Q: PBR - Is there a perverse incentive in timing of payments? Last payment date is May 2015 – what happens in Year 3 if working with a family and awaiting for conviction to come through to claim result?

A: We are trying to create an incentive not to leave the most complex families to the end of the programme - i.e. if there are families with high youth crime issues, LAs should start work with them ASAP and give themselves optimum time to claim a result. Ultimately, this is about the bigger picture - LAs are not just this for the £800 results payment, but the social and economic benefits of achieving sustainable change with these families.

Results should only be claimed once they have satisfied internal audit.

Q: Identification –Authority ‘A’ said 30% of the addresses submitted to DWP hadn’t been confirmed – not, apparently, the same problem as the ‘unable to trace’, just that DWP didn’t appear to have a current address (Authority ‘A’ only supplied names). Presumably, too, there will be a number of families where there are multiple addresses and other complications?

A: DWP cannot process only names. They must include the full address (inc. postcode) or these will be returned. This is very important.

Q: Identification - Request that LAs could use housing benefit data to fill in any gaps in the DWP data but worries this goes against the Social Security Act.

A: We are seeking legal advice on this idea, as we think it has promise.

Q: PBR – Authority ‘B’ asked if working with a family member on one of the education outcomes and succeeded in, say reducing unauthorised absence, but another member of the family than started the same problem would it invalidate result?

A: It would invalidate the result. The point of the results is that we are looking to turn around the whole family - not just individuals.
Q: What do we expect LA to know about the 1/6th? Will they need to know the outcome of whichever intervention it is (eg, ESF) or just what the intervention is?

A: We will expect them to know whether their 6th family has achieved comparable results and what that result is. LA CEOs have signed up to this.

Q: Number of areas wondering about how to approach families that they’re not currently in contact with but ‘qualify’ for the programme. I said I thought that wouldn’t be many - but Authority ‘B’ said it could be half of their families.

A: This seems an operational issue about how to engage families, which LAs should be best placed to advise on. We obviously want them to work with these families as they are currently receiving no support.

Not sure when our website will be up and running. In the meantime, people are welcome to access the LGA's troubled families website: