the Strategy

7.1 The research indicated that there was a high level of awareness and usage of the Strategy among those interviewed. The quantitative survey found that most (32 out of 36) were aware of the existing Strategy and were using it. Qualitative and quantitative research indicated that the existing Strategy was typically used as a document to support existing work programmes and initiatives. Respondents agreed that the existing Strategy had been a good starting point for working with children and young people in 2006 but was now out of date, and required revision.

7.2 The qualitative research found three main themes in terms of respondents’ preferences for the future role of the Strategy. The new Strategy should:

• clarify and justify the role of the FRS within the field of children and young people

– respondents advocated the importance of a strong and directional Strategy which clearly identified where the FRS can deliver valuable engagement

• encourage and facilitate partnership working.

– Partnership working was considered a mainstream activity by participants, who felt that the new Strategy had scope to provide them with a powerful tool for partnership working.

• engage internal staff.

– There was a desire for the new Strategy to promote work with children and young people among staff in FRSs.

Content and focus of the Strategy

7.3 The research identified a number of themes in terms of the desired content of the new Strategy.

7.4 It was felt that, currently, FRSs involvement with children and young people lacked national leadership and guidance on notable practice. Participants hoped that the new Strategy would provide more direction, whilst providing scope for tailoring to local priorities.

7.5 Funding and resources were cited as key challenges in delivering work programmes for children and young people. Participants felt that if the new


Strategy were to promote the value that FRSs can add to engagement with children and young people, they would be better placed to access funding and resources. This was echoed in the quantitative research.

7.6 Safeguarding was considered a priority by participants and they felt strongly that the new Strategy should reflect the importance of this.

7.7 Overall, it was suggested that the Strategy should remain concise, and that its content should be directional, strengthening the current work with children and young people. It was felt that the new Strategy should be underpinned by supporting documents that detail notable practice examples, an evaluation toolkit, and an updated wider context section. In addition, there was a desire for the new Strategy to provide examples of notable practice endorsed by CLG/CFOA.

7.8 Understanding the current climate and national goals for children and young people was seen as critical to not only delivering effective work programmes, but also key for working with and understanding partner organisations. There was a need, therefore, to link the new Strategy with other organisations’ frameworks and work programmes, where possible.

Strategy aims

7.9 The research gathered detailed comment on each of the Strategy aims.

Aim 1


7.10 This aim was essential to the work carried out among children and young people across FRSs. Appropriateness of engagement was a concern, however, and clarification was sought regarding the boundaries of responsibility of the FRS.

Aim 2


7.11 This was felt to be a core role of the FRS. However, concerns were raised with regards to vulnerable children and young people. As with Aim 1, clarification was sought with regard to the boundaries of the FRS role, and where cases should be referred to another agency. Information was sought regarding quality assured training for staff who work with vulnerable children and young people.


Aim 3


7.12 This was considered to be a mainstream activity although some raised difficulties they had experienced when approaching schools, who often experience difficulty in finding time in the curriculum for FRS visits. It was hoped that the new Strategy would make it clear that the FRS has a key role to play in school education. It was also felt that as Aims 2 and 3 were very similar, they should be merged.

Aim 4


7.13 This was considered a core role within the remit of the FRS, and it was hoped that the new Strategy would strengthen this activity.

Aim 5


7.14 It was felt strongly that this was essential to the work carried out with children and young people, although participants sought guidance regarding CRB checks. It was suggested that the new Strategy strengthen its stance and guidance in this matter.

Aim 6


7.15 It was felt that there is not currently enough sharing of notable practice, but that the new Strategy could emphasise and encourage this. It was envisaged that a nationally led group would have a website where notable practice examples could be shared.


Considerations emerging from the research

7.16 Across the research it was clear that participants hoped that the revised Strategy would deliver a number of benefits to the interaction and engagement work that FRSs undertake with children and young people. The following issues were raised for consideration:

National lead group

7.17 Many felt that, currently, FRS work with children and young people lacked national leadership and direction. It was thought that a national lead group should be put in place, and felt that either CLG or CFOA would be best placed to create and manage this group. They hoped that this group would provide a centre and focus for work with children and young people, while promoting the importance of the work and engagement with children and young people that FRSs currently deliver. Many participants envisaged that a national lead group would not only add credence to and emphasise their roles to internal colleagues and partners, but provide an area where notable practice could be shared.

