Exploring the Approaches of North East Local Authorities to Tackling Child Poverty

1. Foreword 04

2. Introduction 05

3. Background & Methodology 06

4. Summary of Findings from 07 Child Poverty Needs Assessments

5. Emerging Priorities identified by 09 Child Poverty Strategies

6. Potential Policy Options 15

7. Conclusions 17

CONTENTS

October 2012

Child poverty affects children not just in their childhood but in their prospects for adult life as well. Children who are born poor are more likely to be poor as adults and have poor children. Currently, more than 1 in 4 children growing up in the North East today are living in poverty and, in some local authority wards, the figure rises to more than 50% of children. That is the scale of the situation we are trying to address today.

The Child Poverty Act introduced duties for local authorities to work with their partners to produce Child Poverty Needs Assessments (CPNAs) and Child Poverty Strategies. Local authorities in the region are fulfilling these duties and have completed their first CPNAs.

However, the pace and scale of some of the reforms being introduced by the Coalition Government mean that the picture in the North East is constantly changing and we need to understand how these changes impact upon some of our most disadvantaged and vulnerable communities.

If the commitment to eradicate child poverty by 2020, is to be met, we will need to refresh and update our analyses of poverty regularly. It is hoped that this report, which highlights common themes and identifies potential areas for improvement within and across the North East, will support future analyses and help to increase our understanding of how we can best tackle child poverty.

The North East Child Poverty Commission will continue to work closely with local authorities and their key partners in the wider public sector, the voluntary sector and the business sector to ensure that we end child poverty and, in doing so, improve the lives of children – and their life chances – across the North East.

1. FOREWORDTackling child poverty in the North East is not a new piece of work for the local authorities in the region. It is, however, one of the most important challenges they face.

Murray RoseDirector of Service to People, Darlington Borough Council,Chair, North East Child Poverty Commission

04

Poverty is defined as a household income of below 60% of the median.

There are approximately 130,000 children growing up in poverty in the North East and it has been predicted that the number is likely to increase in the coming years. Child poverty can have devastating effects for children (not just in their childhood but in their adult life as well), their families and for society more generally.

• Infantsinthepoorestfamilieshaveanalmost 10 times higher chance of dying suddenly in infancy than those in the highest income group.1

• Thereisan‘attainmentgap’betweenpupils who receive Free School Meals andthosepupilsthatdon’treceiveFSM. 15% of boys receiving FSM did not get 5 GCSEs in 2010, whereas only 5%ofboysthatdidn’tgetFSMfailedto get 5 GCSEs.2

• Childrenwholiveinpovertyaretwiceas likely to live in poor quality housing. Overcrowding and spells living in temporary accommodation are also factors that affect children growing up in poverty.3

• Thereisastigmaattachedtolivingin poverty and poor children are often bullied at school. Not wanting to appear poor means that a lot of children who are entitled to Free SchoolMealsdon’tactuallytakethemand poor families will often go without

other items to protect their children from this stigma.4

• SavetheChildrenestimatethatpoorerfamiliesoftenhavetopaya‘povertypremium’ofaround£1,280peryearfor good and services . This is because of different tariffs for gas and electricity suppliers, higher interest rates for loans and purchases and higher insurance premiums for living in disadvantaged neighbourhoods.5

• Onlyoneinninechildrenfromlowincome backgrounds will reach the top 25% of earners as adults. The UK hasverylow‘socialmobility’whichissometimesexpressedas‘poorchildrengrowuptobepooradults’.6

• ItisestimatedthatchildpovertycoststheUKapproximately£25billionperyear,includingaround£17billionthat would return to the government (through increased taxes and reduce benefits payments) if child poverty were eradicated.7

The North East Child Poverty Commission

The North East Child Poverty Commission is a stakeholder group made up of representatives from local authorities, other public sector bodies, charities and businesses who are working together to tackle child poverty in the North East. The Commission is keen to raise public and political awareness about the devastating impact that poverty has on children, their experience and enjoyment of childhood and their chances in life as an adult.

The aim of the North East Child Poverty Commission is to “provide a strong regional voice to raise awareness of the issue of child poverty in the North East and to work collaboratively to tackle the problem.”

