Conference Presentation Slides PPTminimizer€¦ · CONTENTS Page 2008 Conference Evaluation...

UK Drug Workers Forum Annual National Conference 2008

‘TACKLING THE NEW DRUGS STRATEGY TOGETHER’’

14-15 October 2008

Park Inn Hotel, York

CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS

The UK Drug Workers Forum wishes to thank you for participating in the 2008 Annual National Conference at The Park

Inn Hotel, York.

Copies of speaker slides, where available, are contained in this brochure

for your information, together with speaker contact details.

We look forward to seeing you in York again in 2009.

CONTENTS

Page

2008 Conference Evaluation Feedback - Overview 2

Presentation Slides:

Opening Address: 2008 Drug Strategy: The Challenge of Change Owen Rowland, Deputy Head of Drug Strategy Unit, Home Office

3

Integrated Offender Management Model for Drug Misusing Offenders Steve Stebbings, DIP Strategic Lead for Lancashire Constabulary

Slides for this session are not available.

2008 Drug Strategy: Implications for Agencies Ian Wardle, Chief Executive, Lifeline Project Ltd

5

Partners of Prisoners: Families – Part of the Problem, Or Part of the Solution? Farida Anderson, Chief Executive, Partners of Prisoners

9

Drug Related Deaths in Custody – The Issues Arising Deborah Coles, Co-Director, Inquest

12

Family Inclusion Vivienne Evans, Chief Executive, Adfam

14

A European Perspective Thomas Kattau, The Pompidou Group, Council of Europe

16

Workshop Slides:

Workforce Development - Susan Hart, NTA Workforce Programme Manager 18

Who Cares? Successful Engagement and Consultation of Families Within Substance Misuse Services - Ranjeev Choudhry, Manchester City Council Adult Care Services & Anthony Mellor

20

Service Users Back into Work - Ben Lynam, UKDPC Slides for this session are not available.

Rights for Drug Users - Russell Newcombe, Lifeline Project Ltd, Manchester 24

Drug Intervention Programme: How Can We Make it Work Better? -Peter Grime & Mary Calvert, Home Office

28

Drugs and Young People - Manfred Humer, D’n’A Services for Young People, Newcastle Upon Tyne)

29

The CARAT/CJIT Interface - Alan Rushmore, Phoenix Futures Slides for this session are not available.

The Frankfurt Experience - Thomas Kattau, The Pompidou Group & Mick Fowler, Substance Misuse Manager, HMYOI Lancaster Farms and Chair, UKDWF

Slides for this session are not available.

Presenter and Workshop Facilitator Contact Details 33

2009 Conference – York 34

1

2008 CONFERENCE EVALUATION FEEDBACK – OVERVIEW Presentations: The main presentations were very well received, in particular Farida Anderson’s talk was considered to be well presented, informative and impactive and highlighted the need for more training and awareness in providing families with the correct options available to them. Though regrettably cut short, Ian Wardle’s presentation was considered relevant and interesting. Workshops: The workshops provided insight into a variety of topics and were generally considered to be very informative and thought-provoking. Venue: The Park Inn Hotel received various ratings. Whilst some delegates thought the facilities and catering to be very good, others suggested a shortfall in services and poor quality catering with particular shortcomings on vegetarian food provision. Parking facilities were considered inadequate at the hotel, although public car parking was available a short distance away. There was a requirement for more seating to be available in reception areas. Conference: There was a request for presentations to be available to delegates, hence the production of this booklet to ensure all delegates are provided with copies. A suggestion was made that appropriate DVDs/films could be available to view during breaks and this idea will be considered for next year’s event. Speaker contact details were requested and these have been provided in this document. It was suggested that the morning plenary sessions were very long with little time for debate at the end. More frontline workers at the event and making the event more targeted to drug workers rather than managers with more discussion on good and bad practice was requested, together with more service-user representation. There was a request that meals be provided as an option rather than on an inclusive basis to help keep costs down. The evening entertainment was considered to be excellent and those that stayed to enjoy the band after the Conference Dinner commented very positively.

2

2008 DRUG STRATEGY: THE CHALLENGE OF CHANGE Owen Rowland, Deputy Head, Drug Strategy Unit, Home Office 1

The new drug strategy, Drugs: protecting families and communities, was launched on 27 February 2008.

5

• Protecting communities through robust enforcement to tackle drug supply, drug-related crime and anti-social behaviour.

• Preventing harm to children, young people and families affected by drug misuse.

• Delivering new approaches to drug treatment and social re-integration.

