Whole Family Wellbeing Funding (WFWF) - year 1 process evaluation: final report

3 Scottish Government approach to funding, allocation, distribution and support

This section explores the Scottish Government’s role in supporting in the administration and delivery of the WFWF. It draws on data from initial plans, WFWF progress templates for Annual Reports 2022-23, and qualitative interviews with strategic leads and local WFWF leads held in November and December 2022 and June to August 2023.

Key findings

• All interviewed strategic leads and local WFWF leads shared the Scottish Government’s vision for WFWF. They valued the innovative opportunity presented to develop their holistic whole family support, the autonomy they had to tailor spending to local needs, and the flexibility of the funding to scale up existing support or create new offers.
• Although case study strategic leads and local WFWF leads agreed that Scottish Government provided the required information on Year 1 of the funding, they would have liked more information on spending criteria, allocation of funding and funding milestones communicated in one document and earlier in the process.
• Most case study CSPPs found the initial plan template (see below for details) easy and straightforward to complete. Case study CSPPs reported that they developed the plan collaboratively, including with third sector partners (in all but one case study CSPP).
• Where strategic leads and local WFWF leads had accessed support from their Scottish Government WFWF lead contact, this was seen as positive and useful. Suggestions for improving support included facilitating more opportunities for CSPPs to share good practice; provide more support with data planning, collection and analysis to evidence WFWF performance; and provide direction or advice about sustainability of WFWF.

The Scottish Government’s role as the funder was initially focussed on setting the aims and objectives of the funding, outlining the funding criteria, and putting in place processes and guidance to support CSPPs to begin designing their WFWF activities. The Scottish Government provided CSPPs with a template for detailing their initial WFWF plans (see Annex 6). The initial plan template captured information on the CSPPs’ existing approach to holistic whole family support, planned activity for WFWF, anticipated outcomes for the first year, and intended monitoring activities. These plans were the first documentation indicating how CSPPs intended to spend their WFWF allocation for 2022-23. The template also provided CSPPs with detail on the methodology by which the Scottish Government were allocating the WFWF (outlined below), the aims of the funding, and the criteria for spending the funding (presented in Section 4: Experiences of designing and planning priorities and activity below).

CSPPs were awarded funding based on a formula which weighted allocations based on the population of 0–17-year-olds in the area, rurality, number of children in low-income families, and the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD; Scottish Government, 2022d). CSPP funding levels can be grouped into three categories:

• Eight CSPPs received £0.5m or less.
• 13 CSPPs received £0.5m - £1m.
• Nine CSPPs received more than £1m.

The lowest level of funding received by a CSPP was £0.132m and the highest was £4.7m. Across the six evaluation case studies, the lowest level of funding was £0.832m and the highest was £4.7m, with an average of £1.933m.^[8]

The Scottish Government allocated named WFWF leads to provide support to CSPPs throughout the funding period. The WFWF leads worked in the Scottish Government policy team and were a dedicated point of contact for CSPPs if they had any questions about the WFWF or wanted to seek advice (e.g. on their monitoring and evaluation plans). Each CSPP was allocated a Scottish Government WFWF lead to be their direct point of contact.

Initial views of the WFWF

Element 1

Case study interviews revealed CSPPs had strong support for WFWF, with all interviewed strategic leads and local WFWF leads sharing the Scottish Government's vision. Strategic leads and local WFWF leads also appreciated the innovative opportunities WFWF presented for whole family support, early intervention, and prevention:

"It's a really exciting opportunity for us to be actually given this type of money specifically for this and to focus on prevention and the whole family…[to] invest and support families that we have not really been able to do in this kind of way, at a very early stage..."

Strategic Lead

Some strategic leads and local WFWF leads valued the autonomy of having dedicated funding specifically for developing whole-family support. This allowed them to tailor spending and align family support with local needs:

“The WFWF being ring-fenced meant that the full amount was for us to align additional resources and existing funding streams with the WFWF. This meant maximising investment where we had identified need and where we knew there was good practice.”