2. INTRODUCTION

1. http://www.endchildpoverty.org.uk/files/Health_consequences_of_Poverty_for_children.pdf

2. https://nationalpupildatabase.wikispaces.com

3. http://www.endchildpoverty.org.uk/files/Health_consequences_of_Poverty_for_children.pdf

4. http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6070031

5. http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/docs/UK_Poverty_Rip_Off_Brief_1.pdf

6. http://www.dpm.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/opening-doors-breaking-barriers-strategy-social-mobility-0

7. http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/estimating-costs-child-poverty

05

Background

The Child Poverty Act 2010 requires localauthoritiestoproducea‘jointchildpovertystrategyfortheirarea’alongwiththeir partners.

In line with the decision by the Coalition Government not to introduce statutory guidance in relation to Part 2 of the act, in a FAQ Guide, the Child Poverty Unitstatethat‘itisnotstipulatedwhether strategies should be stand-alone or embedded/integrated with other strategies – this is a judgement for local authoritiesandtheirpartnerstomake.’8

Another document – A Guide to Part 2 of the Child Poverty Act 2010 – suggests thatthestrategymustbe‘visible,transparent and accountable to the local community’9.Thestrategies‘mustinclude measures relating to matters identified in a local child poverty needs assessment’10

Methodology

This report is based on the documents produced by local authorities in response to the local duties outlined in the Child Poverty Act 2010.

All 12 local authorities in the North East provided information relating to the work that they had undertaken in respect of these duties. The information provided included Child Poverty Needs Assessments (CPNAs), Child Poverty Strategies (CPSs), Children and Young People’sPlans,coveringreportsandminutes of relevant meetings.

Analysis of the CPNAs focused on the evidence used - or not used - in the development of the assessments and the adherence to – or divergence from – the non-statutory guidance which was issued to local authorities in support of Part 2 of the Child Poverty Act.

The report presents the findings of the analysis of the CPNAs using the Building Blocks structure suggested by the guidance from the Child Poverty Unit.

Analysis of CPSs and other documents including action plans focused on identifying emerging themes or priorities for action. Where similar themes emerged from a number of different authorities, a summary of relevant evidence and/or existing practice is provided and some Potential Policy Options are identified.

Hyperlinks have been provided for all references, where possible.

3. BACKGROUND & METHODOLOGY

8. http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/doc/f/faq%20on%20part%202%20of%20the%20child%20poverty%20act.doc

http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/doc/f/faq%20on%20part%202%20of%20the%20child%20poverty%20act.doc

9. http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/doc/g/guide%20to%20part%202%20of%20the%20child%20poverty%20act%202010.doc

10. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/9/pdfs/ukpga_20100009_en.pdf

06

General

• Thedecentralisationagendaandthe decision not to issue statutory guidance in support of the Local Duties of the Child Poverty Act allowed local authorities to develop CPNAs and CPSs that link to and support their existing local structures and frameworks.

• Arangeofapproacheshavebeenadopted in relation to: the profile given to child poverty within authorities; where the agenda is located within existing organisational or partnership structures; and how and what data has been used in the development of CPNAs.

• Theextenttowhichtheviewsofchildren and young people and their parents fed into the development of the CPNAs varies across the region. Where data from children and young people was used, it tended to be drawn from quantitative surveys, both existing and new. There is little evidence of qualitative information on the impact of poverty on child and family life informing the development of the CPNAs.

Employment & Skills

• ‘Makingworkpay’isakeyelementof the government strategy to tackle child poverty and a strong focus on addressing worklessness exists within the CPNAs. However, there was not much information provided on the success or otherwise of employability initiatives.

• However,around60%ofchildrenliving in poverty live in a household where at least one adult works and the North East has the highest or joint highest proportion of employees earningunder£7perhourinEngland11 and high levels of job density (the number of applicants pre vacancy). Therefore, the supply and quality of work is also important in tackling poverty and better use of labour market statistics could help understand the reasons for poverty, unemployment or economic inactivity.

Family & Life Chances

• Over60differentdatasourcesrelatingto the Family & Life Chances building block were used in the compilation of CPNAs in the North East. Seven nationalmeasuresofchildren’slivechances are included in the national strategy.

• Localauthoritiesrespondedtoa national policy focus on the Foundation Years & Early Intervention: moving towards and/or improving the provision of early intervention initiatives was highlighted as a priority in a number of CPNAs and/or CPSs.

• Thereisaneedtounderstandwhatworks well in early intervention, how outcomes can be measured and how a shift towards early intervention can be achieved, especially in the current economic climate.