• Delivering public information campaigns, communications and community engagement.

The new drug strategy

To meet these new challenges, and to respond to the priorities of communities and delivery partners identified through the consultation process, the new drug strategy is based around four key strategic objectives:

2

The strategy builds upon the real successes of the previous ten-year strategy:

• Recorded acquisitive crime – to which drug-related crime makes a significant contribution - has fallen by more than a fifth since the introduction of the Drug Interventions Programme in 2003.

• Overall drug use - including among young people - is at its lowest level since we began measurement through the British Crime Survey.

• Treatment capacity has more than doubled, with dramatic falls in waiting times and the steep rises in the rates of drug-related deaths that occurred through the 1990s have been halted.

• Powers have been introduced by the Government and widely used bypartners to improve enforcement and to make communities safer

What the previous drug strategy has achieved

6

THE LAST 10 YEARS

Tackling Drugs to Build a Better Britain to the Updated Drug Strategy

THE NEXT 10 YEARS

Drugs: protecting families and communities

Local planning – primarily by Drug Action Teams – submitted centrally for performance management.

Local Planning, through LAAs

New ring fenced monies for drugs e.gPTB, YPSMG, DIP, CAD

Presumption against ring fencing –with funding being incorporated into

larger funding strands.

more localised and mainstreaming

approach

Separate Government Office Drug Teams

Integrated Government Office Crime

Teams

more centralised and sector specific

3

While we have made great progress, much remains to be done:

• Around a quarter of all people still feel that drug misuse or dealing is a problem in their area, and we need to do more to reassure people that action is being taken to make their communities safer.

• Enforcement activity must respond more directly to community concerns, and must act on community intelligence.

• We must intervene more assertively with young people and families where drug misuse is a problem.

• We need to ensure that drug treatment is more effective and focused on outcomes, and that people re-establish their lives and make a contribution to society.

Our new challenge

7 How will the strategy be delivered?

National

At national level the Drug Strategy Delivery Group brings together key senior officials from across relevant departments to drive progress against the drug strategy action plan and related Public Service Agreements

Regional

At regional level the Government Offices have a key role in supporting delivery through the Local Area Agreement process.

The Government Offices also have a vital role in helping to identify and disseminate promising practice to support local delivery partners.

Local

At local level the new set of Public Service Agreements and the Local Area Agreement process, backed by the new inspection regime of the Comprehensive Area Assessment will drive the new locally owned approach.

3

4

12.1%

Recorded acquisitive crime down.

overall drug use in England and Walesis at its lowest level since 1997;

1998 – 2008 Drug Strategy new Drug Strategy

Down by 22%

9.3%

31.8%among young people, overall druguse is at its lowest level over thesame period;

21.3%

85,000Treatment capacity has doubled, waiting times down and effectiveness improved.

195,000 Re-integration

1997 / 98 data

2007 / 08 data

21% Perceptions of drug use / dealingas a problem in your local area

26%CommunicationCommunity

Engagement

Families

Neighbourhood Policing


• The Police and Justice Act (schedule 9) amended the Crime and Disorder Act and requires the following from ‘responsible authorities’ (Local Authorities, Police, Police Authorities, PCTs, Fire Authorities)

– ‘the responsible authorities for a local government area shall formulate

– a strategy for the reduction of crime and disorder in the area, including anti-social behaviour adversely affecting the local environment; and

– a strategy for combating the misuse of drugs, alcohol and other substances in the area ‘

9

Local agencies should:

• establish a dialogue with local communities about what action they want and what they can reasonably expect to see happen;

• follow up any action with reassuring and realistic messages about what was done and how successful it was; and

• set targets that will allow performance to be tracked.

How will the strategy be delivered?

The new localism

Two overarching themes underpin the delivery of the new drug strategy: local ownership and mainstreaming. We have moved ownership of delivery firmly towards local areas. Under this new local delivery regime, local agencies and areas will use resources to meet local needs and respond to community concerns.


Mainstreaming

For delivery of the strategy to be sustainable, we should move towards mainstreaming of services across all strands of the drug strategy. Only by embedding interventions within wider mainstream services will we deliver better outcomes for drug users, their families and communities.

This process has clear implications for the workforce; both specialist and mainstream.

11 The role of the workforce

The drugs workforce is key to success in delivering the drug strategy. A more qualitative focus on outcomes requires a skilled and knowledgeable workforce that can respond to individual needs.

Mainstream services, such as housing, training and employment services cannot take on problem drug use as part of their core business without strong back up and support from specialist drug services.

