Publication - Research and analysis

Child poverty pathfinders in Dundee and Glasgow: phase two evaluation - report appendices

Published: 24 June 2025
From: Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, +1 more … Director of Tackling Child Poverty and Social Justice
Directorate: Tackling Child Poverty and Social Justice Directorate
Topic: Children and families
ISBN: 9781836917397

Appendices to the independent evaluation report on the impacts and learning from the Child Poverty Pathfinders in Dundee and Glasgow . The evaluation examines engagement, delivery, barriers, impacts, and value-for-money considerations.

Supporting documents

Appendix B – Topic guides: Dundee

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee families Wave 1 discussion guide

Summary of key topics to cover:

Informed consent – ensuring that they understand what is involved, how their data will be used, the voluntary nature of taking part, and that it won’t impact on services received before the interview starts. Record consent to take part and (if agree) be audio-recorded.
Background information about the participant – making sure they are a LL/MC family with children <16, family characteristics, current socio-economic status

‘Story’ of their engagement with Linlathen Works over time, including:

Initial engagement – when/how they first had contact with them, initial expectations/concerns, views on door-knocking (where relevant)
Further / ongoing engagement – what/when/how/how much contact they’ve had with LLW, reasons/views on level of engagement, barriers/facilitators to engaging with the LLW.
Support needs – what issues were they facing when first had contact with LLW (explore nature/range of issues and impact they were having)? Had they sought support from elsewhere (if yes, what happened, if no, why not)? What did they hope to get from LLW?
Assessment of needs – conversations they’ve had with KWs about their needs – how effective these have been in identifying needs, and how they’ve changed over time.
Support and relationships – types of support KW(s) have offered and impact of these, views on relationship with KW(s) and if/how this differs from other professionals
Referrals – other services referred to – at drop-in and beyond (exploring this in detail – what happened, what was the outcome, barriers/facilitators to taking up referrals?)
Outcomes for families – views on what has changed for them & their family as result of contact with LLW – probing in particular on impacts on employment/training and feelings about work, financial situation, and quality of life. What is it about the project that has made the difference to them? How does experience of LLW compare with other services?
Accessibility of support – views on ease/difficulty of getting the support they need from LLW (inc. views on the location) and what might make it easier.

Suggestions for improvement / other feedback

Consent to recontact, thank you vouchers and finish.

Section 1: Introduction and consent

Aim: to make sure we gain informed consent from participant before taking part including consent for recording.

Thank participant for taking part and introduce yourself and Ipsos Scotland.
Check they got an information sheet and ask if they had a chance to read it. Do they have any questions on any aspect? Then let them know you will go over the key points.
Remind participant/s of the aims of the research:

The Scottish Government has asked us, Ipsos Scotland (an independent research organisation), to get feedback from families about the Linlathen Works Project. The aim of the research is to find out what went well and what could be done better in future. We’ll also be speaking to people who helped organise and deliver the project. Once we have spoken to everyone, we’ll write a report summarising what everyone has said and that will be published by the Scottish Government.

Provide reassurances of anonymity and confidentiality:

It will not be possible for the Scottish Government to know who took part in the research.
We will include quotes in the report, but these would be anonymous. No identifying information about individuals or families (e.g. names or contact details) will be passed on to anyone outside the research team (me and my colleagues at Ipsos).
Remind participant that the interview will last around 30-45 minutes and that they will receive a thank you voucher which you will sort out at the end of the discussion.
Remind participant that there are no right or wrong answers. It’s really useful to hear what could have been done better as well as what went well.
Emphasise that taking part is completely voluntary - they don’t have to answer any questions they don’t want to answer and can decide to stop the interview at any point. Taking part – or not – won’t affect the support they get from Linlathen Works.
Remind that they are free to change their mind and decide not to take part at any time before or during the interview, or after the interview until the findings have been written up.
Check if participant has any questions.

Note: Spend time making sure interviewee understands what the interview is about and what we/the Scottish Government will do with the information. Offer to go through information sheet if necessary.

Request permission to record interview. Explain that this is so we can listen back to what they’ve said to make sure we understood it correctly, and that recordings will not be shared outside the research team at Ipsos.

That’s recording us now. Could I quickly ask you to confirm for the recording that you are happy to take part based on the information we just discussed, and that you’re happy to be recorded for Ipsos to listen back to?

Section 2 – Background/building rapport

Aim: to build rapport and gain understanding of participant’s life.

To start with, could you tell me a bit about yourself?
What area do you live in (check if LL or MC if unsure)? Have you lived there long?
Who do you live with? Check ages of children.
How do you spend your time in a typical week?
If not clear, check if they are working, studying or volunteering at the moment and probe for details – where? what? full time/part-time? how long have they been doing that for?

Section 3 – Initial engagement with the Pathfinder

Aim: explore initial engagement processes

How did you first find out about Linlathen Works?
Did you attend a drop in at Brooksbank, or did someone from the project ‘door knock’ you?

If first attended drop-in:

When did you first attend the drop-in?
How did you hear about the drop-in? Who from? (e.g. professionals/family/friends). What did they say about it?
Why did you decide to attend? What were you hoping to find out or get help with?
If professional referred/suggested attend drop-in – how did you feel about that? (e.g. not sure why referred, stigma, pleased to be offered support)?

If first contact was via being door-knocked:

How long ago was this?
Who was it that came to your door that first time?
Do you know why they came round the doors? Do you think this is a good idea? Why/why not?
What do you remember about what they said when they first came to your door? What did you think about this? Did you think you would take up the help they described? Why/why not?
How did you feel about someone coming to your door? Has any other organisation done this before? Who? Was this similar or different to that?
Did your views change at all after they came round – i.e. if were unsure at first, did they change their mind? What made them change their mind?
If you hadn’t had a knock at the door, do you think you would have attended the drop-in?

Section 4 – Ongoing contact with the Pathfinder

Aim: To gain an overview of extent / nature of contact with the PF since first contact

It would be great to hear a bit more about your experience of working with Linlathen Works since that first contact.

Can you tell me a bit about what that has involved for you?
How regularly do you attend the drop-in at Brooksbank?
How often do you have contact with any of the key workers outside of the drop-in?
Do you have a main key worker or does it vary?
What kinds of contact do you have with them outside the drop-in? In person? (where?), text, phone calls, emails?
Do you contact them, or do they contact you, or a mix?
Have you been in touch with the Linlathen Works team/your key worker more/less often at different points in time?
How do you feel about the amount of contact you have with Linlathen Works?
Would you like to have more / less contact?
If more - what sorts of things would you like more contact about?
How often would you like to have contact with them, ideally?
Are you happy with the type of contact you have with them? (e.g. would they like more contact outside drop-in, to be able to contact them in different ways?)

If did not engage with the project for long:

Why did you decide not to stay in touch with Linlathen Works?
Were there any barriers or issues that meant it was hard for you to use the service? E.g. travel, childcare, money, timing, other commitments, location etc?
Was there anything in particular that was off putting about the approach Linlathen Works took?

Section 5 – Support needs, assessment, and relationship with their key worker

Aim: to understand the needs they came to the project with, explore views on effectiveness of approaches to assessing needs, and relationship with key worker

Initial support needs:

If you are happy to, can you tell me a bit about the issues you were facing when you first had contact with Linlathen Works / your key worker?
What kinds of challenges / issues were you facing when you first had contact with Linlathen Works?
What impacts were these issues having for you and your family?
What do you think were the main reasons you were having these issues?

(Probes above intended to explore lived experience and perspectives on causes a bit more)

If not mentioned, probe on:

whether had issues they needed help straight away with – e.g. food, paying bills, housing repairs.
whether they wanted help around getting into work or improving their work situation, or accessing training or education? What were main challenges they faced around work?
whether they wanted help with benefits – and if so which ones?
and whether there were any other issues they were looking for help with – e.g. childcare, health and wellbeing, anything else?
Which of these did you most want help with? Why was that the most important thing to you?
Had you asked anyone else for help with these things before you came to Linlathen Works? What happened then?
What were you hoping from Linlathen Works? Did you have any specific goals or things you wanted to get from working with them?

Assessment of needs:

Can you tell me about conversations you have had with your key worker from Linlathen Works to understand what help or support you needed?
Have you been able to discuss all the things you thought were important with your key worker? (narrow/ wide enough focus, relevant/ irrelevant questions)
Were you happy with how your key worker has spoken to you to understand what you need? What was good / bad about how they spoke to you?