4. FINDINGS

11. http://www.poverty.org.uk

Summary of Findings from Child Poverty Needs Assessments

07

Financial Support

• Thereiswell-developedregionalworktaking place across the North East, and within local authorities to tackle financial exclusion. However, it was not always clear how this work was integrated with local authority child poverty work.

• Theimpactonthelocalauthorityarea of not maximising household income was not explicit in any of the CPNAs and it was not always clear that information from the advice sector supported the development of the CPNAs.

Place & Delivery

• Housingsupplyandcondition,including the number of fuel-poor households and the rates of decency were the main issues explored by local authorities in this building block.

• Moredetailedinformationsuchasprovision of, or access to services, location of employment opportunities, satisfaction with the physical environment and awareness of the locationsof‘at-risk’groupswasnotgenerally included in the CPNAs.

At-Risk Groups

• MostoftheinformationcontainedwithinCPNAsregarding‘At-RiskGroups’relatedtofamilystructure(e.g.age of mother, single parents, number and age of children) or participation in the labour market. In some cases, but not all, this information was also presented geographically.

• Lessinformationwaspresentedonotheridentified‘At-RiskGroups’suchas some ethnic minority communities and families with a child or parent who is disabled. This may have been because this building block was introduced after initial guidance had been issued and as part of the Coalition Government’supdatingoftheblocks.

CONTINUED...08

Emerging Priorities from the Child Poverty Strategies

The lack of non-statutory guidance again offered local authorities and their partners an opportunity to develop strategies that are in keeping with the local policy and strategic frameworks and some local authorities developed CPSs that were integrated with other strategies and frameworks. A number of the authorities within the region produced, or have committed to producing, a stand alone Child Poverty Strategy, whilst others have decided to embed their strategies within wider or existing pieces of work.

Analysis of the priorities for action that Local Authorities identified suggests that they broadly fall into six main categories:12

• Raisingaspirations/achievement/attainment & helping children fulfil their potential

• Ensuringeverychildhasthebest start / re-focussing around Early Intervention & prevention

• Improvingaccesstoworkand reducing worklessness

• FinancialInclusioninitiativesandmaximising household income

• Improvingneighbourhoods

• Improvinghealthandwell-being

One other priority was also identified byoneCPSsthatdidn’tfitintothe six broad categories identified above:

• ‘Childpovertyproofing’localauthorityand partners strategies and plans

5. PRIORITIES

12. These priorities were often expressed using a number of different terms and different approaches were also highlighted in CPNAs and CPSs (most notably around family centred models of support)

09

Raising aspirations/achievement/attainment & helping children fulfil their potential

The theme of raising aspirations and achievement amongst young people from disadvantaged backgrounds has been particularly important in policy circles in recent years. Under the previous government, the Inspiring Communities programme was designed specifically toraiseyoungpeople’saspirations.However, evidence suggests that aspirations are generally high across all socio-economic backgrounds, although attainment does not always meet these aspirations amongst some demographic groups. This is often referred to as the ‘Aspiration–Attainmentgap’andthereis clear evidence that children eligible for free school meals do less well at school than those children who are not eligible for free school meals.13

One local authority noted in their CPNAthat‘childrenandyoungpeopleare full of ambition … they have high aspirations for the future and a strong desiretosucceed’andresearchcarriedout by Joseph Rowntree Foundation foundthat‘bothprimaryandsecondaryschool aspirations and expectations for HE among parents and children were generally high even among young people fromthepoorestbackgrounds’.Thisresearch suggested that strategies should be focused on raising attainment rather thanaspirationandthat‘focusedworkisalso required to convert high expectations andaspirationsintoreality’.Furtherworkby JRF in this area suggests that:

‘There were no good indications that a child’s aspirations could influence later participation’ 14

The widespread emphasis on raising aspirations, in particular, does not seem to be a good foundation for policy or practice. Teachers and other professionals may need to revise upwards their estimation of the aspirations of parents and children.15

There is also further evidence that suggests that the popular view of poorer parentshaving‘lower’aspirationsfortheir children is not necessarily the case. A recent study by researchers at Leeds University16 suggested that aspirations amongst parents from different backgrounds were not necessarily linear (low-high) but that they were qualitatively different.

The Pupil Premium will play an important part in efforts to close the attainment gap between pupils eligible for free school meals and their peers who are not eligible for free school meals. A toolkit17 produced by researchers at Durham University has summarised evidence around interventions focused on raising attainment and improving learning. This toolkit highlights that there are ways in which attainment can be improved without a need to focus on raising aspirations.

Ensuring every child has the best start / re-focussing around Early Intervention & prevention

The focus on Early Intervention is not a new concept and local authorities and their partners have been running pre-school programmes via Sure Start and Children’sCentresforanumberofyears.Both the Field and Allen reviews also emphasised the importance of supporting children and families in the pre-school or‘Foundation’years.Thereviewsandtheir suggestions were broadly welcomed and supported by most audiences and the Allen Review had cross-party support, although some commentators have noted that‘earlyinterventions’canandshouldinclude programmes working with adults and older children.

However, the demand to reform public sector services and to identify potential savings has highlighted the financial benefits of early intervention when compared to the cost of crisis intervention at a later stage when the issue may be more serious and/or complex.

Some criticisms of the focus on Early Intervention initiatives have suggested that, in the current political use, it focuses too narrowly on perceived parental shortcomings and failings and also that it requires funding at a time when services for young people are under threat as they are not statutory requirements18. The child poverty strategy, for example, suggests that‘whatisneededisamuchwiderculture change towards recognising the importance of parenting, and how society can support mothers and fathers to give theirchildrenthebeststartinlife’19 .

CONTINUED...

13. See for example: http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/educational-attainment-poor-children & http://www.gos.gov.uk/nestore/docs/cyp/change_children/aspirations/john.pdf

14. http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/aspirations-educational-attainment-participation

15. http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/aspirations-attitudes-educational-attainment

16. http://soc.sagepub.com/content/45/3/480.abstract?rss=1

17. http://www.suttontrust.com/research/toolkit-of-strategies-to-improve-learning/

18. http://www.battleofideas.org.uk/index.php/2011/battles/5414/

19. http://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/CM%208061

10

CONTINUED...

However, very little research exists to support the suggestion that poverty is caused by poor parenting practices and much of the research that has looked at links between poverty and parenting emphasises that parenting practices cannot be divorced from the environment or context in which they occur. A JRF summary of research findings relating to parenting and poverty stated that

A key finding here is that the majority of parents in poverty (like those living in relative affluence) possess adequate parenting capacity. This belies any assumption that poverty is necessarily associated with a lack of parenting capacity.

The North East is also seeing some of the highest increases in the number of children going into care and this is being linked with the effects of the recession. Given the costs involved and the damage and disruption that this process can have on children and young people, it is imperative that the reasons for this increase are understood and alternative, preventative models of service delivery are explored.

The NSPCC have noted that while ‘researchshowsanassociationbetweenneglect and poverty, it does not mean thatpovertycausesneglectorabuse’ and‘themajorityoffamilieslivinginpoverty do not maltreat their children andparenteffectively’20.

Improving access to work/reducing worklessness

Work is the key method for tackling child povertyintheCoalitionGovernment’s‘newapproach’.Welfarereformisintended to incentivise participation in the labour market and there is new support for individuals facing particular disadvantage.

A number of pilots have taken place in the North East looking at new ways of joining up employment related services including the co-location of Work-focussedservicesinChildren’sCentresinRedcar&Clevelandanda‘SchoolGates’EmploymentSupportInitiativeinMiddlesbrough. All of these programmes and new ones contained within the national child poverty strategy seek to work with individuals to help them find work. This focus on attempts to support individuals into work risks ignoring the importance and relevance of wider labour market issues such as a skills mismatch21 (rather than a shortage) the different rates of unemployment22 and job creation and the different impact of the recession on different regions across the UK23 24.

Work by researchers at Teesside Universityexploringthe‘lowpay-nopay’cycle highlighted a number of key points about the interaction between individuals and local labour markets including: an enduring commitment to work despite experience of moving in and out of employment and low-paid jobs; financial necessity and a desire to work leading people to take poor quality jobs that trapped them in long-term insecurity and poverty; engagement

in jobs repeatedly failed to provide routes away from poverty, largely because of few opportunities being available in the local job market; and the insecurity of low-paid and low-quality work was the main reason why shuttling between benefits and jobs had been interviewees predominant experience of working life.25

These findings – and the statistic that 60% of children living in poverty in the UK live in a household where at least one adult works26 –demonstrate that work does not always offer a route out of poverty and that the quality of jobs also matters. Campaigns around Living Wages, family friendly employment practices and rights for temporary workers have all highlighted how some employment practices can serve to keep people in poverty even when they are employed. Recent research has also again highlighted that the cost of childcare can act as a deterrent to people taking employment27. A number of recent studieshavealsohighlightedthe‘businesscase’forimprovingworkingpracticesandpaying‘fairwages’28. These studies have highlighted benefits such as improved staff satisfaction, performance and retention and improvements in health and well-being.