12

• supporting effective communications with local communities through the production and dissemination of a communications toolkit;

• bringing together existing guidance and identifying good practice, and sharing these resources with delivery partners through the Home Office drugs website;

• developing an evidence base of what works in reducing perception levels; and

• bringing together local areas and agencies to share experiences and good practice and to facilitate shared learning.

www.drugs.gov.uk

The role of central Government

The role of Government is to support local delivery of the drug strategy and to drive reductions in public perceptions of drug use and dealing. This includes:

4

2008 DRUG STRATEGY: IMPLICATIONS FOR AGENCIES Ian Wardle, Chief Executive, Lifeline Project Ltd 1 Note of Caution.

Any criticism is a self-criticism, before it is a

criticism of the organisation I work for,

or the wider the drugs field.

2

What happened to the Future?

3

Can one have a medium term strategy

without a long term vision?

4 Drugs: Protecting

Families and Communities

The 2008 Drugs Strategy

The Beginning or the End

5

What lies between methadone and

abstinence?

And what lies beyond?

6

Drugs at the policy crossroads Drugs at the policy margins

Drugs as a simple issueDrugs as a complex or

‘wicked’ issue

Drugs as suitable for a strategic futures treatment

Drugs as a subset of other discourses:

1.Drugs: Fitting into the FuturePolicy

5

7

2. Drugs: Fitting into the Future

Research

8 Jim Orford-Asking the right questions in the right way.

Treatment Research has been asking the wrong questionsin the wrong way.•The field should stop studying named techniques and focus instead on change processes.•Change processes should be studied within broader, longer-acting systems of which treatment is part.•Science in the field should be brought up to date by acknowledging a variety of sources of useful knowledge.

From Addiction January 2008

9

“Evidence for the influence of the wider extra-treatment environment includes findings that quality of home and job

environments, and existence of friendship and extended family resources and social support for change, are related to positive

outcomes”

The Extra Treatment Environment

10 2. Drugs: Fitting into the

FuturePsychology

What is Community Psychology?• At the very heart of the subject is the need to see

people--their feelings, thoughts, and actions --within a social context.

• It exhorts us, when thinking of people’s health, happiness and well-being, or when thinking about people’s distress and disorder to ‘think context’

11

3. Drugs: Fitting into the Future

Strategy of Systems

12

Scotland’s Futures Forum.

Approaches to Alcohol and Drugs.

A Question of Architecture.

13 A systems mapping approach to how

Scotland can reduce thedamage to its

population through alcohol and drugs by

half by 2025.

14 Scotland Futures Forum: A Systems

Mapping Approach

6

15 Foreword“Whatever your view and opinions of alcohol and drugs are, there is a good

chance that ten other people will disagree with you. The Forum set out to bring different voices around the

table and produce fresh, evidenced and unique debate around the future of

alcohol and drugs in Scotland. I believe that it has done so through an

imaginative systems approach.”

16 Systems mapping helps recognise inter-

relationships in complex situations, and provides a tool for communicating

and exploring options with multiple stakeholders.

17 Substance Culture

Alcohol Culture:Us/Drugs Culture:Them plus growing importance ofalcohol in LSPs

GovernanceRebalancing Regulation and Prohibition, e.g. a common system of

classification,.

Enforcement Limited effects combined with Perverse Consequences

Intervention and RecoveryTreatment as a complex site for multiple outcomes (TOP + UKDPC

Consensus Definition vs Treatment as getting better, i.e. Abstinence.

Public HealthIndividual (Healthy Choices) vs. Growing Inequality (IMD) and the Layard

Agenda.

CommunityEmpowerment Agenda (Limits to Public Services) Developing Preventive

Capacity

Evidence and ResearchRCTs, TOP and Individual Pathways vs. Neighbourhood Wellbeing, Quality

of Life and ‘Perceptions’

Seven Key Areas: The Basis of System Mapping

18 4. Drugs: Fitting into the

FutureStrategy of Place

19 Tim Blackman: Placing Health: Neighbourhood renewal, health

improvement and complexity, Bristol 2006

1. Places matter because they are open, dynamic and adaptive systems that do not have a simple cause-effect relationship with national or global drivers of economic, social or policy change.

2. No strategy for tackling health inequalities will reach everyone it should without intervention in neighbourhoods to tackle the local factors that combine with wider determinants of health to create preventable geographical inequalities.

3. Neighbourhoods are complex systems.



A Zone of Complexity1. Renewing neighbourhoods to narrow health

inequalities is not a mechanical procedure because rarely are there relationships of the type A causes B.