Directional and broad Strategy

7.18 Participants desire a concise directional Strategy that provides strong values that reinforce the current valuable engagement that FRSs carry out with children and young people. However, it is important that the new Strategy enables FRSs to have choice over delivery, and scope for ongoing innovation.

7.19 It was clear that some FRSs sought clarification of the remit of their work. It was suggested that the new Strategy signposts to relevant agencies, partners and specialists that FRSs could refer to.

Promote partnership working

7.20 The importance of partnership working emerged strongly across the research. Partnership working was directly linked to funding and ensuring that FRSs engage appropriately and effectively with children and young people. It was considered essential that the Strategy not only identifies the FRS as a delivery partner, but also reflects the ways in which partners work. Inclusion of partner goals such as Every Child Matters and National Indicators was seen as vital.

7.21 For some FRSs, ideas for potential partners and related funding streams was seen as a valuable resource that could be included in the revised Strategy.

Support the Strategy

7.22 Whilst preferences were for a short and direct Strategy document, participants see great value in supporting documents for notable practice, an evaluation toolkit, and a living wider context that is updated when relevant. Again, this was seen as something that a national lead group could take ownership and responsibility for. It was felt that sharing this type of


information would be critical to engaging with partners in the future and help secure funding.

7.23 In addition to creation of supporting documents, many participants were keen to know about any existing groups and resources.

Guidance for staff training and safeguarding

7.24 Finally, it was clear that FRSs sought guidance for appropriate and accredited staff training, and processes for safeguarding. This was seen as key to ensuring that staff engage appropriately and safely with children and young people. It was suggested that the new Strategy reflect this need, and that a national lead group should ensure that FRSs were kept up to date with any future requirements.


Appendix Telephone in-depth interview discussion guide

Teledepth discussion guide: FRS Strategy

Objectives:

• Establish the level of awareness of the Strategy within the FRS;

• Understand how the Strategy is being used

• Evaluate the content of the current Strategy, in particular whether its aims are still the most appropriate and relevant, and thoughts on the usefulness of its ‘wider context’ section

• To establish how a new strategy should be developed, such as whether the current Strategy is missing any information.

Teledepth Summary

Time Item

5 minutes Introductions

10 minutes Current use of the Strategy

How the Strategy affects work programmes/initiatives in your FRS

35 minutes Evaluating the Strategy content and identifying improvements

Looking at the Strategy aims in detail and how these could be developed for the future

5 minutes Improvements summary

Overall improvements that would like to see made to the future Strategy

5 minutes Summary and Close

Please note: given the number of aims to be covered in the teledepth it may not be possible to discuss each aim in each teledepth. However, we will cover all of the aims across the teledepths as a whole.


1. Introductions 5 mins

(Aim: to introduce participant to the research)

Moderator introduction:

• Thank participant for taking part in the research

• Introduce self, GfK NOP, explain purpose for research:

• In February, representatives from the Chief Officers Association (CFOA) and CLG met with the Communities Secretary’s panel of Young Advisors (from across the country) to discuss the Children and Young People’s Strategy. Following this, CLG is gathering views from fire and rescue services to evaluate the existing Strategy and to inform the development of the next one.

• Check, and thank them for completing the pre-task. Moderator: ensure the participant refers to their pre-task answers during the teledepth

• Reassure: We are independent researchers. Please feel free to be as honest as possible. Your perspective is really important to us.

• Discussion will last for 1 hour and it will be recorded for the purpose of the research.

• Ensure participant has a copy of the Strategy with them.

Participant introduction:

• Name

• FRS and job role, length of time in job role

• What are your main priorities/challenges of working with children and young people in your local area at the moment?

• How have these priorities changed over the last few years?

• What do you anticipate your priorities will be in the future?

2. Current use of the Strategy 10 mins

(Aim: to gather overall views of the Strategy and understand how the Strategy is being used)

• What are your general thoughts about the Strategy?

– What are its main strengths?

– What are its main weaknesses?

• In what ways has the Strategy affected the work programmes/initiatives for children and young people in your FRS?

– How has the Strategy been used within your FRS?


• What initiatives has the Strategy prompted within your FRS?

– How has it contributed towards initiatives for fire crime and anti-social behaviour?

– How has it contributed towards initiatives for accidental injury and death?

