1. Interfacing informal and formal help systems: A critical overview of developments within Irish Child Welfare Systems
The Tusla Development and Mainstreaming Programme for Prevention, Partnership and Family Support.
Dr. Anne Cassidy, Fergal Landy & Prof. Caroline McGregor
UNESCO Child and Family Research Centre
Institute for Lifecourse and Society, NUI Galway
23 October 2015

2. Our aim in this paper is to:
To document and critique the development and evolution of Family Support structures, processes and practices as ‘early help systems’ in Ireland with a particular emphasis on the interaction between informal and more formal statutory structures, processes and practices.
To consider how Meitheal and associated developments can best be developed in a way that achieves necessary standardisation and functional interface without leading to a quest for homogenisation on the other.

3. In Other Words...
We want you to be reminded of the fact that child welfare in Ireland has always had elements of formal and informal support systems working in parallel to different levels and orientations (Caroline)
And we want to take time to consider what ‘ingredients’ have worked to maximise the potential for formal and informal systems to be best harnessed (Fergal)
How can we help to maintain the balance between standardisation and homogenisation in the development of Meitheal and the PPFS programme? (Anne)
And we want to remind ourselves that this is not a neutral but rather a politically charged process that requires thoughtful, intelligent, critical and reflective engagement.

4. Continuity of complex Relations
Formal Statutory
Formal community/voluntary
Informal
In Child Welfare, we always have had an inter-play of formal–informal systems and there have always been tensions :
Continuity of complex Relations

5. Brief Overview from 1970 onwards
STATUTORY DEVELOPMENTS:
FROM TASK FORCE ON CHILD CARE 1980
TASK FORCE ON CHILD AND FAMILY SUPPORT AGENCY 2012
‘Voluntary Sector /
Social Services development/
community based help giving expanded
de-institutionalisation of Church services)
Social Work as a discourse has had a contradictory and tense relationship between a formal professional service and a more community engaged one–e.g. Committee on Social Work Report 1985
The modern ‘statutory’ system, as established from 1970 onwards, has moved from an orientation that was a reactive mostly ‘protection oriented’ system to a present construction within a broader Parenting, Prevention and Family Support emphasis.

6. Leading to the question:
How can we carry through constructive continuities from a Family Support history in Ireland that has always relied on a complex inter-play between ‘informal’ and ‘formal’? and
How can we make a clear discontinuity with aspects of the ‘formal’ system in Ireland that allowed for abuse of power, lack of respect for the informal, imposition of deserving and undeserving judgements to create a climate of trust to enable this discursive ideal of harmony between statutory, voluntary, community and general public have the possibility for finding real expressions in practice contexts?

7. Sligo Identification of Need (ION) and Limerick Assessment of Needs System (LANS)
Common understanding of needs; common method of identifying them, common process for meeting them.
Utilising a lead practitioner approach,
delivered to families who have additional or complex needs (but do not require ‘a child protection response’).

8. ION/LANS - Distinctions
The LANS was an explicit initiative of a Children’s Services Committee.
The LANS Coordinator was based in the HSE whereas the ION Coordinator in Sligo was based in Sligo Social Services.
The ION was strictly parent led whereas LANS allowed for a greater role for the Lead Professional.
The LANS embraced the notion of common assessment framework (CAF) whereas the ION used a similar framework but emphasised it as an identification of need by the parent rather than a formal assessment.

9. Discussion and Analysis – a series of interrelated learning points
Roles, Relationships & Structures
Thresholds and Assessment
Joint Working and Information Sharing
Capacity Building
Resourcing

10. Programme for Prevention Partnership and Family Support
Stream 1 : Child and Family Support Networks and Meitheal
Stream 2 : Public Education (Awareness)
Stream 3 : Commissioning
Stream 4 : Parenting Support and Participation
Stream 5: Participation

11. The Meitheal Model-a formal and informal system
Meitheal Model: holistic approach to children in need of support who do not meet the criteria for child protection intervention
Emphasis is on the process being led by the family-informal (importance of relationships) and formal (team’s responsibility for providing particular services to help meet the need)
A temporary ‘team’ of Tusla and external staff is created to help identify and meet a child’s unmet needs

12. The Role of the CFRC’s Evaluation and Research Programme
A three year research and evaluation programme on the Mainstreaming and Development Programme including the Meitheal model
Explicit remit to provide formative and summative feedback on the progress of the programme in meeting its objectives of putting the child at the heart of the system
Technical support to Tusla to embed evaluation into their programme of work and to develop the Meitheal Model

13. The Role of the Evaluation Team
Can help to maintain the balance between standardisation and homogenisation by:
-analysing Tusla’s activities through this lens
-creating tools such as a self-reflection framework
-looking to ensure that ‘local’ experiences feed into the national implementation plan
Document this process so that learning is both ongoing and future orientated

14. And finally, some critical questions to consider
Are rights and justice to the forefront here?
Are we sufficiently critically aware of the tension between extending the power of informal/community/family support and allowing the state to abdicate its responsibilities and minimise its expenditure?
Do the public have sufficient awareness of the ‘formal services’ to be able to engage meaningfully and in an authentic participative manner?
How can we maximise/harness the potential of the ‘informal’ ?
And what about the Resources to facilitate this through funding/commissioning?