If unhappy – make sure probe on which staff they mean, as may not distinguish key workers and other professionals manning the drop-in)

If relevant: Were you happy with getting into these kinds of details in the community centre?
Where / when did you have these conversations? How often have you spoken about these things? Has what you’ve discussed changed over time from when you first had contact with Linlathen Works to now? How/why?

Section 6 – Support, relationship and referrals

Aim: to understand the support they have accessed through the PF, both directly from their key worker, and via referrals, and to explore their relationship with key worker

Support from key worker:

You said your main key worker(s) at Linlathen Works was (name). Can you tell me a little bit about the types of support or help they have offered you?
What kind of support, advice or help have they offered?
How have they tried to help you? (Probe fully)
Offering advice? (probe on what)
Speaking to other professionals for you? (who? What about?)
Organising things for you directly (what?)
Putting you in touch with other professionals or organisations? (See referrals probes, below)
Any other ways?
How helpful or not have you found this? What was particularly helpful? What was less helpful? (Probe for different advice/support /help offered)
Was there anything you needed help with that your key worker couldn’t support/ couldn’t refer you to someone who could support?

Relationship with key worker:

What sort of relationship would you say you have with your key worker(s) at Linlathen Works?
Do you always see the same person at the drop-in? Outside the drop-in? Is that important to you? (why/not?)
How does your key worker(s) compare with other professionals you might have had contact with? Different or the same? How?
Do you feel you trust your key worker(s) at Linlathen Works? What do they do/say that makes you feel that way?
What do they do particularly well in terms of how they work with you? What do they do less well?
Is there anything they could do to build better relationships with people in Linlathen and Mid Craigie?

Referrals:

If attend drop-in:

Which of the other services at the Brooksbank Centre drop-in have you spoken to? Probe: Housing? Enable? CAB? Energy Advice? Social Security?
What did you speak with them about?
What kinds of help or support did they offer you?
What happened next? Were they able to help you in the ways you wanted? If not, did you go back to LLW, or were you able to find alternative help or advice?
Have you been put in touch with any other services by Linlathen Works, other than those you saw at Brooksbank?
Who were you put in touch with? Who put you in touch with them? (KW or another Brooksbank service)
What did they say you they would be able to help you with?
What happened after they put you in touch with them?
Did they actually have any contact with them? If not, why not – what were the barriers?
What was the outcome? Did they help them? How?
If they didn’t get the help they wanted, did they go back to their LLW Key Worker to let them know? Were they able to offer alternative help?
Are there any services they’ve been referred/signposted to by LLW that they haven’t been in touch with yet, but plan to contact in the future? What/why/when?
You mentioned that you wanted help with [refer back to what they told you previously]. Were you able to access help or support for that, either from your key worker or someone they put you in touch with?

Probe as above.

Section 7- Outcomes for families

Aim: to explore perceived outcomes for families

Key outcomes: impact on employment and wellbeing

What, if anything, would you say has changed for you as a result of your contact with Linlathen Works?

What has changed for you personally?
Has anything changed for the rest of your family, including your children?

If not mentioned, probe on:

Employment / training status (see more detailed probes below)?
Access to childcare?
Health / wellbeing?
Housing situation?
Confidence / how they feel about the future? (inc. how they feel about employment in the future, if not currently employed).
Children’s wellbeing

For each, probe fully on:

How role did Linlathen Works play in that? What impact did they have?
What do you think would have happened if you hadn’t been in touch with Linlathen Works? Do you think you would have been able to get help with this from somewhere else?

Employment:

How, if at all, has your work situation changed since you first came to/ worked with Linlathen Works?

If in work:

How long have you been in your work?
If new role, did PF provide any support in getting that?
Are you happy with your job?
Would you like to make any changes?
If so, have you been getting support with ways of doing that? Who from? What kind of support?

If not in work:

Are you thinking about moving into employment at any point in the future?
If so, have you been getting support with ways of doing that? Who from? What kind of support?
Can you tell me more about that? (e.g. confidence boosting, job searching, skills training)

If work is not seen as an option in the foreseebale future: Move on

Has there been any change to your financial situation since you accessed support at Linlathen?
Have these income increases have been via benefits or employment or costs savings? (probe for e.g. moving into work, changing jobs, working more hours, claiming new benefits)
Do you think working with Linlathen helped you be better off? In what way?
What do you think would have happened if you hadn’t been in touch with Linlathen Works? Do you think you would have been able to get help with this from somewhere else?
How manageable would you say you feel your financial situation is now? What would make it more manageable? Are there areas you feel you still need support with? Have you spoken to your key worker about this?
Thinking about how things have changed for you, what difference has that made to you and to your family’s quality of life would you say?
Have there been any changes that have not been positive, or that you didn’t expect when you first went to PF for support?

Section 8 – Accessibility of Pathfinder support

Aim: To explore views on accessibility of PF support

Probe separately for drop-in and other contact with key worker on:

How easy or difficult have you found it generally to get the support you need from Linlathen Works?
Has it been easier or more difficult to get help/support form LLW compared with other services you might have experienced? How/why?
If easier: what do you think made it easier? (e.g. key workers are coming to your door, working out of your local community centre, having various services all in the one place, something else?)

Location:

What do you think about Linlathen Works being based at Brooksbank? Is it a good location for you? Why / why not?
How easy/difficult is it for you to get to?

Section 9- Summary & thoughts on improvement

Aim: overview of views of the PF and suggestions for improvement

Overall, how would you summarise your experience of Linlathen Works?

If not covered: What do you think have been the key benefits for your family?
What is it about the project that made the most difference to you/your family?

(probe on how this has made a difference - accessible, affordable, flexible?)

How (if at all) could the project be improved?
Is there any other help, support or advice you think Linlathen Works could provide, that would improve the service they offer to families in particular?
Is there anything they particularly like that they would like to see more of?
Anything there could be less of?
How could people organising similar projects in future encourage more people with families like you to take up support?
How does your experience with Linlathen Works compare with that of other services you have used/ support you have received?
Any final thoughts/feedback they think it would be useful for us to know?

Section 10: Wrap up and re-contact

That’s everything I wanted to ask you today, thank you very much for taking the time to talk to me today. I really appreciate it. I’ll stop the recording now [stop recording].

Consent to recontact form:

Just to remind you, we’ll be writing a report to summarise everything you and others have told us about the Linlathen Works project. It will be published on the Scottish Government website, so you’ll be able to search for it and read it if you’re interested. It will probably be published spring 2025.

If you would like, we can send you a link to the report when it’s published. If so, we’ll keep your name and email or postal address for this purpose and wait to securely delete it until after we’ve sent you the link to the report.

We might want to speak to you again in around 6 months’ time, to find out how you’re getting on and whether Linlathen Works is still having any impact for you. You’d be completely free at the time to decide whether you wanted to speak to us. Would you be willing to share your contact details with us so that we can get in touch to speak to you about Linlathen Works again?

If yes to either of the above, complete contact details sheet and add to secure spreadsheet.

Thank you voucher: Check whether prefer amazon voucher or L2S – make sure they sign receipt for this.

That’s everything from me. Do you have any questions before we finish?

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee Professional Stakeholder Interviews Wave 1 discussion guide – strategic partners

Notes

This is a topic guide, not a questionnaire – it is a guide to steer the conversation to ensure relevant topics are covered appropriately, with suggestions of questions that might be useful. It is not expected that interviewers will ask every question, and interviews may not proceed linearly – interviewers will follow up on issues raised by participants as appropriate.
You will be interviewing stakeholders in a range of different roles with respect to the Pathfinder. This version of the topic guide includes questions we think are more likely to be relevant to strategic partners, including the DCC policy lead, Employability Service lead, SSS and DWP. There are separate topic guides for the operational key worker teams and services operating at the drop-in in Dundee.

Summary of key aims/topics for interview:

Across the professional stakeholder interviews, we want to find out:
Whether and how professionals think the PF is delivering impacts for families in poverty, and
Whether and how the PF is delivering system change
With a focus on understanding barriers, facilitators, and lessons for future roll-out (locally and in other areas of Scotland)

Each topic guide covers all three, though this topic guide includes a little more on system change.

