Whole Family Wellbeing Funding Programme templates: year 3 analysis - 2024-2025

6. Challenges

This chapter sets out the most common challenges reported by CSPPs and, where applicable, the lessons that can be learnt from how they have been addressed.

Annual reporting templates asked CSPPs to reflect on the challenges they faced in the delivery of WFWF activity. The most common challenges raised included: staff recruitment and retention difficulties; barriers related to workforce capacity; and complex data management protocols. These reflect similar issues identified in the evaluation of Year 2 of the WFWF Programme.

It is important to recognise that a number of these issues relate to existing wider, systemic challenges which were researched extensively through the Children's Services Reform Research study conducted by the Centre for Excellence for Children's Care and Protection (CELCIS). The challenges discussed here offer insight on the content of Year 3 templates and are intended to support learning across WFWF, rather than provide a wider analysis of this context, which was beyond the scope of this research.

Staffing challenges

Many CSPPs experienced difficulties in recruiting appropriately skilled practitioners to deliver planned activities, and some reported high levels of staff turnover. Templates often contained narrative about short term, insecure local funding arrangements for specific posts and a perceived lack of job security as a deterrent for attracting and retaining staff. In some cases this was linked directly to WFWF funded roles, however, other templates acknowledged that this is an issue experienced by CSPPs more widely. National skills shortages were also mentioned; for example, East Renfrewshire’s template referred to significant gaps in the existence of a trained and skilled social care workforce throughout the country.

While recruitment processes for specific activities may have since been completed, the adverse impacts of staffing challenges were still evident in templates. For example, some reported that recruitment delays had resulted in projects being postponed or scaled back. Others noted that high levels of staff turnover had hindered transformational change or led to poorer outcomes for service users, however these were not explained further. A small number reported that unfilled posts resulted in the termination of planned activities and unspent funds being returned.

A few CSPPs described ways in which staffing challenges have been addressed. For example, Angus’ template referred to accessing interim support from an external partner and using a phased implementation approach, however no additional details were available on this. North Lanarkshire described taking a ‘measured’ approach to contract length and costings to mitigate staffing challenges (although did not provide any further detail on this approach).

Workforce and organisational capacity

Challenges related to workforce and organisational capacity were frequently raised within reporting templates. For some CSPPs, capacity challenges have:

• resulted in intense workloads for staff
• limited the ability to sustain or expand services
• resulted in increased waiting times for service users

Systemic financial and budgetary constraints were often cited as a key contributor to capacity challenges. For example, Stirling’s template noted that a loss of funding had meant that ‘the essential foundations of family support across Stirling are either no longer in place or operating at reduced capacity’. A few noted that long term staff absence had reduced capacity, while others mentioned that internal restructuring and office relocations had resulted in significant disruption and affected organisational capacity. A few templates noted that increasing demand across children’s and adult services has further compounded capacity challenges.

“Despite investment in prevention and early help, rising adult mental health issues, youth violence, and drug availability have led to crisis spikes and contextual safeguarding challenges, all leading to increased demand and costs for care.”

Moray Year 3 WFWF template

Local context

A range of local factors posed challenges for CSPPs in the delivery of WFWF activity. The rurality of areas such as Dumfries & Galloway and North Ayrshire was described as a challenge. These areas specifically emphasised geographic disparities in access to services, poor transport links and the need to adapt approaches to meet the unique needs of rural communities.

A lack of local infrastructure was also highlighted in a few templates. Falkirk faced challenges in finding suitable community space for WFWF activity, noting that many local community centres had recently closed and other venues were deemed too small, inaccessible or not trauma-informed.

Measures taken to mitigate these challenges included the provision of mobile support services or outreach programmes to enhance geographic coverage of services and extend support to families in remote or underserved areas.

Multi-agency work

While many successful examples of multi-agency partnerships were described in templates (as noted earlier in this report), many CSPPs also reflected on some of the challenges associated with multi-agency work. These included disparities between the governance, culture and priorities of different departments and agencies, as well as differing IT systems and commissioning processes. Complex data sharing protocols between partners were also frequently highlighted as a challenge which many CSPPs found difficult and time consuming to overcome.

Falkirk’s template contained the following example of how the CSPP addressed challenges related to interagency data processes and lack of ICT system integration:

“The Team which have progressed automation between LCS^[9] (Social Work) and SEEMIS^[10] (Education), continue to encourage data-sharing within Falkirk Family and Friends, and are currently working with the Promise Scotland’s Design School to improve the processes around capturing data.”

Falkirk Year 3 WFWF template