• How has/does the Strategy affect the way in which your FRS develops local partnerships?

• Overall, how relevant is the Strategy to the work you do in your FRS?

– Why?

– Why not/what would make it more relevant?

3. Evaluating the Strategy content and identifying improvements 35 mins

(Aim: to explore the content of the Strategy and investigate relevance, appropriateness for today, and usefulness of the ‘wider context’ section and to identify ways in which the new Strategy can be developed/what it should include)

Moderator: Ask participants to refer to their copy of the Strategy.

• I’d like to spend some time looking at the aims of the Strategy in detail:

– Aim 1: Engage actively with children and young people

– Aim 2: Prevent and reduce fire crime and firesetting by children and young people

– Aim 3: Divert children and young people from fire crime and associated anti-social behaviour

– Aim 4: Educate children and young people in fire safety skills and responsible citizenship

– Aim 5: Ensure that Fire and Rescue Service staff working with children and young people are effective and professional

– Aim 6: Identify and disseminate good practice in working with children and young people

– Wider Context

Overall, which aims do you think are:

• Most relevant to your FRS? Why?

• Least relevant to your FRS? Why?

Moderator: For each aim and wider context ask the following questions. Please note that the order that the aims are shown should be rotated.


• I’d like us to look at aims one at a time – for each aim I’d like you to read through it and make a note of your thoughts. Moderator, once participant has read through the aim ask the following:

• What are your initial thoughts?

• Any surprises?

– Is there anything that you didn’t expect to see as part of this aim?

– Is there anything missing from this aim?

• Is it relevant?

– Is it relevant to your local FRS and your priorities?

– Is it relevant for National priorities?

• Is it appropriate?

– Is it appropriate for the types of priorities and challenges that your FRS has with children and young people today?

– Will it still be appropriate in the next 2 years?

• How does it work in practice?

– How have you used this aim in your local FRS? What initiatives or activities has it prompted?

– How has this aim affected partnership working?

• What improvements would you like to see made to this?

– To make it relevant for your FRS today and in the future?

4. Improvements summary 5 mins

(Aim: identify ways in which the new Strategy can be developed/what it should include)

• Having looked at all of the aims, what are the key improvements that you think need to be made to the Strategy?

– Why will these be beneficial?

Moderator: If any existing aims remain largely intact, and participant would like to see these remain in the future Strategy ask:

• Are there any specific ‘tweaks’ that are needed to optimise this aim?

5. Summary and close 5 mins

(Aim: to round up the discussion and thank participant for their input)

• Finally, how has the Strategy been most useful for your FRS?


• What one change would you make to the Strategy to improve it for the future?

• Any questions?

Thank and close


Focus group discussion guide

Focus Group Discussion Guide: FRS Strategy

Objectives:

• Establish the level of awareness of the Strategy within the FRS

• Understand how the Strategy is being used

• Evaluate the content of the current Strategy, in particular whether its aims are still the most appropriate and relevant, and thoughts on the usefulness of its ‘wider context’ section

• To establish how a new strategy should be developed, such as whether the current Strategy is missing any information

• To identify people to take part in case study interviews.

Focus Group Agenda

Time Agenda Item

10 minutes Introductions

Getting to know each other

15 minutes Current use of the Strategy

How the Strategy affects work programmes/initiatives in your FRS

90 minutes Evaluating the Strategy content

Looking at the Strategy aims in detail

5 minutes Break

25 minutes Improving the Strategy

How can the Strategy be developed and improved for the future?

5 minutes Summary and Close


1. Introductions 10 mins

(Aim: to introduce participants to the research and to each other)

Moderator introduction:

• Thank everyone for taking part in the research

• Introduce self, GfK NOP, explain purpose for research:

– In February representatives from the Chief Fire Officers’ Association (CFOA) and CLG met with the Communities Secretary’s panel of Young Advisors (from across the country) to discuss the Children and Young People Strategy. Following this CLG is gathering views from fire and rescue services to evaluate the existing Strategy and to inform the development of the next one.

• Check, and thank them for completing the pre-task. Moderator: ensure that participants refer to their pre-task answers during the workshop

• Reassure: We are independent researchers. Please feel free to be as honest as possible. Your perspective is really important to us.

• Discussion will last for 2.5 hours and it will be recorded for the purpose of the research.

• Ask people to turn off mobile phones

• We will be taking a break but please also feel free to take a comfort break, get a tea or coffee or stretch your legs as we go along.