20. http://www.nspcc.org.uk/inform/research/briefings/poverty_wda56897.html

21. http://www.ukces.org.uk/assets/ukces/docs/publications/ambition-2020-the-2009-report-key-findings.pdf

22. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/aug/17/unemployment-rise-jobs-not-there

23. http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lmac/impact-of-the-recession-on-the-labour-market/impact-of-the-recession-on-the-labour-market/impact-of-the-recession-on-the-labour-market---impact-of-the-recession-on-the-labour-market.pdf

24. http://dro.dur.ac.uk/7069/

25. http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/understanding-recurrent-poverty

26. http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/hbai/hbai2011/index.php?page=contents

27. http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/en/50_protect-uk-childcare-support.htm

28. See for example: http://www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/docs/staff/8041.pdf&http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD008009.pub2/abstract;jsessionid=563BE44323FB72F9D2885BC424BD5C57.d01t04

11

CONTINUED...

Financial Inclusion initiatives/maximising household income

Ensuring that everyone is receiving the money that they are entitled to and are able to access mainstream financial services is vital in tackling child poverty and mitigating its impacts. Research shows that take up of benefit such as Council Tax Benefit, Housing Benefit is lower amongst households that work, and finding ways of reaching workers is particularly important in this theme.

For example, national figures released in 2010 show the estimated take up rates for Income Related Benefits, Tax Credits andChildBenefitfor2008-0929,30. It is estimated that the loss to the North East from the non take up of tax credits by families with children alone was between £90millionand£220million31. ANEC estimatedthatin2006/07,between£501and£894millionwaslosttotheNorthEast as a result of non-take up of benefits 32. Once the potential local multiplier effect of this money circulating within the local economy is calculated the loss to the regionisnearer£1-1.5billionperyear.

A report for One North East in September 2009 highlighted a number of issues for the North East in relation financial inclusion33. The report suggested that out of 2 million adults in the region:

•Justover1millionhave no savings account

• Over477,000havenobankaccount

• 260,000havebeenrefusedcredit

• Over1millionindividualshavenohome contents insurance

It is unfortunate that traditional sources of advice and support in this area are under particular threat as a result of the fiscal squeeze on local authorities. However, a number of new and innovative approaches to service delivery around financial support suggest that there are opportunities to maximise household income (and reduce household expenditure) even in the current climate. Regional collaborative working is already taking place via the Financial Inclusion and Capability Network (FINCAN) and local authorities are already working with and supporting this venture.

Financial Inclusion initiatives and projects, whilst perhaps best delivered at a local level, could benefit from some regional consistency and collaboration. Best practice at a neighbourhood level should be shared widely and there may be opportunities for regional campaigns to raise awareness of different benefits.

It is important that this work is linked into the child poverty agenda within local authorities and other large employers across public, private and voluntary sectors where possible. The localisation aspects of the welfare reforms again put local authorities at the centre of discussions and action around household income and expenditure.

Improving neighbourhoods (expressed in terms of family & child friendly/safe/sustainable and including housing)

The only mention of neighbourhood and/or environmental issues in the national strategy on child poverty acknowledges, via a reference to the Marmot Review of HealthInequalitiesthat‘thepoorertheneighbourhood, the more likely it is to have high rates of crime, poor air quality, lack of green spaces and safe places for childrentoplay’34.

Improving the physical environment of disadvantaged neighbourhoods often linksbacktothe‘brokenwindowstheory’of social norms in poorer and less well maintained environments. However, in the current financial climate, it is likely that local authorities will be required to explore savings in their environmental or maintenance services which may make improvements difficult to achieve.

Housing is an issue which, although occupying a relatively minor role in the new national child poverty strategy is one which local authorities in the North East are aware can have an effect on family life. High energy prices are also likely to have an impact in the region, which has the highest percentage of fuel poor households in the country.