Introduction

Introduce self and Ipsos
Check in with how they are. Is now still an OK time to speak to us?
Introduce the research: The Scottish Government has commissioned Ipsos to evaluate the Child Poverty Pathfinders in Dundee and Glasgow.

We’re taking a multi-method approach to this, including both quant data (using PF’s own monitoring data and, potentially, using linked admin data to look at outcomes for families over time) and qual data, including interviews with families and with professionals – which is where you come in.

We’re doing qual interviews in two main waves, in addition to the early interviews we did at the scoping phase – this is wave 1, wave 2 will be later in the year in Autumn.

Discuss anonymity and confidentiality.

Won’t use any names in the report. If we use quotes in the report, they will be anonymous.
Hope they will feel able be open in your answers, as the learning from this will hopefully help inform improvements across Scotland.
But, we are aware that offering concrete guarantees of confidentiality is very difficult in this context as are only certain people working on the PF and may be obvious who you are from what you say.
So we will share our notes on the interview with you after the interview, and you can let us know if there is anything you would rather wasn’t included or wouldn’t want to be quoted on.
Remind participant(s) that they don’t have to answer any questions they don’t want to answer, and that they are welcome to stop the interview at any time.
Interview will last around 45-60 minutes – check how long they have available.
Request permission to record – this in case my notes are unclear and I need to go back and check anything. The recording will not be shared with anyone outside the research team and will be securely deleted after the research is complete.
Any questions before we start?
At start of recording – I just need to confirm for the record that you are giving verbal consent that you are happy to take part in this interview, and happy for the interview to be recorded for Ipsos to listen back to.

About the participant and their role on the PF

To start off with, it would be helpful if you could very briefly describe your role in general and as it relates to the PF in Dundee

Current understanding of the PF

I wanted to ask you what you understand to be the aims and scope of the Dundee Pathfinder, as we know from the conversations we’ve had with PF partners since October that the PF is continuing to evolve. So it would be helpful to hear from you how you would describe the Dundee Child Poverty PF at the moment

Probe if necessary / if time:

What do you see as its main aims?

Probe around:

aims for improving outcomes for families,
and system-change aims (improving system of services and support for families in Dundee)
Have the aims changed over time? How? Are they now settled or are they continuing to evolve?
What would you include as part of the PF? Linlathen Works, Stobswell pilot, Employability Service development, other things?
How have the activities the PF involves changed over time?

Views on Linlathen Works model

Our understanding is that at the moment, LLW involves drop-in sessions at Brooksbank, targeted outreach, where Key Workers call on families with children and no income from employment in Linlathen, and now Mid Craigie, to encourage them to engage, and that KWs also offer support between drop-ins where needed.

We’d like to understand a bit more about your views on how these different elements have been working and what other areas (not just in Dundee) could learn from this.

General reflections on the model

What are your overall reflections on how effective you think the LLW approach is?
What has worked well to date?
What has worked less well?

Probe for views on each of:

Multi-agency drop-in
Location (being based in Brooksbank)
Door-knocking
Role of key worker / relationships with families
Joint working between LLW and other services outside the drop-in
Anything else?
Where have the challenges / barriers to delivery / outcomes been? Have these been overcome?

Probe:

Availability of other services?
LLW staff time?
Families’ feelings about accessing services?
Data sharing issues?
Wider benefits system?
Anything else?
What, if anything, would you change about the model?
How different is what LLW is doing from what was available for families previously?
From what you know about the service, does this approach cost more, less, or about the same as what was delivered previously? IF MORE / LESS: in what ways does it cost more / less?

Reach

Who is LLW reaching most effectively?
Balance between families with children and other households?
Any groups of families you feel are missing or aren’t being engaged by the PF? Or who engage initially but then drop-off?
What are the barriers?
Is there anything could change about the PF (or wider services) that might help address this?

Probe on TCPDP groups: families with 3+ children, families with children under 1, families with young mothers, families with a disabled family member, single parents, families from ethnic minority backgrounds.

Outcomes for families

Where do you feel LLW or the wider PF has been able to make most difference to families with children?
What elements have had the biggest impact? (probe – LLW model as a whole, particular elements of LLW, or other elements of the PF?)
Are there areas where you feel it has been harder to help or make a difference for families so far?

Probe around:

Whether there are particular issues families face you feel the PF has been able to make more / less able of a difference on so far (and why)?

If not mentioned, probe around:

helping them access (better) work/training;
improving their income from benefits;
helping with cost-of-living issues;
and wider issues like confidence and health and wellbeing. (both parents and children)
Are there particular types of families it’s been easier or harder to make a difference for? (e.g. probe re. TCPDP family types)
How far do you feel the PF is succeeding in putting families on a pathway out of poverty? (probe on evidence for this)
What else is needed to support this?

System change impacts

Can you say a bit more about how you see the PF contributing to ‘system change’
What are the elements of the PF you think will contribute to system change?
In what ways will these help improve the system and, in turn, outcomes for families with children?
How much impact do you feel the PF has had so far in terms of system change?
Improved joint working?
Shared values?
Improved data sharing?

For each, probe on: examples, what contributes to change, what the barriers are to change, and what else the PF needs to do to help create system change?

What, if anything, do you feel has been learned from LLW or the wider PF about how to improve outcomes for families with children that you would share with other areas?
How has learning from LLW or the wider PF impacted on plans for other elements of the PF? E.g. how has it shaped plans for Stobswell?
Has learning from LLW or the wider PF impacted other aspects of how your organisation is working with families?
Has it impacted on how other services in Dundee work with families with children? Which services? In what ways?
What are the things you think still need to change in terms of how services work in order to better meet the needs of families in Dundee?
Are there any other changes to the wider system as a whole (rather than individual services) that you think are needed to better meet families’ needs?
If other services made those changes, do you think there would still be a need for LLW or not? Why?

Suggested improvements and future

What, if anything, would you change about LLW or the wider PF to help it make more of a difference to outcomes for families with children?
From what you know, how, if at all, do you expect LLW and/or the wider PF to change or evolve in the next 6-12 months?
And are there other ways in which you think it should change, to better meet its aims for families or system change?

Thank you and ending interview

Is there anything else you would like to add?
Do you have any questions about the research?
Are you happy to be quoted anonymously in any reports?
Check contact details for sharing copy of notes.

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee professional stakeholder interviews Wave 1 discussion guide – Linlathen works operational staff

Notes

This is a topic guide, not a questionnaire – it is a guide to steer the conversation to ensure relevant topics are covered appropriately, with suggestions of questions that might be useful. It is not expected that interviewers will ask every question, and interviews may not proceed linearly – interviewers will follow up on issues raised by participants as appropriate.
You will be interviewing stakeholders in a range of different roles with respect to the Pathfinder. This version of the topic guide includes questions we think are more likely to be relevant to operational staff – Linlathen Works Key Workers, and the Operational Manager. There are separate topic guides for other professional partners in Dundee.

Summary of key aims/topics for interview:

Across the professional stakeholder interviews, we want to find out:

Whether and how professionals think the PF is delivering impacts for families in poverty, and
Whether and how the PF is delivering system change
With a focus on understanding barriers, facilitators, and lessons for future roll-out (locally and in other areas of Scotland)
Each topic guide covers all three, though this topic guide is more focused on delivery and impacts for families.

Introduction

Introduce self and Ipsos

Check in with how they are. Is now still an OK time to speak to us?
Introduce the research: The Scottish Government has commissioned Ipsos to evaluate the Child Poverty Pathfinders in Dundee and Glasgow.

We’re doing qual interviews in two main waves, in addition to the early interviews we did at the scoping phase – this is wave 1, wave 2 will be later in the year in Autumn.

Discuss anonymity and confidentiality.

Won’t use any names in the report. If we use quotes in the report, they will be anonymous.
Hope they will feel able be open in your answers, as the learning from this will hopefully help inform improvements across Scotland.
But, we are aware that offering concrete guarantees of confidentiality is very difficult in this context as are only certain people working on the PF and may be obvious who you are from what you say.
So we will share our notes on the interview with you after the interview, and you can let us know if there is anything you would rather wasn’t included or wouldn’t want to be quoted on.
Remind participant(s) that they don’t have to answer any questions they don’t want to answer, and that they are welcome to stop the interview at any time.
Discuss how long the interview will last (and how long they have)
Request permission to record – this in case my notes are unclear and I need to go back and check anything. The recording will not be shared with anyone outside the research team and will be securely deleted after the research is complete.
Any questions before we start?
At start of recording – I just need to confirm for the record that you are giving verbal consent that you are happy to take part in this interview, and happy for the interview to be recorded for Ipsos to listen back to.