• Introduce the agenda (see above)

• Pass around copies of the Strategy for those who have not brought one.

Participant introductions:

• Round robin: everyone to introduce themselves including:

– Name

– FRS and job role, length of time in job role

• What are your main priorities/challenges of working with children and young people in your local area at the moment?

– How have these priorities changed over the last few years?

– What do you anticipate your priorities will be in the future?

2. Current use of the Strategy 15 mins

(Aim: to gather overall views of the Strategy and understand how the Strategy is being used)

• What are your general thoughts about the Strategy?

– What are its main strengths?


– What are its main weaknesses?

• In what ways has the Strategy affected the work programmes/initiatives for children and young people in your FRS?

– How has the Strategy been used within your FRS?

• What initiatives has the Strategy prompted within your FRS?

– How has it contributed towards initiatives for fire crime and anti-social behaviour?

– How has it contributed towards initiatives for accidental injury and death?

• How has/does the Strategy affect the way in which your FRS develops local partnerships?

• Overall, how relevant is the Strategy to the work you do in your FRS?

– Why?

– Why not/what would make it more relevant?

3. Evaluating the Strategy content 90 mins

(Aim: to explore the content of the Strategy and investigate relevance, appropriateness for today, and usefulness of the ‘wider context’ section)

Moderator: please note there is 10 minutes for introducing this section, and 10–12 minutes for discussion of each aim. Ask participants to refer to their copy of the Strategy.

• I’d like to spend some time looking at the aims of the Strategy in detail:

– Aim 1: Engage actively with children and young people

– Aim 2: Prevent and reduce fire crime and firesetting by children and young people

– Aim 3: Divert children and young people from fire crime and associated anti-social behaviour

– Aim 4: Educate children and young people in fire safety skills and responsible citizenship

– Aim 5: Ensure that Fire and Rescue Service staff working with children and young people are effective and professional

– Aim 6: Identify and disseminate good practice in working with children and young people

– Wider Context.

Moderator: For each aim and wider context ask the following questions. Please note that the order that the aims are shown should be rotated – see appendix.


• I’m going to give you a copy of an aim and I’d like you to read through it and make a note of your thoughts. Please think about the following:

– Any surprises?

- Is there anything that you didn’t expect to see as part of this aim?

- Is there anything missing from this aim?

– Is it relevant?

- Is it relevant to your local FRS and your priorities?

- Is it relevant for National priorities?

– Is it appropriate?

- Is it appropriate for the types of priorities and challenges that your FRS has with children and young people today?

- Will it still be appropriate in the next 2 years?

– How does it work in practice?

- How have you used this aim in your local FRS? What initiatives or activities has it prompted?

- How has this aimed affect partnership working?

Moderator: each participant is given a copy of the aim and 3 minutes to make their notes. Following this discuss their notes and thoughts and summarise the discussion with the following question:

– Overall, how useful is this aim? Why/why not?

4. Break 5 mins

• Comfort break

5. Improvements to the Strategy 25 mins

(Aim: identify ways in which the new Strategy can be developed/what it should include)

• I’d like to think about how the Strategy can be developed and improved for the future. To do this, everyone will need some post-it notes.

Moderator, stress that they do not have to work within the constraints of the existing 6 aims – they may want to create new ones.

• Moderator: explain brain writing exercise:

• You have 3 minutes to write as many ideas as you can for how you’d like to see the Strategy developed in the future. You might like to think about


how it could be improved, what you think is currently missing, what other information would be useful and how it could be a better fit for your FRS.

• After 3 minutes everyone will put their post-it notes in the middle of the table in a large piece of paper. You then have another 3 minutes to build on other peoples’ ideas. You should pick out other peoples’ post-it notes and build on their idea. You are not allowed to criticise their idea, but you do need to develop it and add to it.

• After this we’ll come back together to look at all of the post-it notes.

• Moderator: following post-it notes, all of the post-it notes should be grouped on the paper – participants should do this by putting post-it notes into groups that best make sense to them. Post-it notes and ideas will be discussed as they are grouped, and new ideas/post-it notes can be added during this process. Each group should then be given a label/name.

• Now that we’ve grouped our ideas I’d like you to think about which 3 ideas you think should be taken forward.

