Whole Family Support Third Sector Delivery Fund: Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment

Health Inequalities

Health inequalities are strongly influenced by social and economic conditions. High levels of poverty and income inequality persist in Scotland, affecting people's ability to afford food, heating, and good-quality housing, and increasing exposure to chronic stress and long-term poor mental and physical health. Data shows large differences in both life expectancy between the most and least deprived areas: life expectancy differs by 8.7 years for females and 11.1 years for males between the 20% most and least deprived areas ^[10].

• what does the evidence suggest about possible impacts of the policy/programme/decision, as planned, on those inequalities of outcome?

Evidence shows increasing demand for third sector services, particularly in relation to mental health, financial hardship and wellbeing, while organisational capacity to meet demand is under growing pressure ^[11].

Research suggests that short-term funding models can limit long-term planning, collaboration and sustainable service delivery across the third sector, whereas more flexible and multi-year funding approaches can improve organisational stability, strengthen partnerships and support better outcomes for communities ^[12] .

Evidence reviews further suggest that collaborative funding approaches, including partnership working and joint delivery models, can improve access to support, strengthen cross-sector relationships and enable a wider range of organisations to contribute to service delivery ^[13].

Learning from place-based initiatives also demonstrates that partnership working across local authorities, third sector organisations and other agencies can provide more effective, holistic and wraparound support for families experiencing socio-economic disadvantage ^[14].

This assessment has identified the third sector as a critical partner in reducing inequalities, particularly where organisations have established relationships with local communities and can reach families who may be less likely to engage with statutory services.

• what gaps are there in key evidence? Is it possible to collect new evidence quickly in other areas?

We recognise there is scope for further improvement in the national collection of robust outcome data demonstrating meaningful benefits for priority family groups. We are working towards a better understanding of this across the wider body of analytical work on WFS, including this fund.

As the Fund is delivered, we will gain more evidence of the impact of the specific interventions pursued by each third sector organisation. This will include work to understand the impact this Fund is having on priority family groups, although it is important to note that evidence related to longer term impacts and links to poverty reduction cannot be collected quickly and require more than a short consultation or survey.

• how could you involve communities of interest (including those with lived experience of poverty and disadvantage) in this process?

People with lived experience of poverty and disadvantage were involved through the Poverty Alliance's Get Heard Scotland citizen panel.

Feedback from panel members emphasised the importance of accessibility, local delivery, coordination between organisations and ensuring families have clear pathways into support. Panel members highlighted that large-scale programmes involving multiple organisations can risk fragmented delivery if strong partnership arrangements are not in place. This feedback reinforced the importance of designing funded activity around local needs, trusted relationships and coordinated support for families.

Given that the funded activities will look different for each awarded third sector organisation or partnership, it will be for organisations to ensure that they include communities in the design, delivery, and evaluation of services, and this will be reflected in the outcomes within the Grant Offer Letters for the Fund.

• how could the programme/policy/decision be adjusted to address inequalities associated with particular groups? Communities of interest or of place who are more at risk of inequalities of the outcome?

The Fund has been designed and adapted to help reduce inequalities experienced by communities that may face additional barriers to accessing services and support, including those experiencing socio-economic disadvantage. The Fund assessment process placed significant emphasis on local partnership working, acknowledging that collaboration with established local organisations is critical to reaching disadvantaged and underserved populations effectively.

Through delivery expectations and agreed objectives, the Fund will seek to encourage locally embedded approaches that build on existing community networks and relationships. Applicants are expected to work in partnership with community-based organisations that have established trust and understanding of local needs. The Fund will also support flexible delivery models, including outreach activity where appropriate, to reduce practical barriers to participation and ensure support can reach communities that may be less able to engage with traditional service delivery approaches.

Scottish Government officials will continue to work with funded third sector organisations and partner agencies to ensure that vulnerable and socio-economically disadvantaged groups are appropriately considered in the delivery of the Fund. Monitoring arrangements will support the collection of information on participation, reach and outcomes, helping to ensure that the work delivers intended outcomes.

• what changes, if any, will be made to the proposal as a result of the assessment? Why are these changes being made and what are the expected outcomes?

In designing the Fund criteria, we encouraged applicants to focus on addressing, holistically and in coordination with statutory services, the child poverty drivers related to WFS to cover areas such as housing, employability, health and wellbeing, early child development, and financial wellbeing, to take account of factors identified through the equalities screening process.

The assessment identified the importance of ongoing monitoring and evaluation to strengthen understanding of longer-term impacts on families and child poverty outcomes. This will be achieved through outcomes monitoring and ongoing review arrangements with third sector partner organisations to help identify any gaps in provision, unintended impacts or opportunities for improvement. Findings will be used to inform future programme development and strengthen evidence on what works in reducing inequalities of outcome for priority family groups.