About the participant and their role on the PF

To start off with, it would be helpful if you could very briefly describe your role

How much of your time each week is spent on activities directly related to Linlathen Works vs. other things?

Current understanding of the PF

Before I ask you about delivering LLW in more detail, just wanted to ask you a bit about what you understand to be the aims and scope of the Dundee Pathfinder as we know from the conversations we’ve had with PF partners since October that the PF is continuing to evolve. It would be helpful to hear from you how you would describe the Dundee Child Poverty PF at the moment

Probe if necessary / if time:

What do you see as its main aims?

Probe around aims for improving outcomes for families, and system-change aims (improving system of services and support for families in Dundee)

Have the aims changed over time? How? Are they now settled or are they continuing to evolve?
What would you include as part of the PF? Linlathen Works, Stobswell pilot, Employability Service development, other things?
How have the activities it involves changed over time?

Views on Linlathen Works model and impact for families

We’d like to understand a bit more about your views on how these different elements have been working and what other areas (not just in Dundee) could learn from this.

Drop-in model

Can you describe a typical drop-in session?
Who tends to attend the drop-ins?
Balance between families with children and other types of households?
And between Linlathen / Mid Craigie families and families/households from elsewhere?

In terms of families with children:

Which families do you think come most often for help? Is there any pattern in terms of needs or types of families that come more often?
Are there any groups you feel are missing or don’t tend to come to the drop-in? If so, why do you think they aren’t coming? Is there anything that might help engage them?

What works well about the drop-ins?
What are the main challenges / things that work less well?
What have you learned from the drop-ins that you would recommend that other areas / LAs do / do not do if they are thinking about running a similar drop-in?

Targeted outreach

Our understanding is that you’ve been doing targeted door knocking to engage Linlathen families since October 2022 and with Mid Craigie families since early 2024.

Could you talk us through how you approach this?
What do you say on the doorstep? Has this changed over time?
When families don’t want to take up support, what do they tell you about this?
Are there particular families that are easier / harder to engage through targeted outreach? E.g. in terms of their needs or family type.

Probe again on TCPDP groups – SG is particularly interested in learning about supporting large families, families with babies, young mothers, single parents, families with a disabled family member, and families from ethnic minority backgrounds as they’re all groups that tend to be at higher risk of being in poverty.

Is there any learning from your outreach about what does / doesn’t work with any of these groups?
How good is the data you have to support your door-knocking? Are you able to identify the right families through this?
What have you learned about what works / doesn’t work in approaching families? What would you want to share with other areas who might be considering doing something similar?

Ongoing engagement with families through LLW

Can you tell us a bit more about your contact with families once they are engaged with LLW?
What’s the balance between seeing families at drop-in and outside drop-in sessions?
What kinds of contact do you have with families outside the drop-in? (probe on mode – e.g. face-to-face appointments, telephone, text, probe on how long, typically, people receive support for – both length of individual contacts and time period they support them for).
Which families do you tend to have most involvement with after you first get in touch with them?
Do you think there is any pattern to this, in terms of either their needs or their characteristics – i.e. are there some families who don’t engage much after first contact?
What are the reasons why you / LLW might have less engagement with some families?

Probe if necessary

Any issues relating to the PF / its resources (e.g. lack of KW time, time/location of the drop-in)?
Any issues around family attitudes towards seeking/accepting support?
Any other reasons/barriers?
What, if anything, do you feel you have learned about what works to keep families who need it engaged with support over time?
What, if anything, could you/others do differently to engage families (and keep them engaged)?

Support for families

Thinking about the families LLW has supported, can you talk me through the types of support they have been offered?

Probe around:

Issues they’ve been supported with – employment, education/training, benefits/grants, food, fuel, childcare, clothing for children housing, mental health/wider health and wellbeing, anything else?
Way support has been offered – e.g. to what extent does support involve:
KW directly helping them access what they need (e.g. form filling, direct provision of support)
KW referring them to another service at the drop-in
KW referring them to another service outwith the drop-in
LLW/PF offering them a service directly – e.g. the return to work course.

Referral processes

How does the referral process work? Is it different depending on different services?
Do KW follow up once a referral has been made? (How many times?)
Overall, how well do you think the referral process is currently working? What are the most important factors in this?
How do you decide what support to offer families?
How far is it based on responding to specific asks, vs. KWs identifying needs and suggesting things they might find helpful?
Is this different for LL/MC families vs. wider clients using the drop-in?
Are there any restrictions on the support that KW are able to offer? (e.g. by time, resource, knowledge of what’s available, eligibility criteria, KPIs, etc.)
Is this different for LL/MC families vs. wider clients using the drop-in?
How do they assess what support families need?
How formal is this – e.g. do they set goals with families, or is it more informal than that?
How much do these assessments differ from one service user to another? I.e. how much does both the process for setting goals and the actual goals themselves vary from person to person?
Has the type of support the families you work with need changed over time? How? Why?
How far are you seeing individual families moving on from coming in with crisis issues (food, bills, housing) to looking at longer-term changes (employment / training)?
And how far has the balance of the support you are providing as a service, overall, changed over time? E.g. balance of your time spent on employability vs. wider issues?

Outcomes

What are your overall reflections on how effective you think the LLW approach is?
How different is what LLW is doing from what was available for families previously?
What impact has it had on you and the way you work? (probe for both positive and negative impacts)

Outcomes for families

Where do you feel LLW has been able to make most difference to families with children?
Are there areas where you feel it has been harder to help or make a difference so far?

Probe around:

Whether there are particular issues families face you feel you have been able to make more / less able of a difference on so far?

If not mentioned, probe around

helping them access (better) work/training;
improving their income from benefits;
helping with cost-of-living issues;
and wider issues like confidence and health and wellbeing. (both parents and children)
Are there particular types of families it’s been easier or harder to make a difference for? (e.g. probe re. TCPDP family types)
What elements of how LLW is set-up or delivered do you think have worked well / are most effective in supporting families? Probe as necessary
Multi-agency drop-in
Location (being based in Brooksbank)
Door-knocking
Role of key worker / relationships with families
Joint working between LLW and other services outside the drop-in
Anything else?
What have been the main challenges or barriers to being able to achieve positive outcomes for families? Probe if necessary, e.g.
Availability of other services?
LLW staff time?
Families’ feelings about accessing services?
Data sharing issues?
Wider benefits system?
Anything else?
How easy or difficult is it to manage targeting support to LL / MC families and running drop-in for wider clients?
What would you say is the balance of time you spend on LL/MC families with children vs. wider case load? Has this changed over time?
Are you subject to any targets or performance measures, or is it up to individual KWs how they use their time?
What are the main things you have learned from LLW / the PF about how to improve outcomes for families with children that you would share with other areas?

Outcomes for wider ‘system’ / services

Thinking now about wider services that help support families with children in Linlathen and Mid Craigie
Has the PF and LLW been able to help build positive working relationships with other services? If yes, which services?
What were the facilitators of this? E.g. meetings, sharing learning, sharing staff, etc. – what works to support positive joint working?
Where are there gaps / services that could work more effectively together for families but don’t at the moment?
Why? What are the barriers to joint working? (e.g. probe on time/resource if not covered)
Has LLW and the PF made any difference to how other services work with families with children?
If yes, what difference? Which services? How was this achieved / how did LLW influence these services?
What are the things you think still need to change in terms of how services work in order to better meet the needs of families in Dundee?
If other services made those changes, do you think there would still be a need for LLW or not? Why?

Suggested improvements and future

What, if anything, would you change about LLW or the wider PF to help it make more of a difference to outcomes for families with children?
From what you know, how, if at all, do you expect LLW and/or the wider PF to change or evolve in the next 6-12 months?
And are there other ways in which you think it should change, to better meet its aims for families or system change?

Thank you and ending interview

Is there anything else you would like to add?
Do you have any questions about the research?
Are you happy to be quoted anonymously in any reports?
Check contact details for sharing copy of notes.