– Moderator: each participant is given 3 stickers which they can attribute to the 3 groups that they would like to prioritise (each participant can give maximum 1 sticker to any one group). Participants are asked to explain their choices.

– Moderator: If any existing aims remain largely intact, and participant would like to see these remain in the future Strategy ask:

- Are there any specific ‘tweaks’ that are needed to optimise this aim?

6. Summary and close 5 mins

(Aim: to round up the discussion and thank participants for their input)

• Finally, can I ask you each the following questions:

– How has the Strategy been most useful for your FRS?

– What one change would you make to the Strategy to improve it for the future?

• Any questions?

• Explain that we will be re-contacting people to participate in another stage of research which will involve a face-to-face interview at their place of work. Pass around information sheet to get permission to re-contact participants.

Thank and close


Quantitative telephone questionnaireGood morning/afternoon. My name is … from GfK NOP Research. We are conducting research on behalf of Communities and Local Government amongst the members of staff responsible for fire crime, accidental fire deaths and youth work.

QA. Is the member of staff responsible for <fire crime and youth work/accidental fire deaths and youth work> currently available?/Can I speak to (NAME)?

Yes – CONTINUE

No – ARRANGE A GOOD TIME TO CALL BACK OR GET A MORE RELEVANT PHONE NUMBER

ONCE THROUGH TO RESPONDENT

Good morning/afternoon. My name is … from GfK NOP Research. We are conducting research on behalf of Communities and Local Government amongst the members of staff responsible for fire crime, accidental fire deaths and youth work. We are interested in finding out your views on the Fire and Rescue Service Strategy for working with Children and Young People 2006–2010.

QB. The survey will take approximately 15 minutes. Is this a convenient time to conduct the survey or should I call back later?

Convenient now – CONTINUE

Call back later – MAKE APPOINTMENT

OC. Can you confirm, are you the person/one of the people within your FRS who is responsible for the ‘working with Children and young people strategy’?

Yes

No – could you please put me through to the person who is responsible for ‘working with Children and young people strategy’

QD And which of the following areas do you work in? READ OUT AND SINGLE CODE

Fire Crime

Accidental Fire Deaths

Fire Crime and Accidental Fire Deaths

None of these – could you please put me through to someone who is responsible for fire crime and/or accidental fire deaths and youth strategy


Q1. To what extent are you familiar with the Strategy for Children and Young People 2006–2010 produced by CLG for use by the Fire Service? Are you. READ OUT

Very familiar with it

Fairly familiar with it

Not very familiar with it – ASK IF ANYONE ELSE WHO DOES KNOW ABOUT IT IS AVAILABLE

Don’t know about it – ASK IF ANYONE ELSE WHO DOES KNOW ABOUT IT IS AVAILABLE

IF VERY OR FAIRLY FAMILIAR

Q2. In the last 2 to 3 months have you taken part in some research on the Strategy, either in a focus group or via another telephone interview by GfK NOP?

Yes

No

IF YES

Q3. Thinking back to before that research took place how familiar were you with the Strategy then? Would you say your were… READ OUT

Very familiar with it

Fairly familiar with it

Not very familiar with it

Didn’t know about it

ASK ALL

Q4. Do members of staff from your fire service currently .. READ OUT

Visit schools

Run a youth scheme

Run a youth offender programme

Engage with partners who run a youth scheme

Engage with children or young people in any other way (SPEC)

Yes


No

DK

FOR EACH OF CODES 1–3 ‘NO’ ASK

Q5. Why don’t you (ANSWER TO Q4)? PROBE TO PRECODE

IF NO TO ALL AT Q4

Q6. Why not? PROBE TO PRECODE

Not enough staff

No funding/money

No trained personnel

No time

Not part of the FRS’ job

No need of it

Don’t know how to do it

Other (spec)

IF NO TO ALL AT Q4

Q7 Have you ever run or taken part in youth programmes?

Yes I have run youth programme

Yes I have taken part in a youth programme

Both

Neither

DK

IF YES TO ANY AT Q4.

Q8. In planning ways to engage with young people or children how much reference did you make to the Strategy for Children and Young People 2006–2010? READ OUT

A great deal

A fair amount

Not very much


Not at all

IF FAIRLY OR VERY FAMILIAR AT Q1

Q9. Overall how useful do you think the current Strategy is in helping you to work with young people and children? READ OUT

Very useful

Fairly useful

Not very useful

Not useful at all

DK

Q10. The Strategy sets out a number of ways to deal with children and young people in order to achieve the aims of the strategy. Do you think that you will be able to use this strategy to work with children and young people?