2. The issues exist in a ‘zone of complexity’ where interactions introduce uncertainty and agreement needs to be negotiated between multiple players.



Four Capitals1. Fixed Capital: housing, plant, plant, roads, etc2. Human Capital: residents’ levels of education,

skills and health.3. Environmental Capital, or the amenity of the

neighbourhood4. Social Capital and levels of trust and respect in

the neighbourhood.

22

The National Strategy for Neighbourhood

Renewal (NR), launched in 2001 as a

10- to 20-year initiative.

7

23 The focus is on closing gaps between national averages for:

• life expectancy, • the employment rate, • educational achievement, • crime • decent housing • (with liveability added subsequently)

and these local authorities' averages, as well as between targeted neighbourhoods within the local authority areas and their

local authority averages.

24

An organisation with Vision in an industry without

8

PARTNERS OF PRISONERS: FAMILIES – PART OF THE PROBLEM, OR PART OF THE SOLUTION Farida Anderson, MBE, Chief Executive, Partners of Prisoners 1

Farida Anderson MBE

Chief Executive, POPS

UK Drug Workers Forum Annual National Conference – 15th October

2008

Registered Charity No.: 1048152 Company Registration Number: 3067385

Families part of the problem or part of the solution?

2 Presentation outline…

Forgotten Victims - film

POPS

Families issues

Support network

The importance of maintaining family ties

3 POPS history…

POPS was formed in 1988 by

offenders’ families.

POPS is a needs led organisation.

POPS is a growing organisation

employing approximately 75 staff and

over 20 volunteers.

POPS receives no statutory funding

but has contractual arrangements with

the public/private sector.

4 POPS services…

POPS

5

6 Families needs (general)…

Physical and psychological – stress, guilt, anxiety, fear, confusion.

Relationships – change in roles (grandparents as carers, siblings as carers).

Financial - theft of money and possessions

- repaying debts

- paying for rehab

- buying drugs

Social – alienated, no motivation, stigmatised by the community.

9

Video clip

7 Families needs (custody)…

Enforced separation.

Fear of the unknown.

Worry about how they will cope.

Pressure to supply.

Security – dog, closed visits, searching.

Lack of knowledge.

Not clear about their role.

8 Services available in custody?

Interventions are offender focused.

Detox.

CARATS

Harm Reduction / minimisation

Therapeutic Communities /

Interventions

Where are families in this?

9 Good practice…

DAAST and POPS Family Support Group

Based at HMP Manchester.

Funded by Manchester DAAST.

Run by two full time members of

staff.

Partnership working.

Provides advocacy, signposting,

information and support.

10 Benefits of supporting families…

Consistent approach.

Improved understanding for

families.

Helps families to recognise own

needs.

Shared goal – to desist against

families being counter productive.

Empowers family members.

11 Benefits of supporting families cont…

Improved communication between

and within the family.

- Reducing tension

- Improving trust

Identifies and addresses family

issues i.e. children etc….

Builds trust between all concerned.

12 A model of offender management…

Arrest

Court

Prison

Release

10

13 The role of the ‘offender supporter’…

Being there at all stages of the Criminal

Justice System.

Being able to support and monitor

progress of offender.

Feeling valued and retaining their role

when the offender is in custody.

Family who are prepared for the release

of a loved one.

Family who can actively participate in the

progression route of an offender.

14 Contact us…

Valentine House1079 Rochdale RdBlackleyManchesterM9 8AJT/F: 0161 702 1000E: [email protected]: www.partnersofprisoners.co.uk

Company Registration Number: 3067385Registered Charity No.: 1048152

11

DRUG RELATED DEATHS IN CUSTODY – THE ISSUES ARISING Deborah Coles, Co-Director, Inquest 1

INQUEST

• INQUEST is a charity that provides independent and free legal advice and support to bereaved people on inquest procedures in England and Wales

• Its key focus is on deaths in custody – prison, police, immigration

and psychiatric detention• It is casework led, conducts policy and research, campaigns and

lobbies for reform of the system, for better support for families and changes to prevent unnecessary deaths and for greater state accountability

• It is consulted widely by government ministers and departments, MPs, lawyers, academics, media and the wider public

2

All deaths in Prison, England & Wales, 1997-2008

118134

149 139123

154177

210

168155

188161

0

50

100

150

200

250

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Source: INQUEST casework and Monitoring

3

Self-Inflicted Deaths in Prison England & Wales 1997-2008

69

8391

8273

96 93 95

7867

92

47

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Source: INQUEST casework and Monitoring

4 Issues arising from drug-related deaths

• Inconsistency of treatment and lack of continuity of care between different prisons and prisons and the community – treatment dictated by prison policy rather than clinical need

• Lack of proper clinical governance and accountability for delivery

• Still enforced detoxifications which are clinically inappropriate and known to risk suicide self harm

• Conflict between health needs and discipline and control – physical and behavioural symptoms of drug withdrawal often treated with punishment

• Prejudices and assumptions about drug misusers contributing to poor decision making during detox and maintenance

• Poor medical care, undertrained staff

• Lack of involvement of families in treatment and care

5 Risley prison

• Nearly half of Risley’s prisoners, significantly worse than the comparator, said it was easy to get drugs…

• A significant number of prisoners admitted to a drug problem on arrival..but detoxification arrangements were limited to symptomatic relief with no capacity to sustain maintenance provision.

• ‘People rob you for drug money.’

• ‘Blatant drug use, more in your face here. ’

• ‘Huge heroin problem, blatant drug taking and making calls on mobiles to get your daily hit.’

6

12

Michael

• Michael (39year old) was found hanging in his cell in April 2007 – on remand for burglary

• Long history of poly drug use and homelessness

• He spent the first month in local London prison where placed on a methadone maintenance programme. Following a court appearance he was taken under Operation Safeguard in police cell for the night –contrary to guidelines. Then sent to another prison where no methadone programme. Four days later suffering withdrawal he hung himself.

7 Tina

• Tina was a 37 year old woman who died in prison after hanging herself – serving 4 month sentence for possession of drugs and criminal damage

• Addicted to heroin, prescribed methadone and diazepam

• Placed on 8 day detox programme. Died 4 days after last methadone dose. Prison failed to reassess her despite acute withdrawal symptoms, frequent fitting, cramps and asthma attacks.

8 Martin

• 25 years old – found dead in cell 11 days after undergoing detoxification for methadone

• Died from dehydration following serious mismanagement of detoxification programme. He was 188cm tall (6ft 2in) and weighed just 43kg (6st 10lbs) at time of his death

• Assumptions were made by staff that his dramatic weight loss/stomach pains, vomiting and inability to walk were due to drug withdrawal/abuse and not a serious medical problem

• Jury criticise numerous failings in his treatment and care

9 Styal women’s prison

• Six women died in a 12 month period Aug 2002/3 - drug dependence and drug withdrawal played key role in all deaths

• Failure to implement a methadone programme despite coroner’s and prison inspectorate recommendation

• As a matter of urgency a proper detoxification regime should be put in place (Prison Inspectorate Feb 2002)

• As our last report pointed out there was no effective or safe detoxification:indeed some women were fitting and vomitting in their cells (June 2004)

10 Lyndsey

• Lyndsey aged 30, died on 8 March 2005 due to methadone toxicity. She was prescribed methadone despite giving an inconsistent history of drug use.

• Prison staff failed to recognise evidence of her deteriorating condition in the days leading up to her death.

• The jury at her inquest identified a catalogue of failures: lack of basic nursing observations; lack of formal observations of her withdrawal; lack of a care plan; lack of a proper medical review; and closure of the mental health and post-detoxification units in the prison. failure of medical staff to provide basic level of care.

11

“This misplaced over reliance on the prison system is at the heart of the problem. Throughout our inquiry we have seen time and time again the links between mental illness, drug and alcohol dependencies, short sentences and potential for self inflicted death…the imprisonment of such vulnerable people is at the root of the problem itself.”

Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights Inquiry Into Deaths In Custody

12 Family comment

“[My daughter] was a heroin addict. All she couldthink about was her next fix, thus ending upshoplifting to fund her habit. This is what made hera ‘criminal’ in the eyes of the law. If [she] couldhave overcome her drug dependency, she wouldnot have ended up in prison.”

(Pauline Hart, mother of a 19-year-old woman who died in

prison)

13 Alternatives to prison

• Move from a punishment and criminal justice model to a welfare and treatment based model

• Diversion from prison and investment in community based alternatives

• Consistency of treatment within prison, properly qualified and supervised staff.