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee professional stakeholder interviews Wave 1 discussion guide – other professionals

Notes

This is a topic guide, not a questionnaire – it is a guide to steer the conversation to ensure relevant topics are covered appropriately, with suggestions of questions that might be useful. It is not expected that interviewers will ask every question, and interviews may not proceed linearly – interviewers will follow up on issues raised by participants as appropriate.

You will be interviewing stakeholders in a range of different roles with respect to the Pathfinder. This version of the topic guide is aimed at other services involved in the LLW drop-in. There are separate topic guides for the immediate key worker team and a topic guide for more strategic partners. However, you will still need to use your judgement about which questions are relevant to which interviewees, depending on their responses.

Summary of key aims/topics for interview:

Across the professional stakeholder interviews, we want to find out:
Whether and how professionals think the PF is delivering impacts for families in poverty, and
Whether and how the PF is delivering system change
With a focus on understanding barriers, facilitators, and lessons for future roll-out (locally and in other areas of Scotland)
Each topic guide covers all three: this topic guide focuses particularly on delivery and impacts for families and perceptions of the impact of the PF on their service.

Introduction

Introduce self and Ipsos
Check in with how they are. Is now still an OK time to speak to us?
Introduce the research: The Scottish Government has commissioned Ipsos to evaluate the Child Poverty Pathfinders in Dundee and Glasgow.
We’re taking a multi-method approach to this, including both quant data (using PF’s own monitoring data and, potentially, using linked admin data to look at outcomes for families over time) and qual data, including interviews with families and with professionals – which is where you come in.
We’re doing qual interviews in two main waves, in addition to the early interviews we did at the scoping phase – this is wave 1, wave 2 will be later in the year in Autumn.
Discuss anonymity and confidentiality.
Won’t use any names in the report. If we use quotes in the report, they will be anonymous.
Hope they will feel able be open in your answers, as the learning from this will hopefully help inform improvements across Scotland.
Also ask you to respect each other’s confidentiality, as this is a group interview.
But, we are aware that offering concrete guarantees of confidentiality is very difficult in this context as are only certain people working on the PF and may be obvious who you are from what you say.
So we will share our notes on the interview with you after the interview, and you can let us know if there is anything you would rather wasn’t included or wouldn’t want to be quoted on.
Remind participant that they don’t have to answer any questions they don’t want to answer, and that they are welcome to stop the interview at any time.
Group discussion will last around 60-90 minutes (check how long they have available).
Request permission to record – this in case my notes are unclear and I need to go back and check anything. The recording will not be shared with anyone outside the research team and will be securely deleted after the research is complete.
Any questions before we start?
At start of recording – I just need to confirm for the record that you are giving verbal consent that you are happy to take part in this interview, and happy for the interview to be recorded for Ipsos to listen back to.

About the participants’ organisation and their role on the PF

To start off with, it would be helpful if you could very briefly tell me a bit about the service you work for, your role, and your involvement with the PF / Linlathen Works (briefly go round room)

If necessary, prompt on:
What does your service do? What kinds of support does it offer people?
What is your day-to-day role? How does your involvement in the PF / Linlathen Works fit into this?
How much of your time is spent on LLW / the PF vs. other roles?
Are you just involved in LLW / the PF through the drop-in, or are you involved in any other ways?
How long have you worked with LLW / the PF? (Is this the same for their organisation?)

Current understanding of the PF

Before I ask you about the drop-in in more detail, just wanted to ask you a bit about what you understand to be the aims and scope of the Dundee Pathfinder as we know from the conversations we’ve had with PF partners since October that the PF is continuing to evolve. It would be helpful to hear from you how you would describe the Dundee Child Poverty PF at the moment

Probe if necessary / if time:

What do you see as its main aims?

Probe around aims for improving outcomes for families, and system-change aims (improving system of services and support for families in Dundee)

Have the aims changed over time? How? Are they now settled or are they continuing to evolve?
What would you include as part of the PF? Linlathen Works, Stobswell pilot, Employability Service development, other things?
How have the activities it involves changed over time?

Drop-in model – delivery, reach and support offered

How often do you / your service attend the drop-in? (Every week or intermittent?)
Can you describe a typical drop-in session?
What is your role?
What is the role of the LLW Key Workers?
Who tends to attend the drop-ins?
Balance between families with children and other types of households?
And between Linlathen / Mid Craigie families and families/households from elsewhere?

In terms of families with children:

Which families do you think come most often for help? Is there any pattern in terms of needs or types of families that come more often?
Are there any groups you feel are missing or don’t tend to come to the drop-in? If so, why do you think they aren’t coming? Is there anything that might help engage them?

Probe on TCPDP groups: SG is particularly interested in learning about supporting large families, families with babies, young mothers, single parents, families with a disabled family member, and families from ethnic minority backgrounds as they’re all groups that tend to be at higher risk of being in poverty. Are any of these groups you do / don’t tend to see coming to the drop-in? Why?

What kinds of support do you offer at the drop-in?

To what extent does support involve:

you directly helping them access what they need (e.g. form filling, direct provision of advice/support)
you following up with them outside the drop-in (how often do you tend to engage with individuals – is it mostly one-offs engagements or ongoing?)
you referring them to other services/support?

Referral processes

Do the LLW key workers refer their clients to you? How does this work in practice?
Do KW follow up once a referral has been made? (How many times?)
If you refer onto other services - how does that work?
Overall, how well do you think referral processes a) from LLW KWs and b) from you to other services is currently working? What are the most important factors in this?
Thinking about families with children specifically, has the type of support families coming to the drop-in with need changed over time over the course of the Pathfinder? How? Why?
And how far are you seeing individual families moving on from coming in with crisis issues (food, bills, housing) to looking at longer-term changes (employment / training)?
What works well about the drop-ins?
What are the main challenges / things that work less well?
What have you learned from the drop-ins that you would recommend that other areas / LAs do / do not do if they are thinking about running a similar drop-in?

Outcomes

What are your overall reflections on how effective you think the LLW approach is?
How different is what LLW is doing from what was available for families previously?
How does the approach taken by LLW compare with how your service has engaged / offered support previously? In what ways is it similar or different?
What impact has it had on you and the way you work? (probe for both positive and negative impacts)

Outcomes for families

Where do you feel LLW has been able to make most difference to families with children?
Are there areas where you feel it has been harder to help or make a difference so far?

Probe around:

Whether there are particular issues families face you feel you have been able to make more / less able of a difference on so far (and why?)?

If not mentioned, probe around

helping them access (better) work/training;
improving their income from benefits;
helping with cost-of-living issues;
and wider issues like confidence and health and wellbeing. (both parents and children)
Are there particular types of families it’s been easier or harder to make a difference for? (e.g. probe re. TCPDP family types)
What elements of how LLW is set-up or delivered do you think have worked well / are most effective in supporting families? Probe as necessary
Multi-agency drop-in
Location (being based in Brooksbank)
Door-knocking by key workers
Role of key worker / relationships with families
Joint working between LLW and other services outside the drop-in
Anything else?
What have been the main challenges or barriers to being able to achieve positive outcomes for families? Probe if necessary, e.g.
Availability of other services?
LLW staff time?
Time and resource within your own service?
Families’ feelings about accessing services?
Data sharing issues?
Wider benefits system?
What are the main things you have learned from LLW / the PF about how to improve outcomes for families with children that you would share with other areas?

Outcomes for wider ‘system’ / services

Thinking now about the wider ‘system’ of services that help support families with children …

Has the PF and LLW been able to help build positive working relationships with other services? If yes, which services?
What have been the facilitators of this? E.g. meetings, sharing learning, sharing staff, etc. – what works to support positive joint working?
Where are there gaps / services that could work more effectively together for families but don’t at the moment?
Why? What are the barriers to joint working?(e.g. probe on time/resource if not covered)
Has LLW and the PF made any difference to how your service works with families with children?
If yes, what are you doing differently and why?
What about other services – have you noticed any changes in how they approach working with families with children?
What are the things you think still need to change in terms of how services work in order to better meet the needs of families in Dundee?
If other services made those changes, do you think there would still be a need for LLW or not? Why?

Suggested improvements and future

What, if anything, would you change about LLW or the wider PF to help it make more of a difference to outcomes for families with children?
From what you know, how, if at all, do you expect LLW and/or the wider PF to change or evolve in the next 6-12 months?
And are there other ways in which you think it should change, to better meet its aims for families or system change?