A report by York University in 2009 highlighted that most local authorities intheNorthEasthad‘muchbetterhousingthanwouldbeexpected’giventheir levels of child poverty 35 although

29. http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/income_analysis/jun_2010/0809_Publication.pdf

30. http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/personal-tax-credits/cwtc-take-up2008-09.pdf

31. Ibid

32. http://www.northeastcouncils.gov.uk/download_documents_pdf.cfm?file=asset20110405042223.pdf

33. http://www.ignite-ne.com/ignite/Documents-hvstr.nsf/0/765873885C63E4328025760400418E10/$file/Enhancingfinancialinclusion.pdf

34. www.marmotreview.org/

35. www.york.ac.uk/inst/spru/research/pdf/ChildPovertyNE.pdf

12

CONTINUED...

this largely applies to the role of social housing in the region. With a national policyfocuson‘supportingtheprivaterentedsectortogrow’,localauthoritieswill want to ensure that these high standards are maintained.

There are other ways of improving the environment without making physical changes and a number of the priorities relating to this theme identify the need to change the social and emotional environment of disadvantaged neighbourhoods. This includes measures to reduce incidences of anti-social behaviour and crime with hoped for outcomes including reduced fear of crime, lower insurance premiums, higher house prices and greater community cohesion.

There is some evidence that a number of the services that currently address some of these issues are some of those that are being disproportionately affected by the current cuts to public sector budgets, not least because some of them are not statutory services. For example, work carried out by the LGA suggested that services for young people would be expectedto‘receiveaproportionallylarger savings target for the current financial year 36

Work carried out by Children North East in 2011 with children and young people from across the region identified that poor housing was the greatest and most recurring issues for young people growing up in poverty 37. The wider environment was the second most common issue identified in the participatory photography project they carried out. Transport and the lack of socialactivitiesor‘placestogo’alsofeatured highly.

Improving health and well-being

Children in the North East are among the least healthy in the country and living in poverty is strongly linked with a number of health issues. In a paper written for the North East Child Poverty Regional Advisory Group in 2009, Professor JonathanBradshawnotedthat‘onhealthit is striking how many areas in the NE are doing much worse than would be expected given their material well-being rankings’38. This report also noted that other sources of health data, such as CHIMAT 39, portrayed a similar picture.

Donald Hirsch and Professor Nick Spencer have written that:

‘Poverty is the greatest preventable threat to health, and tackling it is fundamental to addressing health Inequalities and boosting life chances’ and that the

evidence has profound implications for public policy. It suggests that effective action to tackle child poverty would make an important long-term contribution to many health-related policy objectives, including reducing obesity, reducing heart disease, increasing breast feeding and improving mental health.40

Not only does child poverty affect health during childhood, but it also affects adult health as well. In a separate paper drawingonover70differentstudies,Professor Spencer argues that:

it is now clear that poverty and low socio-economic status in early life adversely affect health in ways that transmit across time and contribute to poor adult health. In other words, poor social circumstances in childhood are associated with poor health both in childhood itself and in adult life 41

Theworkofthe‘You’reWelcome’project 42 that was carried out with young people in the North East will be important in ensuring that health services take the needs and views of children and young people into account when designing and delivering services. The profound impact that poverty and low income has on health is already well known and relatively uncontested. We have known since Victorian times that poverty affects health and so eradicating poverty must be central to any attempts to improve the health outcomes of children and young people. Danny Dorling illustrates this graphically when he writes:

Unfortunately, we will always suffer from child mortality, but there is no good reason, other than because of our greed and ignorance, for those mortality rates to be higher for children from poor families 43.

The transferring of the Public Health agenda to local Health & Wellbeing Boards, alongside commissioning arrangements for Health Visitors and School Nurses, presents local authorities and their partners with an excellent opportunity to prioritise the health and well-being of children and young people in the new health landscape.

36. http://www.lga.gov.uk/lga/aio/17710243

37. http://www.children-ne.org.uk/tackling-child-poverty

38. http://php.york.ac.uk/inst/spru/pubs/1876/

39. http://www.apho.org.uk/default.aspx?QN=CHIMAT_HOME

40. www.endchildpoverty.org.uk/.../Intergenerational_Links_between_c

41. www.endchildpoverty.org.uk/.../Childhood_Poverty_and_Adult_Hea

42. http://www.rywu.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Your-Welcome-Participation-Toolbox-Final.pdf

43. So you think you know about Britain, D. Dorling, 2012

13

CONTINUED...

‘Childpovertyproofing’local authority and partners strategies and plans

The previous Labour government was explicit that ending child poverty was ‘Everyone’sbusiness’anditisimportantthat corporate or partnership policies or strategies not closely linked to child poverty do not unintentionally prove to be counter-productive in efforts to address it.