• Continuity of treatment and support for those coming out of prison

14 For more information you can contact Deborah Coles:

• [email protected]

• www.inquest.org.uk

13

FAMILY INCLUSION Vivienne Evans, Chief Executive, Adfam 1

Vivienne Evans Adfam

www.adfam.org.uk

Drugs and Families

2 Scale of the issue

281,125 - 506,025 problem drug users in England & Wales

200,000 - 300,000 children of problem drug users in England & Wales (Hidden Harm, ACMD 2003)

780,000 - 1.3m children of problem alcohol users(England) (Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy Office for England, 2004)

150,000 family members affected, directly or indirectly, by drugactivity in prison at any one time7 million; estimated number of people in England affected by someone else’s substance misuse

3 Why support families?

Have needs in their own rightProvide practical, emotional and financial support to the substance user – improve likelihood of successful treatment and retention in treatment Health and welfare of family members is improved if they are given support Engaging families in a prison setting can reduce drug supply andre-offending Isolation and stigma increases stress and its related problems –added strain on statutory services

4 Policy context

Models of Care Drugs Strategy 2008Carers' Strategy 2008NICE guidance Hidden Harm Social Exclusion Action Plan

5 Impact

PhysicalPsychologicalCriminalitySocial StigmaPersonal and societalFinancial

6

14

Why support families?Have needs in their own rightProvide practical, emotional and financial support to the substance user – improve likelihood of successful treatment and retention in treatment Health and welfare of family members is improved if they are given support Engaging families in a prison setting can reduce drug supply andre-offending Isolation and stigma increases stress and its related problems –added strain on statutory services

7 Benefits

To user To family itselfTo communities To economy

8 Objective 2: Preventing harm to children, young people and families affected by drug misuse

Our approach will be based on four key elements:

a new package for families – including a focus on the children of substance misusers;

mainstreaming prevention;

making improvements to the treatment system for young people; and

building our evidence base of ‘what works’.

9 Commissioning Guide

Key messages:Carer involvement works most effectively when support services designed for them are in placeCarers and users have separate and distinct needs Systems designed for users may not work for carersFamily support services cannot be fitted into existing models designed for users Services need to reflect carers’ experiencesServices require adequate funding

10

What still needs to happenImplementation of the new drugs strategyMore training and guidance for workers

Families needs to be included in service level agreements and performance targets

Advocates in the locality to assist or work for families

15

A EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE Thomas Kattau, The Pompidou Group, Council of Europe 1

“Drug policies can only be effective if they are based on a realistic assessment of day to day practice, making use of the available research and the right policy tools. There is today, a worrying widening gulf between government drug policies and the reality of drug abuse. We believe that the unique role of the Pompidou which unites theory, policy and practice can make a vital contribution to how drug policies are made and how they are implemented.”

Bob Keizer, Netherlandsformer Chair of Permanent Correspondents

of the Pompidou Group

2

“Most drug programmes across Europe are problem centred. That is to say the problem is the central feature of approach - the problem of heroin trafficking, the problem of drug deaths, the problem of drug related crime and so on. The unique approach of the Pompidou Group is that it puts the individual as the starting point in looking for solutions to drug abuse. People take drugs so drug use and misuse is about ‘people’: That's where the Pompidou Group starts from.”

Bob Wylie, Scotland

News Correspondent, BBC

3

The Pompidou Group is the Council of Europe’s cooperation group that works to prevent drug abuse and illicit trafficking in drugs. It provides a multidisciplinary forum at the wider European level where it is possible for policy-makers, professionals and researchers to discuss and exchange information and ideas on the whole range of drug misuse and trafficking. It is in its 37th year of operation and includes 35 member states.

4

…Prevention

“Research has shown that a good and warm relation between adults is the most powerful resource in preventing drug use. Involving parents should be a key component of any parent –focused drug prevention programme since this will reinforce the protective factors that are developed within the family”

Richard Ives, expert, U.K.

5

... Treatment

“Adolescents are in a distinct developmental phase and their substance abuse patterns and other factors influencing their lives typically differ from those of adults. Thus, adolescent substance abusers may require different treatment strategies. Providing adequate treatment at this age may prevent the development of long-term addiction.”

Evangelos Kafetzopoulos, Greece

6

16

… Law enforcement

“Recognising the complexity of the problems being faced in relation to drug use, open drug scenes and drug-related crime, it is broadly accepted that a partnership approach involving state agencies, the community and voluntary sector and other relevant parties is needed.”

Johnny Connolly, Ireland

7 …Ethics

“The use of drug tests in school may therefore conflict with ethical principles such as individual autonomy and respect for privacy, to the extent that they are unjustified intrusions by the state into young citizens' private lives that expose them to humiliating or ambiguous situations without even offering them the assurance that the results, which could in any case be obtained by other, less coercive, means, will be treated with confidence. ”

Lourenço Martins, Portugal,

René Padieu, France

8 ....Research

“Where the drugs issue is politicised and research is seen as providing answers, there is serious risk of over-simplification, both by researchers and by those who ask for research, with the inevitable result that expectations often are not met. Policy makers and researchers need further to acknowledge that positive outcomes at one level are often at the expensive of negative or unintended consequences at other levels.”