Yes

No

DK

Q11. If you currently use the Strategy document, what is it used for? READ OUT. CODE TO PRECODES

Setting up partnerships

Working with children’s Trusts

Working with Integrated Youth Support Services

Getting funding for youth schemes

For guidance on how to work with young people

To set targets/plan work with young people

Framework for your own strategy

For reference

Other (spec)

I don’t currently use it at all


Q12 Are there any other strategies or guidance documents that you use when working with children and young people?

Yes

No

Don’t know

IF YES at Q12

Q13 Which other strategies or guidance documents do you use? DO NOT READ OUT

Children and Young People Plan (CYPP)

The national framework for children, young people and maternity services

National Community Safety Plan

Every Child Matters (ECM)

Youth Matters

Lord Laming

Integrated Youth Support Services

Children’s Act

Child Trust documents

County Council children and young people strategy

Safeguarding children

Other (specify)

Don’t know

Q14. The Every Child Matters Strategy set out five outcomes. These are to be healthy, to stay safe, to enjoy and achieve, to make a contribution and to achieve economic well being. Which, if any, of these outcomes do you think should be supported by the Children and Young People Strategy? READ OUT AND CODE ALL THAT APPLY

Be healthy

Stay safe

Enjoy and achieve

Make a contribution


Economic well being

None of these

DK

Q15. Thinking in more detail about the Strategy for Children and Young People 2006–2010, as you may remember it has 6 aims. For each of the aims I’d like you to tell me how appropriate you think it is for today’s Fire and Rescue Service to be trying to implement them. For each aim please tell me whether you think it is very appropriate, fairly appropriate, not very appropriate or not appropriate at all that the FRS takes a role in implementing them. READ OUT

1. Engage actively with young people

2. Prevent and reduce fire crime and fire setting by children and young people

3. Divert children and young people from fire crime and associated anti-social behaviour

4. Educate children and young people in fire safety skills and responsible citizenship

5. Ensure that Fire and Rescue Service staff working with children and young people are effective and professional

6. Identify and disseminate good practice in working with children and young people

Very appropriate

Fairly appropriate

Not very appropriate

Not at all appropriate

Don’t know

Q16. Do you think the Strategy document provides you with sufficient pointers as to where to get help with dealing with children and young people?

Yes

No

DK


Q17. Do you think the current Strategy is now in need of revision and updating or is it fine as it is?

Needs revision

Is fine as it is

DK

Q18. As I mentioned earlier some previous research has been undertaken with members of staff of Fire and Rescue Services about the Strategy and how it can be improved. At the moment we have individual ideas about how it could be made more useful. We would like now to put those ideas to everyone to see how much agreement there is with each. For each that I read out please tell me if you agree strongly, tend to agree, neither agree nor disagree, tend to disagree or disagree strongly that it would make the Strategy document more useful. READ OUT

The new Strategy should demonstrate better leadership and provide clearer direction strategically

The new Strategy should support FRS by signposting to relevant safeguarding guidance and authorities.

A new Strategy should give examples of how the FRS should engage with other bodies working with children and young people.

It will only work if it is promoted sufficiently to get buy in from key partners.

A new Strategy must provide justification for seeking internal funding and resources.

The Strategy should provide examples of good practice endorsed by CLG/CFOA

The Strategy should provide some guidance on the best methods of evaluation or an evaluation toolkit.

he Wider Context section, while useful, is soon out of date so would need to be provided as necessary rather than in the Strategy itself.

There should be clearer guidance from the Strategy on appropriate training for working with children and young people.

It should permit innovation and allow scope for local priorities and needs.

The Strategy should link with other important documents in the area of children and young people for example Every Child Matters, Local Area Agreements and national indicators.

Agree strongly


Tend to agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Tend to disagree

Disagree strongly

DK

Q19 To what extent would you support or oppose your fire service being involved in local partnerships to take forward the Children and Young People Strategy?

Support strongly

Tend to support

Tend to oppose

Oppose strongly

DK

Q20. In addition to the things I’ve already mentioned are there other ways you think the current Strategy could be improved?

Open

evaluation of the children and young people strategy 2006

Documents