The effects that growing up in poverty hasonchildren’schancesandoutcomesin adult life – and the cost to society - demonstrate that responsibility for ending child poverty should not rest solely withChildren’sServicesdepartmentswithin local authorities. In a number of local authorities, the responsibility for co-ordinating the work to tackle child poverty resides with different functions or services. Some authorities have allocated lead responsibility to a Chief Executives or Corporate Policy team to assist the mainstreaming of child poverty throughout the organisation, whilst in other areas lead responsibility sits with Partnership Teams which strengthens the viewthatchildpovertywon’tberesolvedby the council alone.

A recent example of partner organisations working to tackle child povertyona‘Healthier,WealthierChildren’projectinandaroundGlasgowfound that training and supporting an early years workforce such as midwives and health visitors resulted in estimated financialgainsofnearly£3millionina15month period for pregnant women and families at risk of child poverty44 . Similar projects could conceivably be delivered

utilising other partners workforces such as education and/or housing. Children North East are developing a programme ofworkaroundtheconceptof‘poverty-proofingtheschoolday.’45

Onelocalauthorityidentified‘childpovertyproofing’existingandnewstrategies and plans as a priority to ensure that all areas of local authority business considered the implications of their work on children living in poverty. Existing Equality Impact Needs Assessments and other service delivery planning frameworks or corporate risk management processes could be adapted toinclude‘childpoverty’asanextraconsideration, without the need for new processes to be developed.

There is also potential to include Child Poverty related training and information into existing training programmes such as employee induction and in-house training courses without requiring significant extra resources.TheChildren’sWorkforceDevelopment Council produced a trainingmoduleon‘understanding,recognisingandresponding’tochildpoverty, which is now available on the Department for Education website.46 A training session for schools governors around child poverty and the pupil premium is currently being piloted in the North East.

However, given that the availability and accessibilityof‘good’workiscentraltoending child poverty, it is important that employers and not just employees are engaged in efforts to tackle child poverty.

44. http://www.gcph.co.uk/publications/359_maximising_opportunities_final_evaluation_report_of_the_hwc_project

45. http://www.vonne.org.uk/z_includes/inc_getasset.php?srcpath=..%2F..%2F..%2F&type=file&id=2976

46. https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/SP225/0911

14

Potential Policy Options

Raising Aspirations and Achievement

1. Local authorities could consider afocuson‘realisingaspirations’or‘raisingattainment’ratherthan‘raisingaspirations’asthereislittleevidence of low aspirations (either child, parental or community) being a factor in low educational attainment.

2. Focusing on what works in raising achievement or attainment, the introduction and expansion of the Pupil Premium and the Academisation programme offer new opportunities to work with schools in understanding what interventions work well for children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

3. Local authorities could consider working collaboratively, and with relevant researchers and research networks, to better understand the‘stateoftheregion’schildren’,including understanding the effect of the economic climate on the wellbeing of young people in the North East.

Improving / Re-focusing around Early Intervention

4. Local authorities and their partners could consider the benefits of an ‘EarlyIntervention’approachacrossthe life cycle and not just in the early or foundation years, which was the focus of the Field and Allen Reviews.

5. Commissioning of new or different services across local authority boundaries is already being explored and the evaluations of these models could be shared, where appropriate.

6. Local authorities could consider arrangements to share information on their approaches (including developing an evidence base) to commissioning and delivering Early Intervention projects using mainline funding.

Improving Access to Work / Reducing Worklessness

7. Localauthoritiescouldconsiderhowto encourage and support employers in the region to implement family friendly employment practices, using their procurement and commissioning arrangements to promote these practices.

8. Evidenceprovidedbyemployabilityinitiatives, including national child poverty pilots should be included in the design of local interventions and programmes to support people back into work.

9. Local authorities should consider the monitoring of local labour markets as an integral part of their work to tackle child poverty, where this is not already happening.

10. Job creation initiatives within the North East should promote the creation of quality jobs wherever possible, noting that work does not always offer a route out of poverty.

6. POLICY15

CONTINUED...

Financial Inclusion Initiatives / Maximising Household Income

11. Local authorities, their partners and other large employers should consider how they can support alternative sources of credit such as credit unions through, for example, the provision for payroll deductions for employees or‘optinginasdefault’schemeswithsocial housing tenants.