Thank you and ending interview

Is there anything else you would like to add?
Do you have any questions about the research?
Are you happy to be quoted anonymously in any reports?
Check contact details for sharing copy of notes.

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee families interviews Wave 2 discussion guide

Structure of this topic guide:

The subheadings set out the key topics to explore in each interview. You may not follow them in this order, however – it’s likely you’ll move between topics as interviewees mention them.
We’ve included less prescriptive detail / precise questions than in the Wave 1 topic guide, given how flexibly these needed to be used in practice. There may also be other topics that come up and you should explore these if you think they are relevant to the evaluation.
Please make sure you have explored the topics listed in sufficient detail before finishing the interview. You may need to take a couple of minutes to review and revisit topics before ending the interview.

Key topics that we want to explore in more detail than at wave 1 include:

Employment and training – even for those who are not currently considering this, we want to explore whether they see this as something for their future, why/why not, and what the barriers are / what would need to change to make this an option they could consider. This will need sensitive handling, but we do want to pull this out a bit more at wave 2.
Sustainability of outcomes – especially re. employment, training and finances.
Feelings about asking for support – and whether would be able to seek support for themselves if KW wasn’t available (re. hypothesis 5 above).
For repeat interviews, there are notes on specific things you might want to focus on, but generally it will be a case of checking if things have changed/happened since the last interview under each theme (and no harm in asking some questions again, to see if get further reflections).

Topic guide

Section 1: Informed consent – check if they’ve read the leaflet and then reiterate key points:

What the research is about and who it’s for
What we’ll do with their answers – will use to write a report, but anything we include will be anonymous – no names, and SG won’t know who took part. Won’t share any names or contact details.
No right or wrong answers.
Voluntary – can stop interview at any time. No consequences for support.
Check if have any questions.
Give them a copy of the privacy notice and leaflet to take away.
Start recording - record consent to take part and (if agree) be audio-recorded.

Section 2: Background information about the participant

For repeat interviews, check any changes to circumstances
Make sure they are a LL/MC family with children <16
Check their age, number/age of children, who they live with, current socio-economic status (whether they’re working, studying, volunteering or looking after family at the moment, and if economically active, what and how long they’ve been doing that).

Section 3: ‘Story’ of their engagement with Linlathen Works over time

For repeat interviews: Focus on engagement / contact with PF since previous interview (recap what they told us last time)

Initial engagement

When/how they first heard of LLW?
When/how they first had contact with them?
Initial expectations/concerns (what did they hope to get help with)?
Views on door-knocking (where relevant) – how did they feel about it? Would they have engaged with the PF without it? Had anyone else done that previously?

Further / ongoing engagement – want detailed picture of contact over time:

When / how / how much contact / what type of contact they’ve had with LLW since first got in touch?
Balance between attending drop-in and contact with KW outside drop-in? And whether this has changed over time?
Has anyone else in their family had contact with LLW? What /how much etc.?
Views on level of contact? Would they like more / less? Why?
Barriers / facilitators to engaging with LLW? Anything that’s made it difficult? Anything that’s helped?

Section 4: Understanding what their support needs are and where (else) they’ve looked for help

Repeat interviews: What, if any, issues or challenges have they had since last interview? (Could recap what they told us last time first)
What kinds of issues were they facing when first had contact with LLW?
Probe on the nature/range of issues and the impact they were having –
Help with money / benefits? (if benefits – which ones?)
Check if they are entitled to any benefits, and is this something they’ve had any support with from LLW or not? If are entitled: check what benefits they are currently receiving (e.g. what benefits are you currently receiving?)
Help with jobs or employment? (in what way?)
Help with training / skills / education?
Help with childcare?
Help with their health and wellbeing? (what type of help did they need?)
Any other issues? Housing? Food? Fuel?
Had they looked for support with any of these from elsewhere?
If yes, who from, and what happened, if no, why not?
What help did they hope to get from LLW on these issues?
Repeat interviews: Want to understand if they’re still going to the PF for help, or are they managing issues themselves, either without support or accessing support directly (without going through KW).
If not going through KW – are they still using the drop-in for support, or accessing support outside the drop-in?

Needs, barriers and support re. employment specifically:

All: Have they discussed employment / training with anyone at LLW? If yes, who, and what have they discussed? What was impact of this?
If not working / weren’t working when first in contact with PF: What are / have been the barriers to them getting a job? Have they ever had any help / advice around these? What was the outcome?
If not working: do they see themselves moving into work at some point? If not: What would need to change to make this a realistic option for them?
Probe on current feelings about employment / training, and whether this has changed at all since involvement with PF?

Other outstanding needs / barriers:

What else, if anything, do they feel they need help with at the moment?
Have they discussed this with LLW / anyone else? What was the outcome of this? If not, why not?

Section 5: How the Pathfinder has assessed their needs and provided support

What conversations have they had with KWs about their needs? Have they been able to discuss all the areas that mattered to them with their KW? Anything haven’t been able to discuss?
Types of support KW(s) have offered (inc. balance between KWs referring them to others/helping them directly).

Probe for detail on types of support and whether/how these helped:

Advice?
Speaking to other people for them? (Who?)
Organising things – e.g. filling in forms/applications?
Putting them in touch with other orgs?
Impacts of different support offered. How helpful or not? Any support offered but not taken up? Why?
Views on relationship with KW(s) / support provided and if/how this differs from relationship with / support provided by other professionals
What specifically is it about how they work with people that they find helpful?

Probe on what they do that is different from other services? Want to try and unpack if there are things they have offered / done for them that no one else has? Or what they say helps mostly about how they do it (e.g. approachable etc)?

Have they had help from other services with similar issues? If yes, was the support from the Pathfinder different or similar? Want to explore whether what the Pathfinder offers is additional or substituting other services
Anything they find less helpful?
What other services referred to from LLW – at drop-in and beyond
Detail on who? What happened? What was the outcome?
Barriers/facilitators to taking up referrals/signposting?
Why hadn’t they contacted those services before?
Would they contact them directly now, or would they still prefer to go through KW? Why?

Section 6: Outcomes for families

Key – make sure probe in detail.

For repeat interviews – probe on new outcomes / reflections now on previous outcomes mentioned

Views on what has changed for them & their family as result of contact with LLW.

Probe specifically on:

Any impacts on employment/training and feelings about work?
Their financial situation – including benefits and other income?
Quality of life / health / wellbeing (theirs, their children’s) – and what contributed to this (e.g. reduced financial stress, or direct support with MH/health)?
What specifically about the support the PF offered led to these outcomes? Probe in detail – especially want to understand if direct help or referrals, and role of KW in this.
Probe on role of different elements in outcomes:
Key workers – what was it they did specifically that helped make these changes?
Drop-in? How important was the drop-in to changes they’ve described?
Something else?
What would have happened if they hadn’t been in touch with LLW? Would they have got any of this help from somewhere else?
Probe around sustainability of employment / financial outcomes:
If help getting job – are they happy with job? Is it a job they see themselves doing for a while?
If help getting training / volunteering – where do they see themselves going next? What do they hope to do with their training / volunteer experience?
If help with money/benefits: how manageable do they feel their financial situation is now? Do they feel they still need more help with money to make it manageable long-term? What? Is this something they’ve spoken to LLW about?
How do they feel about asking for support now? Any different to how they felt when first contacted PF?
Would they be comfortable / know where to go for support if KW wasn’t available?
Have they started using other services as well as LLW? (Want to explore whether more aware of services that can support them and/or more willing to ask them for support.)

Section 7: Overview and suggestions for improvement

Accessibility of support – views on ease/difficulty of getting the support they need from LLW
Anything they could do to get more families from LL/MC to use LLW?

Section 8: Consent to recontact, thank you vouchers and finish.

Read out: Just to remind you, we’ll be writing a report to summarise everything you and others have told us about the Linlathen Works project. It will be published on the Scottish Government website, so you’ll be able to search for it and read it if you’re interested. It will probably be published spring/summer next year.

If yes to the above, complete contact details sheet and add to secure spreadsheet.

Thank you voucher: Check whether prefer amazon voucher or L2S – make sure they sign receipt for this.
Check if any questions.
Thank and close

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee professional stakeholders Interviews Wave 2 discussion guide

Structure of this topic guide:

We’ve included fewer prescriptive details / precise questions than in the Wave 1 topic guide, so that these questions can be somewhat adapted for different audiences. Where questions are only relevant for a particular audience, this is noted.
Please make sure you have explored the topics listed in sufficient detail before finishing the interview. You may need to take a couple of minutes to review and revisit topics before ending the interview.

