account arrow-down-linearrow-down-small arrow-downarrow-download arrow-left-small arrow-leftarrow-link arrow-rightarrow-upaudio-less-volume audio-not-playing audio-plus-volume audio awarded books calendar close-modal closedate delete document education emailevent Facebookhamburger impact instagramjustice linkedin location-outline location opinion page phonepinterestplay pluspost preview project reports search-bigsearch-old search share star-full star-open startime twitterwelfare youtube zoom-in zoom-out

New way of working with families in crisis commended by government’s child protection review

The only Family Drug and Alcohol Court (FDAC) in the UK has been successful in improving outcomes for children by tackling the substance misuse of parents at an early stage of care proceedings, according to an independent evaluation of the court published today by the Nuffield Foundation and Brunel University.

Parents who had been through the FDAC system were more likely to stop their substance misuse than those in ordinary care proceedings, meaning fewer children were taken into care. When parents were unable to control their substance misuse, FDAC made swifter decisions to find permanent alternative homes for children. The integrated approach also has potential to reduce costs.

FDAC’s success has also been recognised by two major government reviews of family justice and child protection. The Munro Review of Child Protection was ‘impressed’ by the pilot and used it as an example of how multi-disciplinary teams can provide effective interventions for vulnerable children.

This reiterates the findings from the Family Justice Review interim report, which said FDAC showed ‘considerable promise’ and ‘potentially justifies a further limited roll out’. The Family Justice Review, led by David Norgrove, also emphasises the importance of judicial continuity – having the same judge follow a family through all stages of proceedings – a unique and important feature of FDAC.

What is FDAC?

FDAC is a new way of dealing with care proceedings when parental substance misuse is causing harm to children. This is the main issue in up to two thirds of all care proceedings.  Unlike conventional care proceedings, parents in FDAC see the same judge throughout and meet with them every fortnight. They also receive support from a multi-disciplinary team, including fast access to substance misuse services and assistance with other issues such as housing, domestic violence and financial hardship.

The FDAC pilot is being run in the Inner London Family Proceedings Court at Wells Street and the multi-disciplinary team is provided by The Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with children’s charity Coram. The pilot is based on a successful US model and began in January 2008 with three participating London Boroughs – Camden, Islington and Westminster. Hammersmith and Fulham joined the pilot in April 2011 and the pilot will run until March 2012.

Families reunited and substance misuse controlled

The independent evaluation team, led by Professor Judith Harwin at Brunel University and funded by the Nuffield Foundation and the Home Office, found that FDAC has been more successful at controlling substance misuse and reuniting families than ordinary proceedings. At the time of the final court order, 39% of FDAC mothers were reunited with their children compared to 21% of mothers from a comparison group in ordinary care proceedings. All but two parents said they were in favour of the FDAC approach.

Cost savings

More children staying with their families means that local authorities save money. The evaluation also shows that FDAC reduced costs in other ways such as shorter care placements, shorter court hearings and fewer contested cases.

“We are delighted that both the Munro Review and the Family Justice Review have recognised the earlysuccess of FDAC in breaking the cycle of harm caused to families by substance misuse and we hope the government takes heed of the recommendation to consider rolling out the model further”, said Professor Judith Harwin.

District Judge Nick Crichton said:

“This evaluation shows that swift access to integrated support services helps parents control their substance misuse and be reunited with their children.Where parents are unable to address their substance misuse, FDAC’sintervention helps to secure an earlier alternative permanent home for children.All the evidence so far suggests that extending this pilot and rolling out FDAC inother areas would be in the best interests of children and families.”

In a joint statement, children’s charity Coram, The Tavistock & Portman NHS Foundation Trust and the London Boroughs of Camden, Islington and Westminster, said: “We are very pleased to receive independent recognition of the work of the Family Drug and Alcohol Court. This further demonstrates how, with successful multi-agency working, families can be given a greater chance to stay together and the best possible decisions can be swiftly taken for the future of the children at the heart of these cases.”

ENDS

Contact: Fran Bright, Communications Manager, 020 7681 9623: fbright@nuffieldfoundation.org.

Notes to editors

1.The Munro Review of Child Protection published its final report on 10 May 2011. FDAC is featured as a case study (101-104). The report is published on the DfE website: http://www.education.gov.uk/munroreview/firstreport.shtml

2.The Family Justice Review published its interim report on 31 March 2011. It references FDAC on pages 140-141 and again in Annex O (Pages 214-217). The report is published on the MoJ website: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/family-justice-review.htm.

3. FDAC sits at the Inner London Family Proceedings Court in Wells Street. Between January 2008 and the end of June 2009, 55 families (77 children) entered the court. The evaluation compares this sample to a comparison sample of 31 families (49 children) involved in ordinary care proceedings in two other local authorities during the same period.

4. This evaluation of FDAC was funded by the Nuffield Foundation and the Home Office. Cases were followed up for 6 months from the first hearing and it was also possible to track 41 FDAC and 19 comparison cases to final order. Interviews were held with parents and with the FDAC judges, team and court staff and commissioners involved in the set-up and implementation of FDAC. Focus groups were held with parent mentors and with professionals who had cases in FDAC in the first 18 months (lawyers, guardians, social workers and staff from adult treatment services).