Richard Hartnoll, UK

9

“Developments in neuroscience, bio-technology and methods of treatment offer exciting prospects for future prevention and treatment programmes, but there are no “quick fixes” for complex behavioural and health problems. We need to keep the individual at the forefront of our policy concern and ensure respect for fundamental human rights.”

Terry Davis, Secretary General of the Council of Europe

17

Workforce Development Susan Hart, NTA Workforce Programme Manager 1

1NTAMore treatment, better treatment, fairer treatment

The New Drugs Strategy –A workforce perspective

October 2008

Susan HartNational Workforce Programme Manager,

Treatment Delivery Team

2


Where we are now?

Volume

Access

Saving Lives

Delivery Assurance

Working in Partnership

3


Key Themes of the New Drugs Strategy

FamiliesReintegration

PersonalisationNew contexts for delivery

Evidence and accountability

Targeting resources

4


Drug strategy themes

Families – children of drug misusing parents and carers

Re-integration – Employment, changes to the benefit system, housing and treatment exitsPersonalisation – care planning and individual budgets

5


Workforce issues

Split into groups and look at the first 3issues:-Families – children of drug misusing parents and carersRe-integration – Employment, changes to the benefit system, housing and treatment exitsPersonalisation – care planning and individual budgets

What are the workforce issues ie staff competencies, partnership working etcTime allowed: 20 minutes

6

18


Workforce issues

Competencies of staffPartnership working

Staff resources

7


Next steps?

Training needs analysis or skills audit?Work with commissioners to make workforce competency a priority????

19

Who Cares? Successful Engagement and Consultation of Families Within the Substance Misuse Services Ranjeev Choudhry, Manchester City Council Adult Care Services and Anthony Mellor, Manchester

1

W.H.O Carers ?

2

Workshop Topics

What does Family/Carer involvement mean to you as professionals?

In your experience as practitioners do services involve Family/Carers and if so at what stage?

What impact does the involvement of families/carers have on a person’s treatment/recovery process?

What impact on you as practitioners do you feel involving families/carers would have, both positive and negative?

How do you think the services in which you work can tap into families/carer’s knowledge and experiences of the cared for?

3

4

5

6

20

7

Project Plan

To Explore & Develop Services For Families & Carers Affected by

Substance Misuse.

8

Aims of ProjectIdentify current provision.Identify carers.Work alongside ‘traditional carer services to meet needs of carers families and carers affected by substance misuse.Train substance misuse services to identify and support the needs of families and carers.Develop substance misuse Carer specific services.To promote Cultural Change throughout services.

9

Service Delivery

System Carer

10

Project Perception:

11 Legal Rights

• Carer and Disabled Childrens Act 2000

• Carers (Equal Opportunities) Act 2004

• DOH New Deal For Carers

12

21

Lack Of Awareness Of Legal Rights/Responsibilities

• Within Hidden Carers Themselves

• Within Substance Misuse Providers

• Within Mental Health Provides

• Within Community Family/Self/Help Groups

• Within Adult Social Care

• Within Criminal Justice System

13 Lack Of Service Provision/Care

Planning• No evidence of specific local support services

aimed at this group of Hidden Carers on the ground.

• Poor co-ordination between services e.g mental health and Alcohol & drugs.

• Lack of Quality Control Standards• Lack of transparency within the Mainstream,

Statutory & Voluntary Carers services regarding funding and access to it

• Lack of Relational Depth to any engagement with group of Hidden Carers by Statutory, Mainstream Carers Services.

14 Differentiating Key Issues for this group of Hidden Carers

• The severe degree of discrimination, labelling, stigmatisation alienation when experienced when interacting statutory voluntary and mainstream services.

• The risk of physical and mental harm e.g domestic violence, neglect, mental health

• The real sense of fear of being identified and judged

• The real sense of being ‘criminalised’ whithout recourse to support services.

15

“Don’t worry about me, just sort them out”

“I don’t want to be her care, I want to be her husband”.

16

Project Initial Outcomes

• Excellent co-operation with existing Outreach/Community Networks

• High interest from existing Family/Parents Network & Groups

• High Interest & Commitment from Providers regarding the generation of Diverse Provision e.g MCC

• High Interest from all sectors regarding the Training.