Key topics that we want to explore in more detail than at wave 1 include:

Views on longer term outcomes for families and systems - whether these are likely to be met, and for whom
Value for Money – more specific detail on whether they feel the project has been delivered as efficiently and economically as it could have been – i.e. any areas where could have been delivered differently, or with less resources, but still produced the same (or better) outcomes?
Scaling up – what would ‘scaling’ up the Linlathen Works approach in other areas of Dundee look like? Which elements would need to be replicated?
Key workers/training – KWs have come out as a key strength of the PF in earlier interviews, but what has supported this? How could it be replicated elsewhere? What is the role of recruitment vs training in developing effective KWs?
Relationship between CPP and other initiatives – e.g. No one left behind (NOLB), Early Adopting Communities (EAC), Dundee Fairness Initiative (DFI) – (how) are they working together? Are they avoiding duplication?
Monitoring & Evaluation – challenges and views on future approach (both in Dundee and for other areas)

Topic guide

Section 1: Informed consent

Check if they’ve read the information sheet and then reiterate key points:
What the research is about/who it’s for
What we’ll do with their answers – writing a report, but anything we include will be anonymous – no names.
However, obviously relatively small numbers of people in particular roles, so can’t guarantee won’t be identifiable.
If they feel that something they’ve said could itself be identifying and they would rather we didn’t refer directly to this in the report let us know.
Offer to share notes after interview if they’d like to review.
Voluntary – can stop interview at any time.
Check if have any questions.
Start recording - record consent to take part and (if agree) be audio-recorded.

Section 2: Background information about the participant

Overview of role in general & how this relates to the Pathfinder
For repeat interviews, check if anything has changed since Wave 1
For new interviews, probe in more detail – e.g. when first got involved with PF, how this has evolved over time, current involvement, etc.

Section 3: Pathfinder activities – any changes to work with families

(Operational team interviews only. Cover most of this fairly briefly, but probe around balance between families and other HHs and working with other services)
Since we carried out interviews about the PF back in June/July, has anything changed about the way the PF has been working with families?
Explore reasons for changes and impact of those changes.

If not mentioned, probe on any changes to:

The Drop-in
Outreach activities (door-to-door and other)
The way the KW team work together
The way the KW team work with families
How many families / households are they working intensively with at the moment? (How) has this changed over time?
Which types of households are they working with more intensively? Just households with children, or also younger people, older people, other households?
How do KWs decide who to follow up with (more)?
The focus of activities – what they’re trying to achieve, who they’re focusing on (which types of LL/MC households)?
Balance between work with families with children and other households, including young people, grandparents?
When they’re supporting young people or grandparents, are those people that are coming into the drop-in, or are some of them wider members of families with children <16 that they’ve identified through targeting?
Any change to the balance between families with children/other types of households they’re supporting more intensively over time?
(SG/Op manager: Is it all funded through same pot? I.e. work with families with children under 16 and other types of HHs)
Which partners LLW engage with / how they work with them
Probe around school-aged childcare pilot at Rowantree, Dundee Fairness Initiative, Employability services if not mentioned.
How closely do they work together? How much overlap is there between Pathfinder service users and people using these other services?
With Employability services, at what point do people move from LLW to more Employability Service? Who decides this?
Anything else?

Section 4: Progress on longer term outcomes for families

(Likely to spend longer on this with operational team than strategic interviewees, but still worth exploring elements of this with other interviewees)

For all:

From our previous interviews, we’ve heard a lot about the short-term positive impacts that the PF is having for families. We’d like to focus a bit more on the longer-term impacts today. (Acknowledge – questions may be harder to answer for those further away from delivery, so just say if feel can’t answer)

Our understanding is that the aim of the PF is to set families on a pathway to longer-term and sustainable routes out of poverty, by increasing employability and empowering families to make change for themselves.

To what extent does this feel like an accurate description of how they see the aim of the Pathfinder? If not quite right, how would they describe the aim?

On increasing employability:

To what extent do they feel LLW has been able to move LL/MC families on from support with things like food, fuel and housing, to considering future employment?
Which LL/MC families has this worked for?
Are there examples of families who aren’t currently engaging in employability activities, but who are making steps towards this?
What does progress towards employment look like for these families?
Which LL/MC families do they feel LLW hasn’t been able to make progress with on employability? How big a group is this?
Why is it easier / more challenging to help different families move towards considering employment?

Explore barriers/enablers to moving families towards employment

What have they learned about when / how to approach moving discussions on to employment / training?
How do they identify which families are ready to move on to this?
How do they work out when the right time is?
Understand that around 75% of LL families are in the No Work Related Requirements category – what does / could increasing employability look like for this group?
If employment isn’t a realistic outcome, what can the PF do to help these families? Is there a different long-term goal for them?
What would need to change for the PF to be able to move more families to employment, training or volunteering outcomes?

On empowering families to make change for themselves:

What do they think this would look like for the families they’re working with?
How realistic is aim of empowering families to make change for themselves in future?
Are there families they feel this is a more / less realistic aim for?
Are families using other services more or less as a result of the PF at the moment?
Which services? Why?
Do they think this will change in the future?
Want to explore whether the PF is surfacing unmet demand for other services (i.e. people who needed help but weren’t coming forward before) and/or whether they’re also alleviating pressure on other services by providing support themselves.
Are they seeing indications that families are becoming less reliant on key workers / the PF over time?
Any that no longer need the PF and are sustaining in employment / financially stable?
Examples? What helped families to become more self-reliant?
Any that are becoming more reliant on the PF over time? Why?
Which families are / are not becoming less reliant on the PF? Why?
Another longer-term goal that’s been discussed in relation to the PF is helping families achieve financial stability
What do they think financial stability would look like for the families they’re working with?
Is it different for different families? E.g. for those on NWRRs vs. those without health/caring barriers?
How realistic is aim of helping families achieve financial stability?
Are there families they feel this is a more / less realistic aim for?
Are they seeing indications that families are becoming more financially stable?
Examples? What helped families to become more financially stable? What are the key things the PF has done to support this?
What are the barriers to supporting families to become more financially stable?

Section 5: Progress on system change activities and outcomes (all interviewees, though cover more briefly with DWP/Soc Sec Sc.)

Make sure probe in detail on this
Thinking about the aspects of the PF that are more about system change and influencing how others work with families, has there been any recent progress / developments relating to:
The service design workshops? On reflection, how, if at all, have these influenced practice for the PF or wider services? Whose practice? In what ways?
The ‘sprints’ workshops to try and agree outcomes/activities for partners working with PF families / similar families who are further from employment
Did they attend these?
Have these been taken forward? How?
What progress has there been towards development of an approach for ES for parents in ‘tier 3’? (probe especially in E.S. interview)
All interviewees, inc. Soc Sec Sc. and DWP: Data sharing?

Make sure understand the different issues there have been and where progress has and has not been made, e.g.: data sharing to support targeting families; data sharing between partners to identify what help families might need; data sharing to enable Pathfinders to track outcomes for families they have referred on.

What progress has there been since early Summer?
What are the key things that have helped?
Where are the continuing blocks/issues?
What are the lessons for other areas?
Development of shared principles across partners?
Has this progressed since the PF started? And more recently?
How? Which partners have developed shared values?
What were key elements that contributed to this?
Development of shared outcome frameworks/measures between partners?
Has this progressed since the PF started? And more recently?
How? Which partners have developed shared outcomes?
What were key elements that contributed to this?
Any other activities that have been more about wider system Pathfinder operates in / influencing other organisations’ approaches to working with families like those in LL?
What has been the impact of these to date?
Earlier interviews highlighted various ‘system change’ aims for the PF. How far do they feel there has been progress on each of the following?

Probe for examples of changes:

Gaps in provision for families filled
If feel there has been progress on this, how is the PF achieving this? Backfilling for overstretched services, vs. other services identifying and filling gaps?
Wider services adapt as result of feedback from the Pathfinder?
Probe for any further examples – what feedback, what adaptations?
Has PF involved / informed any community involvement in development / design / provision of services?
More case conferencing
Improved trust between partners
Probe – which partners? What has achieved this?

