Bairns' Hoose Pathfinder Phase – Research Report

7. Access to Bairns’ Hoose

This chapter examines the accessibility of Bairns’ Hoose, primarily looking at the progress towards Standard 3: Inclusive Access, and Standard 4: Design and environment. This covers travel and access to a physical Bairns’ Hoose site, design of the space, and actions taken to ensure CYP’s accessibility needs are met at all stages of their Bairns’ Hoose journey.

Progress

Progress was made towards establishing a physical Bairns’ Hoose site, with six partnerships having sites open at the time of fieldwork. One partnership was renovating a site to prepare for opening and another was starting the process of developing one. All partnerships with established sites noted that renovations ensured the sites were child-friendly, cosy and trauma-informed. This included providing toys and games, ensuring the design, layout and furniture felt safe and inviting, and where possible, having an outdoor space to play or relax. Partnerships also took steps to ensure that families would have the space to themselves without overlapping with other families using Bairns’ Hoose services. This was accomplished by creating multiple separate waiting areas or suites, or through timetabling and case management to limit visitors to one family at a time.

Progress towards including access to police, social work, justice, health and recovery services under one roof varied between partnerships. All Bairns’ Hoose sites had interview rooms and three had established court links on-site. One partnership also had access to a court link outwith the Bairns’ Hoose site. Two partnerships were in the process of installing court links and two were in discussions (Chapter 10). In terms of incorporating health, one partnership conducted forensic medical examinations on-site, one conducted health assessments but planned to provide forensic medical examinations in the future (also available to a neighbouring partnership), three partnerships planned to provide some kind of health assessment, and the remaining partnerships did not have plans for a health room in the Bairns' Hoose (Chapter 11). Incorporation of recovery services also ranged from services available on-site to referrals made to external agencies, including both therapeutic support and holistic family support (Chapter 12).

Partnerships had taken steps to make Bairns’ Hoose sites accessible to CYP and families in remote and rural areas, including by using a hub-and-spoke model with multiple sites, providing families with financial and logistical support for travel, and taking a soft borders approach to referrals, discussed further below. Partnerships also took steps to ensure Bairns’ Hoose was inclusive for CYP with specialist needs, with some partnerships using speech and language therapy teams to provide communication support. While all partnerships had access to interpreters to support CYP and families in their native languages, interpreters were not always reliably available when needed.

Access to Bairns’ Hoose in remote and rural areas

Different strategies were tried to support CYP and families living in rural areas or islands to access a Bairns' Hoose site. One approach was to employ a hub-and-spoke model, in which a central Bairns’ Hoose site was complemented by additional spoke sites across the partnership area. The spokes allowed CYP and families to access a Bairns’ Hoose closer to where they live, limiting the need for extended travel. However, the cost of renovating and running new sites limited partnerships’ ability to open multiple spoke sites.

“Originally we'd hoped there would be two houses […] but funding just didn't allow for that. […] Some children, depending on where they're living, are too far away, that it's not in their best interest to travel to the house. But I think, unless we have houses in every local authority [within our partnership], that's always going to be a challenge and there isn't the funding for that.”

Additionally, due to funding and space limitations, not all services could be provided in all spoke sites, when compared to the hub site. For example, while all the spoke sites had interview rooms, in some cases only the hub site provided health assessments, had a court link or had on-site recovery support. As a result, CYP and families may have still needed to travel further to access certain services.

Another strategy to improve access to Bairns’ Hoose sites was to take a ‘soft borders’ approach to referrals when there were Bairns’ Hoose options in multiple nearby local authorities. This allowed CYP and families to access the location that was most convenient for them, rather than the location technically within their local authority. This approach was necessary in partnership areas that covered several local authorities, but was also employed by neighbouring partnerships.

A further option for CYP and families who decided that travelling to a Bairns’ Hoose site was not in their best interest, was to allow CYP to choose the location they would prefer, such as their school. The interview team could then travel to the chosen location and capture the interview using mobile Video Recorded Interview equipment. While this approach meant the location may not meet Bairns’ Hoose Standards, it ensured all CYP had their needs met in the best possible way. This approach was standard prior to establishing Bairns’ Hoose.

Finally, to address the cost barrier to travelling to a Bairns’ Hoose site, partnerships funded travel for CYP and families. One approach to funded travel was to reimburse families for any travel expenses. Another approach was to arrange transport for CYP and families, either through support workers or SCIM teams transporting them, or by arranging a taxi.

Choosing a discreet location

A further challenge identified by partnerships was finding a location that ensured that those who accessed Bairns’ Hoose had their privacy safeguarded. This challenge was raised by both urban and rural partnerships, but it was particularly acute in small communities, where it may have been easier for the purpose of a Bairns’ Hoose building to become known in the community.

“What was quickly realised was that [having a house] would create a real challenge locally. It's a small community. If we had a house, it would very quickly become known in the community […] and any child going in or out of that would be immediately identified as a child who’s, you know, being interviewed.”

There were two different approaches to ensuring discretion for CYP and families that arose during qualitative interviews. One approach was to use a multipurpose location so that it would not be possible to tell whether someone was entering the building for Bairns’ Hoose or for another service. The other approach was to select a discreet location in a private area. Since the Bairns’ Hoose was removed from busy areas, it would be unlikely for someone to know the purpose of the building unless they needed to go there.

However, a challenge that arose when establishing a Bairns’ Hoose site, either in a residential area or in a community space, was that the success of the Bairns’ Hoose relied in part on community buy-in. There was an instance where a local community was concerned about the prospect of having a Bairns’ Hoose because of worries about the confidentiality of people accessing it, given the small local community. It was also unhappy with suggestions that an existing public space might be used. In another instance, a local community were concerned about the prospect of potentially having increased police presence locally.

“When [community members] understood there to be a justice element and that there was police involvement, they kind of decided to themselves what they thought that was. […] What it did do was give us learning for the next time we were looking to do a Bairns’ House. [Professionals] worked really hard at [encouraging] community involvement and understanding, while still having to appreciate the confidential element of what this was going to be. […] Obviously as a house, very much in a residential area, we had to involve community in some format that we maybe didn't do [enough] the first time.”

When approaching engagement with community experience groups, partnerships collaborated with a variety of third sector organisations already embedded in the local area to raise awareness among groups with certain relevant experiences, such as care experienced young people and young mothers, about the intention behind Bairns’ Hoose. Partnerships also worked with local community experience groups to create participation groups who could be involved in designing the space and providing feedback on the development of Bairns’ Hoose. When consulting with community members, partnerships emphasised the importance of stressing that Bairns’ Hoose was not targeted at them and there was no assumption or expectation that families would need to use the Bairns’ Hoose at some point in the future.

“I suppose I was very keen to stress to the young mums’ group that this wasn't targeted at them […] [It’s] about how you pitch things in a way that ‘it's really important you get your views, it's not because we're thinking you're going down that road’. It's just getting it right, you know.”

Building maintenance

An ongoing challenge was limited staffing for upkeep of buildings and basic maintenance, in one case resulting in the interview team cleaning the building. Additionally, deciding building ownership when working with multiple agencies created complications when allocating responsibilities and ensuring ongoing funding for building management, maintenance, and upkeep of the grounds (as discussed in Chapter 6).

Making the space feel safe and inviting

Partnerships used several approaches when designing the Bairns’ Hoose space which helped ensure it would feel cosy, comfortable and safe for all CYP. This included using a Trauma Informed Lens Walk Through Tool to help determine areas for improvement. This tool was developed by the National Trauma Transformation Programme (NTTP), a Scottish Government initiative designed to support trauma-informed and responsive systems across various sectors. Partnerships also created participation groups to include CYP in the design of the space, particularly care experienced and justice experienced CYP, and liaised with an autism parent support group to ensure the space would be accessible. These groups helped design the space, and in some cases created artwork and toys to be incorporated into the Bairns’ Hoose.

Inclusive access for those with additional support needs

Partnerships took steps to ensure that Bairns’ Hoose was accessible to all CYP by consulting professionals familiar with the CYP, such as social workers or educators, about any additional support needs. Some partnerships also incorporated speech and language therapy teams into the Bairns’ Hoose. Professionals found that the team’s input improved communication and accessibility for CYP and families with additional support needs.

Speech and language support was brought into the Bairns’ Hoose in several different ways. One way was to consult speech and language therapists during interagency referral discussions. Therapists had also briefed interview teams and advised on adjusting interview protocol as needed. This was used not just for young children, but also for teenagers.

“It's been really valuable for our interviews in particular […] If the interviewers have been taught at the college how to speak to children, we would take that as that's how you speak to children. Whereas the speech and language person has come in and gone, ‘Well, actually that child doesn't know the difference between January and April’. So instead of saying ‘What month is it? You say, ‘What was the weather like? Was it warm outside? Was it near Christmas?’.”

Speech and language teams helped design accessible materials for CYP to read, such as documents explaining interviews and medical examinations (as discussed in Chapter 8). One partnership also invested in staff training in Talking Mats, a communication tool designed by speech and language therapists, which staff used to improve communication with CYP. The incorporation of more accessible written and verbal communication tools into Bairns’ Hoose was described as particularly valuable in one area with high levels of deprivation and high speech and language needs.

In three partnerships, inclusive access was sometimes hampered by a lack of in-person interpreters, either due to limited availability or certain dialects not being offered. As a result, professionals relied in some cases on interpretation by family members or a telephone translation service. In one remote partnership, all translation for Children’s Services was done through a telephone translation service. In exceptional cases, the service could provide interpretation in person. Partnerships expressed the desire for national support and guidance to address this challenge – both to increase availability and to develop trauma-informed interpretation services. It was mentioned that the national joint investigative interview team was doing some work on training interpreters for interviews. Not all partnerships mentioned challenges with interpreters. In one partnership, interpreters were available in-person and via telephone through the NHS and each council had the option to arrange for interpreters. When interpreters were needed for joint investigative interviews, Police Scotland arranged this.

Finally, delays in building renovations meant that in some cases the sites were opened before all refurbishments could be made, such as installing ramp or lift access and installing accessible toilets. One solution to this challenge was to work with occupational therapists to create temporary workarounds.