12. Local authorities should explore ways of working with and raising awareness amongst other employers to involve them in increasing the take up of in-work benefits amongst their employees.

13. Local authorities and other public and voluntary sector organisations should consider ways of improving the welfare knowledge and signposting ability of their employees so that people who may be entitled to benefits are given appropriate and timely advice and support. This neednotbelimitedtothechildren’sworkforce and is particularly important given the significant welfare reforms that are planned.

Providing Family / Child Friendly Neighbourhoods

14. New ways of maintaining and, where possible, improving disadvantaged neighbourhoods should be explored in light of significant pressure to local authority budgets, including working with different agencies and local residents.

15. Understanding which environmental factors have the greatest impact on children’slivesthroughresearchand consultation with residents will help to increase the success of these initiatives in relation to mitigating the impactofpovertyonchildren’slives.

16. Housing providers and regulators should continue to work together to ensure that, wherever possible, the condition and supply of housing in the North East helps to mitigate, rather than worsen, the effects of poverty, with a particular focus on fuel poverty.

Improve Health and Well-being

17. LocalHealthandWellbeingBoards could consider making the improvement of the health of children in their area a priority for their work, notingthepositionoftheNorthEast’schildren in health terms relative to the rest of the country.

18.Considerationcouldbegiventodeveloping a set of regionally agreed ‘Children’sLifeChancesIndicators’,incorporating the national measures and relevant and significant local measures.

Child Poverty Proof local authority and partners strategies and plans

19. Local authorities should consider ways to ensure that ending child povertyiseverybody’sbusinessacross their organisation and that all strategies and plans support this aim. Poverty proofing corporate documents and plans and including child poverty in Impact Assessments are possible options here.

20. Consideration could also be given to the development of a regional training programme, including sessions to be used for inductions, ‘briefinterventions’andimpactassessments, for example, to support the above recommendation and ensure a well informed regional workforce .

16

The Guidance produced by the CPU 47 on Part 2 of the Child Poverty Act noted that:

‘the responsible local authority will want to agree with partners how and when to publish, review and revise the assessments in line with their local needs, so that these can usefully inform the timely preparation, review and revision of local child poverty strategies’ (emphases added)

Some local authorities have developed a process where their CPNAs are updated and monitored regularly as new statistical information becomes available. Other authorities are in the final stages of agreeing their first CPS whilst others already considering reviewing and refreshing their existing strategies.

A number of recent independent analyses suggest that child poverty levels are set to rise in the coming years as a result of austerity measures and public sector reforms, many of which are yet to be implemented. In particular, the reforms to the welfare state are predicted to hit families with children harder than other groups. The North East has beenidentifiedbytheTUCas‘oneof the hardest places to find work in thecountry’48 , revealing the differing geographical impact of these economic situation.

As new measures are introduced more work will be required to understand the effect these changes have on people. The introduction of Universal Credit in 2013 will, in the words of the government strategyonchildpoverty‘supportthosewho do the right thing, who take a full time job, to have an income which liftsthemoutofpoverty.’49 But there are not enough jobs for everyone, let alone full time jobs and, again, there is a geographical imbalance in the creation of new, well paid and secure jobs, which does not favour the North East. Recent news regarding job losses at long established employers in the region such as Alcan, BAE, Direct Line and Peters Cathedral Bakers demonstrate how difficult it is to support existing companies, as well as trying to attract new investors in the North East.

Many of the policies that can help to tackle child poverty, such as benefit levels and minimum wage levels are developed nationally. However, the coalition governments focus on localism and decentralisation does provide local authorities with the opportunity to adapt and deliver some of these policies in their own way and to develop new ones which go beyond those developed in Westminster.

Decisions regarding the implementation of localised elements of the welfare reforms, the priority setting process within newly formed Health & Wellbeing Boards and the potential for agreeing Living Wage policies are three areas that spring to mind as areas where there is some degree for local decision making to take place, but there will be more.

In summary, and as this report and the Child Poverty Needs Assessments and Strategies that it is based on, has hopefully shown, there is a lot that local authorities and their partners can do to reduce levels of child poverty through local action.

7. CONCLUSIONS

47 http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/doc/g/guide%20to%20part%202%20of%20the%20child%20poverty%20act%202010.doc

48 http://www.tuc.org.uk/economy/tuc-21415-f0.cfm

49 https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/CM%208061

17

 

Improving partnerships, knowledge and outcomes