Strategic Lead

Interviewed strategic leads and local WFWF leads often commended the funding’s broad criteria, including enabling CSPPs to scale up existing services through building local capacity, or creating new support. The funding's flexibility also facilitated alignment with local family and adult support priorities.

“The Whole Family Wellbeing Fund[ing] has allowed us to look at our services in a more co-ordinated way… so that we're not competing with each other or duplicating activity.”

Strategic Lead

The case study research indicated that CSPPs were increasingly using multiple funding sources to create a comprehensive whole family approach, combining WFWF funding with others into a unified pot for holistic support. Interviewed strategic leads and local WFWF leads viewed the WFWF as complementary to other funding streams, such as mental health and wellbeing funds and the Scottish Attainment Fund (see Figure 2).

Figure 2 CSPP Spotlight: South Lanarkshire

Complementary funding streams reviewed and combined where appropriate by a management group.

In South Lanarkshire, a children’s services management group includes representatives from a number of funding streams: Inclusion As Prevention; The Children and Young People's Mental Health Grant; The Attainment Scotland Fund; and The Community Mental Health and Wellbeing Fund. This group assessed commissioned services from each funding stream with the aim of ensuring the different budgets’ priorities aligned with funded activities, and to minimise overlap or duplication between budgets. As a result, and with permission from funding sources, the management group combined council and the integrated joint board^[9] funding with WFWF, to collectively fund whole family support.

Initial information provided about Element 1

Some strategic leads and local WFWF leads said that they would have liked information about WFWF from the Scottish Government earlier, including a Year 1 funding timeline. They also for said they would have benefited from greater clarity on spending criteria, allocation of funding, and funding milestones at an earlier stage. Although the Scottish Government provided this information, they would have liked more information on spending criteria, allocation of funding and funding milestones communicated in one document and earlier in the process.

“We appreciated the information but having it all in one document, early on would have been great.”

Strategic Lead

Element 2

Strategic leads and local WFWF leads in two case study areas, receiving both Element 1 and 2 funding, were initially uncertain about how the two elements would work together. However, they later gained clarity through the expressions of interest process, and discussions with their Scottish Government WFWF lead.

“We had Element 1 and Element 2 [funding], but how are they different, what would be the different processes…we had a lot of questions [at the start] basically.”

Strategic Lead

Strategic leads summarised that Element 1 funding provided an opportunity to consolidate and enhance the early intervention and prevention support that they provide to families. While Element 2 was an opportunity to reflect on Element 1 activity and learn from other CSPPs through the Learning into Action Network.^[10]

CSPPs who applied for but did not receive Element 2 support said they would have liked more detailed feedback on their Element 2 application, which they thought could have aided Element 1 activities. The Scottish Government offered feedback shortly after the decision-making process but noted low engagement. CSPPs would appreciate feedback being automatically sent when their applications were unsuccessful, and efforts to be made by the Scottish Government to make CSPPs aware that they had the opportunity to request feedback.

Developing the initial plan

The initial plan template asked for information on CSPPs’ existing approach to holistic whole family support, planned activity for WFWF, anticipated outcomes for the first year of funding, and intended monitoring activities.

Development process

Most case study CSPPs strategic leads actively led the initial plan development, collaborating with partners (e.g. colleagues working in health, education, housing, community justice etc.) through workshops and discussions. This engagement aimed to understand partner priorities and identify areas of overlapping support for families. The involvement of third sector organisations was considered vital and occurred in all but one CSPP case study area. Strategic leads found this early engagement facilitated third sector partner participation in subsequent WFWF activities.

CSPPs also used data on existing support service usage and performance to inform WFWF activity plans. Figure 3 illustrates an example of this from South Lanarkshire.

Figure 3 CSPP Spotlight: South Lanarkshire

Continuous data sharing across the CSPP allowed for evidence-based decisions when developing the initial plan.

