providers and partner agencies were slow to distribute promotional materials. They reliedon open access screening events with little outreach to identify parents with particulardifficulties. Target group families simply didn’t hear about the programme. Then, once theprogramme started, levels of drop-out were high, particularly early on in the process, notleast because no-one took responsibility for encouraging and enabling parents to attend.4.4. Addressing these issues in practiceWhile it was not possible to address all of the problems identified in this illustration manysolutions were put in place.1. More time and energy were invested in briefing partner agencies to inform them ofthe programme. Then the referral process was strengthened. A recruitment pack wascompiled and distributed and efforts were made to ensure local staff knew thescreening criteria.2. Additional support was provided to enhance the local providers’ capacity to deliverthe programme and ‘wraparound care’. Extra money was paid to providers to coverrefreshments, administration, crèche and interpreting services, and providersreceived more funding for demonstrating high recruitment and retention rates.3. A concerted set of parent engagement activities was also put in place. Outreach eventswere held in residential areas and public spaces often frequented by families withyoung children, and a crib sheet was prepared to help people involved in this face-tofacework address parents’ frequently mentioned concerns about the programme.4. The accessibility of the programmes was enhanced and, crucially, these features wereadded to publicity materials. For example, the incentives of a free crèche andtransport were made widely known.From this brief overview of research and practice on parent recruitment and retention atleast 12 key lessons emerge (Box 2).Box 2: Lessons for parent recruitment and retention1. Lots of children and families who need parenting programmes don’t get them, and theywon’t unless the people responsible for commissioning and providing them act to makethem more accessible.2. If we don’t engage parents in programmes, the programmes won’t work.3. Engage providers first if you want them to engage parents.4. Have a clear recruitment process and train everyone involved including other local parents.5. Invest in and incentivise recruitment and retention.6. Get out there! Go to parents; don’t expect them to come to you.7. Build relationships: visit, call, then visit and call again.8. Make parents want to attend programmes, and make it easy for them to do so.9. Be creative! Try out innovative recruitment ideas and evaluate them against the outcome.10. Recruit parents to come and try it once and see if they wish to return.11. Recruitment is nothing without retention.12. Aim high but remain realistic: life gets in the way of the best intentions.30 Professional Practice Board
These kinds of solutions should go some way to addressing the shift in responsibility forparents not accessing programmes lying with programmes not parents. Best practice inobtaining the highest engagement and retention rates with multi-problem families, shouldalways be a priority. To achieve this it would seem that creating a local culture of positiveexpectation is very important. Next we describe some examples of programmes that havetaken on board some of these messages and are trying to implement them.4.5. Examples of efforts to boost recruitmentIn our survey a wide range of approaches emerged some of which can evidenceconsiderable success in this area. For example, in the United States, Families and SchoolsTogether (FAST), a social work led evidence-based parenting programme, has achievedretention rates averaging 80 per cent for over 20 years in programmes serving diverse,different communities, all in extreme poverty, including native American people living onrural reservations and with inner city communities in New Orleans, Milwaukee andPhiladelphia (McDonald & Frey, 1999; McDonald et al., 2012).In 2006, the Harvard School of Education published a report (Caspe & Lopez, 2006) onthe lessons learned and best practices identified from studying and reviewing 13 evidencebasedfamily programmes in the US. These are included in the current US SubstanceAbuse and Mental Health Service Administration (SAMHSA) recommended list(www.samhsa.gov). FAST was highlighted as ‘one programme with high rates ofrecruitment and retention’. The report mentioned both the ‘external factor’ strategiesused (2006, p.10) to enhance initial recruitment and ‘internal factors’ where culturalsensitivity was designed to enhance retention. Here are FAST’s strategies and those ofseveral other programmes:FAST■ Recruits families through face-to-face visits.■ Asks current and former programme participants to help with recruitment.■ Holds meetings for parents during non-traditional hours, including weekends and evenings.■ Visits parents in community locations.■ Provides transport, infant care, and meals at meetings.and■ Implementation team leaders include individuals who are representative of the culture andbackground of the families served.■ Programme staff understand the beliefs, values and attitudes of the community.■ Helps staff to think about recruitment and retention as a routine and on-going process.Positive ActionIn our voluntary family classes situations, such as with schools, Positive Action programmesinitially attract parents who are already closely aligned with the school, but some of the activities thathave been tried to bring in ‘hard to reach’ parents include telephone-trees where they are called on toparticipate, parents in the classrooms reach out to them, and culturally cohesive groups have foundways through social networks and peer influence to inform parents who might be more reluctant tocome. We also have, where possible, provided transportation or some sort of meal/snack to attractthem, but the best method we have found for bringing in parents of all kinds, and especially thiskind, is just word of mouth of the effectiveness of the programme among parents.<strong>Technique</strong> <strong>Is</strong> <strong>Not</strong> <strong>Enough</strong> 31
- Page 1 and 2: Professional Practice BoardTechniqu
- Page 3: ContentsAcknowledgements ..........
- Page 6 and 7: We also wish to thank Sarah Fitzroy
- Page 8 and 9: alienation and sense of isolation f
- Page 10 and 11: A range of these programmes are rec
- Page 12 and 13: 2. Vision and purpose2.1. The brief
- Page 14 and 15: From this conference a commitment t
- Page 16 and 17: development strategies have been us
- Page 18 and 19: 3. The socio-political context3.1.
- Page 20 and 21: Box 1: UNODC compilation of evidenc
- Page 22 and 23: cost-effective and it has caused so
- Page 24 and 25: Positive ActionPositive Action was
- Page 26 and 27: ■Programmes must have robust evid
- Page 28 and 29: These principles are based on our a
- Page 30 and 31: families who might benefit. This pr
- Page 34 and 35: Positive Parenting Programme (Tripl
- Page 36 and 37: multiple approaches that also inclu
- Page 38 and 39: need to learn English in their pare
- Page 40 and 41: Parenting programmes that work in m
- Page 42 and 43: 5. Principle 2. Cultural sensitivit
- Page 44 and 45: Positive ActionPositive Action faci
- Page 46 and 47: attitudes. Such attitudes can surfa
- Page 48 and 49: developed purely from a theory-driv
- Page 50 and 51: cultural heritages lecture at them.
- Page 52 and 53: having reciprocal relationships to
- Page 54 and 55: first started delivering the progra
- Page 56 and 57: Strengthening Families ProgramWhen
- Page 58 and 59: 7. Principle 4. Sustainability: Cre
- Page 60 and 61: operate at different levels. Some a
- Page 62 and 63: Incredible YearsAnother component o
- Page 64 and 65: commissioners can have more confide
- Page 66 and 67: Incentives for achieving model fide
- Page 68 and 69: 8. A framework for ensuring that ev
- Page 70 and 71: 9. Next stepsEvidence-based parenti
- Page 72 and 73: 70 Professional Practice Board
- Page 74 and 75: 72 Professional Practice Board
- Page 76 and 77: ReferencesAlinsky, S.D. (1971). Rul
- Page 78 and 79: Davidson, G. & Campbell, J. (2007).
- Page 80 and 81: Heindrichs, N., Bertram, H., Kusche
- Page 82 and 83:
McDonald, L., FitzRoy, S., Fuchs, I
- Page 84 and 85:
Spoth, R., Redmond, C., Hockaday, C
- Page 86:
The British Psychological SocietySt