Fit for All partners took part in evaluation workshops after the completion of the Summer 2021 programme. Here is what the groups that took part thought worked, and could be improved:
What worked…
Despite COVID and other worries, we delivered Fit for All pretty much to target. Bring it On Brum were really helpful and supportive, eg over inputting registers – which we know we didn’t do so well and that we need to get better at. Groups were pleased with the support they got from Children’s Quarter and by being part of Fit for All.
Capacity building – eg by getting parents involved in play training – we were able to use the programme as a catalyst to get parents and children more active and better informed.
Fit for All groups learnt techniques and approaches from others – improving the way groups can work all year round.
We get children and families into good habits around food and physical activity that can be sustained the rest of the year. All groups were aware that Fit for All helped to improve and extend some SEND children’s food choices. Children tried new foods, ate different fruit every day etc.
Fit for All partners helped tackle isolation which often faces disabled and vulnerable children and their families. Children and families met new people – we drew together families and children from different communities from those based around schools (which, for SEND children, are not necessarily as local as for most children in mainstream schools).
Benefits outreach/income maximisation – Free School Meal eligibility depends for most children on whether parents are claiming benefits; some families in need, were eligible for passport benefits and were helped to claim them.
More cooperation between groups and coproduction with families.
What we could do with more of…
Time – to plan and structure what groups want to deliver and to make more of the benefits of cooperation and coproduction with families.
People – and particularly people with skills in food and play (due to high adult: child ratios required).
Recipes/ideas/expertise and accessible information around food.
Flexibility to include SEND children and families who were in need but who might not fit the criteria for funding.
But, sometimes, there was too much…
Information and rules set out at the start of the programme – several groups withdrew because they said they couldn’t deal with the bureaucracy and participants confirmed they had found it off-putting. In practice, the burden was not as bad as groups feared. Some information, however, was provided late, eg from Bring It On Brum about enrichment opportunities.
Expectation of potentially intrusive questioning around family financial position to ascertain Free School Meal eligibility. In practice, Bring it On Brum handled this with sensitivity.
Requirement to identify the school attended – some children don’t have a school place; some are between schools; some aren’t sure which schools they will be going to; and some go to schools outside the local authority area – and the proportion of these is higher in each case for SEND children
Rigid cut-off between those families entitled and those not – there’s no taper, you either get Free School Meals or not. In practice, why not provide the services to all SEND children and families, regardless of means-testing? Families with SEND children typically have higher outgoings which are not taken into account in means testing.
Some groups felt training provided through Bring it On Brum wasn’t very relevant – we need to know the objectives of training, not just be told to attend it. Other groups felt that training in Safeguarding and Food Safety had been useful.
What could make it better is…
Planning and structured approaches – will help our groups make more effective use of time.
We need to improve our information systems and, for example, a better approach to registers so that we can input attendance information on time. Most groups felt that completing registers was challenging; the guidelines of what information was required was not clear enough. Chasing parents and getting the details needed when they were reluctant/ embarrassed to share was difficult and led some groups to under-report figures.
Resource sharing and skills sharing between groups. We did a bit of this; we want to do more.
Better links between groups – in practice, groups said some of their sessions were saved by CQ being able to ‘borrow and lend’ staff within the Fit for All network.