In South Lanarkshire, data from partners (e.g. social work, health, education and housing) was shared to allow for data analysis across services delivered by the partners.

This data included key health measures, child protection, school participation, post-school destinations, and leisure and culture participation. Strategic leads and local WFWF leads used this data to gain insights into supported families and identify overlapping services, facilitating the creation of an initial WFWF plan based on local needs.

"It [the data] was telling us…that actually the groups [being assisted] are homogenous…the child affected by addiction is from the same household that’s experiencing adult addiction, or adult protection issues."

Strategic lead

Template usability

The initial plan template was well received by all case study CSPPs. Those who had been involved in drafting initial plans reported it was effective in supporting them to document their plans, without placing a significant or unreasonable burden on them. The interviews indicated that this was primarily because CSPPs already had a clear vision for how they wanted to deliver holistic whole family support and were often building on existing plans rather than starting from scratch. Where pre-existing plans were in place, CSPPs identified that ‘more flexibility’ in the template would have been useful in allowing them to fully describe their planned activities. However, interviewees did not explicitly describe what greater flexibility would look like.

Timescales for developing the initial plan

The timescales for developing the initial plans were relatively short, with CSPPs given between July and October 2022 to complete these. Case study CSPPs had varied experiences with completing the initial plan templates within the specified timescales. Some CSPPs reported that time pressures limited the degree to which they could develop their ideas and include details of these in their initial plans. For example, one CSPP said that there was limited time to discuss their plans with third sector partners before submitting the initial plan, and that they had to rush their decision-making processes (e.g. plans for analysis of data) to meet the timescales.

Other CSPPs, however, valued the need for urgency and reported the short timescales gave them the opportunity to speed up their decision-making process around where to focus their holistic whole family support.

Though the primary intended purpose of the initial plan was for CSPPs to communicate their WFWF plan to the Scottish Government, strategic leads and local WFWF leads of case study CSPPs highlighted the usefulness of the template as a tool for using within CSPP planning discussions about how to spend the WFWF. In this way, the initial plan also served to support CSPPs in the development of their WFWF plans.

Ongoing support from the Scottish Government

Initially, some CSPPs did not access Scottish Government support from the WFWF lead (their role is described at the start of the section) due to uncertainty over what support was available or perceived lack of engagement from their assigned contact.

“We have had a meeting with our identified person [...]. It is not clear what that role of that person is, or what that person's duties and responsibilities will be going forward, and how they can enhance this. It feels remote [...] I don't feel they are particularly engaged.”

Strategic Lead

However, as Year 1 of the WFWF progressed, CSPPs’ engagement with Scottish Government support improved, and their perception of it became more positive. Where CSPPs had accessed it from their Scottish Government WFWF lead, they found the support and communication helpful for designing and implementing WFWF activities. They valued direct, named links within the government, and praised the timely responses.

Initially, Element 2 CSPPs had separate contacts for Elements 1 and 2, but they suggested combining them for greater efficiency. The Scottish Government responded by providing a single point of contact for CSPPs with both Element 1 and 2 funding.

Suggested improvements to Scottish Government support

Case study CSPPs outlined three ways the Scottish Government could improve their support offer:

• Facilitate more opportunities for CSPPs to understand what other CSPPs were doing in relation to delivery of holistic whole family support. This would include examples of best practice and opportunities for learning from overcoming common challenges and achieving transformational change.
• Provide support with data planning, collection, and analysis to evidence the performance of their WFWF activity. Some sought guidance on using existing data effectively, particularly in assessing whether outcomes were contributing to specific WFWF activities and demonstrating intangible outcomes, like enhanced collaboration between family support services. More details on CSPPs’ approach to data collection and monitoring can be found in Section 6: Monitoring delivery.
• Provide direction or advice on the sustainability of WFWF, beyond the 2026 funding period, and in embedding whole-family support in CSPPs beyond the lifetime of the funding. The last statutory Children’s Services Planning cycle^[11] ran from 2020-23 and the next planning cycle runs from April 2023-26.