5. The total funding secured for the five-year FDAC project is £2,103,129. This has been contributed by DCSF (now DfE), the Home Office, the Department of Health, the Ministry of Justice and the four participating London boroughs.

Related


Explore our projects

New

Welfare | 2020 - 2023

Public expenditure planning and control in complex times

View project
New

Welfare | 2020 - 2022

How UK welfare reform affects larger families

View project
New

Education | Welfare | 2020 - 2020

Measuring the disadvantage attainment gap in 16-19 education

View project
Two teenage male pupils study a science lesson as part of their post-16 options
In progress

Education | 2019 - 2021

Post-16 pathways: the role of peers, family background and expectations

View project
In progress

Education | 2019 - 2022

The SWAN game-based approach to learning foundational number language

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2022

Children living with domestic violence: effects on children’s well-being

View project
In progress

Education | 2019 - 2020

Education priorities in a forthcoming general election

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2022

Ethnic inequalities in later life

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2022

The effect of Community Mental Health Services in England

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2022

Caregiving dads, breadwinning mums: Transforming gender in work and childcare?

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2021

Living with data: knowledge, experiences and perceptions of data practices

View project
In progress

Education | Welfare | 2019 - 2022

Contemporary fathers in the UK

View project
New

Welfare | 2020 - 2023

Public expenditure planning and control in complex times

View project
New

Welfare | 2020 - 2022

How UK welfare reform affects larger families

View project
New

Education | Welfare | 2020 - 2020

Measuring the disadvantage attainment gap in 16-19 education

View project
Two teenage male pupils study a science lesson as part of their post-16 options
In progress

Education | 2019 - 2021

Post-16 pathways: the role of peers, family background and expectations

View project
In progress

Education | 2019 - 2020

Education priorities in a forthcoming general election

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2022

Children living with domestic violence: effects on children’s well-being

View project
In progress

Education | 2019 - 2022

The SWAN game-based approach to learning foundational number language

View project
Reported

Welfare | 2013 - 2017

IFS Green Budget 2013 – 2016

View project
Reported

Education | 2017 - 2018

Growing up digital

View project
Reported

Welfare | 2013 - 2016

Data about fathers in birth cohort studies (Life Study)

View project
Reported

Welfare | 2017 - 2017

General Election 2017

View project
Reported

Justice | Welfare | 2015 - 2018

Bridging the Evidence Gap in Family Proceedings

View project
New

Welfare | 2020 - 2023

Public expenditure planning and control in complex times

View project
New

Welfare | 2020 - 2022

How UK welfare reform affects larger families

View project
New

Education | Welfare | 2020 - 2020

Measuring the disadvantage attainment gap in 16-19 education

View project
Two teenage male pupils study a science lesson as part of their post-16 options
In progress

Education | 2019 - 2021

Post-16 pathways: the role of peers, family background and expectations

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2022

Ethnic inequalities in later life

View project
In progress

Education | 2019 - 2022

The SWAN game-based approach to learning foundational number language

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2022

Children living with domestic violence: effects on children’s well-being

View project
In progress

Education | 2019 - 2020

Education priorities in a forthcoming general election

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2022

The effect of Community Mental Health Services in England

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2022

Caregiving dads, breadwinning mums: Transforming gender in work and childcare?

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2021

Living with data: knowledge, experiences and perceptions of data practices

View project
In progress

Welfare | 2019 - 2020

Valuing data: foundations for data policy

View project
Reported

Welfare | 2018 - 2018

Interdisciplinary conference on evidence use in policy

View project
Reported

Welfare | 2018 - 2018

Council tax support schemes’ impact on claimants & local authorities

View project
Reported

Welfare | 2018 - 2018

Improving survey representation of non-resident parents

View project
Reported

Education | 2017 - 2018

Growing up digital

View project
Reported

Justice | Welfare | 2017 - 2018

Addressing the ‘care cases’ crisis: a sector-led review

View project
Reported

Welfare | 2017 - 2018

Vulnerable migrants and well-being: A pilot study

View project
Reported

Welfare | 2017 - 2018

Benchmarking transparency in government’s use of evidence

View project
Reported

Welfare | 2017 - 2017

General Election 2017

View project
Siblings play ball in a playground - Siblings Contact and the Law
Reported

Justice | Welfare | 2017 - 2019

Siblings, contact and the law: an overlooked relationship?

View project
Reported

Welfare | 2017 - 2019

Asylum policies in Europe and the refugee crisis

View project
Reported

Justice | Welfare | 2017 - 2019

Measuring outcomes for children’s social care services

View project
Reported

Welfare | 2017 - 2018

The distribution and dynamics of economic and social well-being in the UK

View project
Search projects

We improve people’s lives by funding research that informs social policy, primarily in EducationWelfare and Justice. We also fund student programmes that give young people skills and confidence in science and research.

We offer our grant-holders the freedom to frame questions and enable new thinking. Our research must stand up to rigorous academic scrutiny, but we understand that to be successful in effecting change, it also needs to be relevant to people’s experience.

Profile