Section 6: Key worker approach

(Operational team)
Something that was generally seen as working well at W1 was the key worker element of the PF and there was an appetite to explore how to make this work effectively for other areas/teams.
What do you think has contributed most to the KW team having been able to build relationships and support families?
Any learning you would share with other areas / teams? What’s been most / least useful in terms of …
Probe re:
Recruitment approach?
Training? Topics / timings / who provides / what’s been most useful?
How to support / manage the KW team effectively?
How to empower frontline workers to provide support that people need?
Roles within the team?
DWP/Soc Sec Sc.:
What have you learned from having a KW in the team?
What, if anything, has been the value to DWP / Soc Sec Sc. of having shared team?
Do you think this is something you will replicate this in other areas of Dundee / Scotland? Why / why not?

Section 7: Value for Money

(All interviewees – but different people may be able to comment at different levels)

Value for money is obviously something the SG and other funders have to think about when they’re considering how a programme has worked and what, if anything, they might do differently if they were thinking about setting up a similar programme somewhere else. Know this can feel a bit sensitive, but it’s important to talk about it as it’s one of the key things funders ask about.

It’s too early to measure the long-term impacts of the PF, so not focusing on that in asking about VfM. But we can explore other elements of VfM, like what resources are needed to deliver LLW, whether any of the costs could have been reduced without also reducing the impact, and whether any aspects of a programme could have been delivered more efficiently.

Thinking about the different parts of the PF, are there any that you feel could have been delivered differently, or with less resource, but still have achieved the same (or better) impacts?
Probe on different elements – What about:
The drop-in sessions?
Was the number of sessions right? Could they have been run less often?
Were the partners right? Was there any duplication or overlap of drop-in partners that, with hindsight, wasn’t necessary?
Were the sessions always run efficiently? What advice would you give to anyone else setting something similar up about how to run something like this as efficiently as possible?
The outreach – is there any other way you think families in LL/MC could have been reached that might have worked in the same way or better?
The structure of the LLW team:
Is the team structure / size right?
What if had fewer KWs? Or more?
The Oversight Board and general management of the project? (NB KWs may not know about this, but can ask)
Has this been at right level (in terms of who is involved and time spent) to manage the programme efficiently / effectively? If not, what would have worked better?
Training and other external facilitated sessions
How useful were these? What, if anything, did they add to delivery?
Monitoring activities: We know this has been challenging in terms of time it’s taken from the team and completeness/accuracy of data.
What would have made PF monitoring data:
Easier and less time consuming to collect?
More effective, so that it captured data on outcomes for families that could be shared externally more easily?
Any other costs that you think could have been reduced or things you think, with hindsight, could have been delivered more efficiently than they were?
(If not covered at costs workshop) Have there been any unplanned or unexpected costs since the PF started?
Were the costs of delivery as expected, or were any higher or lower than anticipated?
Has the pathfinder led to any efficiency gains elsewhere? E.g. has it made it easier for other services to reach more people in need, or to better take-up of other services? Has the co-location of services reduced outreach costs to others?
Are there any areas where they feel there has been overlap or duplication in what other services and the Pathfinder have offered? If yes – which services and in what ways?

Section 8: Scaling up

(All interviewees – but different people may be able to comment at different levels)

One of the questions the Scottish Government and its partners are interested in is what the PF approach would look like ‘scaled up’.
If the decision is taken to ‘scale-up’ the approach within Dundee, what do you think this should look like?
How should plans for ‘scaling up’ be targeted?
How should they decide which areas / which groups of people to focus this kind of approach on?
Is a place-based approach suitable for every area? Or are there particular types of area it’s better suited to?
Which bits of the LLW approach should be replicated?
Which bits might not be needed?
Which bits could be done in a different way (or by different organisations) in other areas?
What resources would be needed to ‘scale up’ the approach in Dundee?

Probe on:

Key workers – would you need same size/structure of team in other areas? Would their role need to be the same? E.g. re. outreach, support, managing the drop-in – any other way of delivering these roles if it were scaled up?
Management and oversight – what do you think would be needed in terms of operational and strategic management if it was ‘scaled-up’? Who would need to be involved? Over what period?
Drop-in sessions – are there existing drop-ins that could be built on or would these need to be set-up from scratch? What additional resource would be needed?
Training – what training would be needed to support delivery in other areas?
Monitoring – what resources (both time and practical, like software, training etc.) would be needed to support effective monitoring?
Wider resources to support delivery (e.g. other activities happening around the PF, around childcare, community activities, etc.)
Anything else?

Section 9: Monitoring & evaluation

Already mentioned that monitoring and evaluation has been a challenge.
(All) - If you were starting a project like this from scratch, what would you want to see in place in terms of monitoring tools?
Operational team – Now they’ve been using Outcome Star for a few months, what are their reflections on it?
If another organisation was thinking about using this, or something similar, to track ‘softer’ outcomes, what would they tell them?
Idea of Outcome Star and similar tools is to track change over time, which means getting an initial baseline of where someone is at as early as possible after they engage. At what point is it feasible to use something like Outcome Star with families on a project like LLW, where engagement is very flexible and there aren’t fixed contact points?
How many clients, realistically, would it be possible to use this with if you were aiming to complete it with them every 3-6 months?

Section 10: Wrap up and close

Anything else they would like to share about how the PF has been working?
Check if would like a copy of notes to review ahead our analysis (note in recruitment sheet)
Check if any questions.
Thank and close.

Contact

Email: social-justice-analysis@gov.scot

Thanks for your feedback

Information

Appendix B – Topic guides: Dundee

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee families Wave 1 discussion guide

Section 1: Introduction and consent

Section 2 – Background/building rapport

Section 3 – Initial engagement with the Pathfinder

Section 4 – Ongoing contact with the Pathfinder

Section 5 – Support needs, assessment, and relationship with their key worker

Section 6 – Support, relationship and referrals

Section 7- Outcomes for families

Section 8 – Accessibility of Pathfinder support

Section 9- Summary & thoughts on improvement

Section 10: Wrap up and re-contact

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee Professional Stakeholder Interviews Wave 1 discussion guide – strategic partners

Notes

Introduction

Discuss anonymity and confidentiality.

About the participant and their role on the PF

Current understanding of the PF

Views on Linlathen Works model

General reflections on the model

Reach

Outcomes for families

System change impacts

Suggested improvements and future

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee professional stakeholder interviews Wave 1 discussion guide – Linlathen works operational staff

Notes

Introduction

Discuss anonymity and confidentiality.

About the participant and their role on the PF

Current understanding of the PF

Views on Linlathen Works model and impact for families

Drop-in model

In terms of families with children:

Targeted outreach

Ongoing engagement with families through LLW

Support for families

Referral processes

Outcomes

Outcomes for families

If not mentioned, probe around

Outcomes for wider ‘system’ / services

Suggested improvements and future

Thank you and ending interview

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee professional stakeholder interviews Wave 1 discussion guide – other professionals

Notes

Introduction

About the participants’ organisation and their role on the PF

Current understanding of the PF

Drop-in model – delivery, reach and support offered

Referral processes

Outcomes

Outcomes for families

If not mentioned, probe around

Outcomes for wider ‘system’ / services

Suggested improvements and future

Thank you and ending interview

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee families interviews Wave 2 discussion guide

Topic guide

Section 1: Informed consent – check if they’ve read the leaflet and then reiterate key points:

Section 2: Background information about the participant

Section 3: ‘Story’ of their engagement with Linlathen Works over time

Initial engagement

Section 4: Understanding what their support needs are and where (else) they’ve looked for help

Section 5: How the Pathfinder has assessed their needs and provided support

Section 6: Outcomes for families

Section 7: Overview and suggestions for improvement

Section 8: Consent to recontact, thank you vouchers and finish.

Child Poverty Pathfinder – Dundee professional stakeholders Interviews Wave 2 discussion guide

Topic guide

Section 1: Informed consent

Section 2: Background information about the participant

Section 3: Pathfinder activities – any changes to work with families

Section 4: Progress on longer term outcomes for families

Section 5: Progress on system change activities and outcomes (all interviewees, though cover more briefly with DWP/Soc Sec Sc.)

Section 6: Key worker approach

Section 7: Value for Money

Section 8: Scaling up

Section 9: Monitoring & evaluation

Section 10: Wrap up and close