• Contact was being made with Hidden Carers• Data Analysis

17

Training

Training delivered by Adfam to 112 practitioners over 10 sessions.

“I found this to be one of the best training sessions since qualification”.

“Useful in making contact with other services to build up a knowledge base”.

“…when you think back to past cases and think now I would do this instead”.

18

22

19

Emergence Of Focus Groups

Manchester Alcohol & Drugs Focus Group

Keeping The focus, Challenging Stigma, Altering Perceptions,Having A Voice, Changing Lives.

20

We Help Others CARES !Understanding.Diversity of Others.

20

21 Contact Details

Ranjeev ChoudhrySubstance Misuse Family & Carer Development Officer Community Alcohol Care

Management TeamTel:- 0161-223 9641

Mobile:- [email protected].

23

Rights for Drug Users Dr Russell Newcombe, Lifeline, Manchester 1

Rights for Drug UsersDr. Russell Newcombe, Senior Researcher

Lifeline, Manchester, England

Paper presented at the UK Drug Workers Forum Annual National Conference, York, 14-15 October 2008

Full 70-slide version available from: [email protected] version can be viewed at: www.lifeline.org.uk

2

www.lifelinepublications.org.uk

Definition of key terms/conceptsDrug: a chemical which alters the functioning of the brain/mind

Drug use/taking/consumption: obtaining, preparing, ingesting, and/or being intoxicated on drugs

Drug user/taker/consumer: adult who freely consumes drugs

Rights: the freedoms and civil liberties guaranteed to citizens of a democracy by national governments and the United Nations (and European Union in the case of the UK)

Discrimination: the process by which a member of a socially defined group is treated differently because of being in that group

Minority group: small/powerless group within general population

3


The 4 stages of Intoxiphobia

1. Professionalization: criminalization andmedicalization of prohibited drug use

2. Stigmatization: official labeling plus publicignorance leads to myths and stereotyping

3. Discrimination: prejudicial language & unfairbehaviour toward drug users by non-users

4. Marginalization: social exclusion of drugusers, and formation of sub-cultures on the ‘edges of society’

4


Official/Public Labelling: becoming a known drug user

Medical record: drug treatment clients/drug addictsTreatment and medication for drug problems [permanent record kept by GPs, hospitals & drug clinics]

Criminal record: drug offendersConvictions/cautions & imprisonment for drug offences[kept on Police National Computer permanently for drug trafficking or Class A drug offences - with child abuse, etc.]

Social records: problem drug usersMainly local authority records, notably Social Services and Education departments [record-keeping varies]

Mass media records: esp. press and Internet

5


Sources of discrimination

National laws and social policies

Organisational policies and regulations

Professional practices and procedures

Mass media representation (myths, stereotypes)

Individual attitudes and behaviour (prejudice)

6

24

EMPLOYMENT

DISCRIMINATIONAGAINST

DRUG USERS

HEALTH

LEISURE

DRIVING

FINANCES CHILDREN

EDUCATION HOUSING

TRAVEL

CRIMINALJUSTICE

7


Discrimination against drug users in healthcare settings

A study of 274 IDUs at 11 drug agencies in Sydney found that more discrimination was reported in health services than any other settings. Overall, 65% reported that such discrimination resulted from them being a drug user, while 52% attributed it to their HCV-positive status – esp. females.It was concluded that this discrimination arose from stereotyping and prejudice among health professionals.

S. Habib (2003). Hepatitis C and injecting drug use: the realities of stigmatisation and discrimination. Health Education Journal, 62, 256-65.

8


Negative attitudes to drug users among GPs in England & Wales

A national postal survey of a random sample of one in 10 GPs in England & Wales in 1989 revealed that most had negative attitudes toward drug users, including:1. Drug users are harder to manage than other patients (79%)2. Drug users make unreasonable demands on time (71%)3. Drug users will become aggressive in the surgery (73%)4. Working with drug users would be unsatisfying (62%)5. Prefer to treat patients other than drug addicts (41%)Source: Glanz A. (1994). The fall and rise of the general practitioner. IN J. Strang & M. Gossop (eds), Heroin Addiction and Drug Policy: the British System. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

In 2007, only around 25% of GPs in England & Wales had a caseload of drug users (Drugscope, May 2007)

9


Discrimination in the European Union

In 2000, two EC Directives giving all EU citizens legal protection against discrimination were derived from Article 13 of the Treaty of Amsterdam.

The European Convention on Human Rights lists 10 groups: sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority,property, and birth. Though “or other status” is added to list, drug users are not explicitly mentioned.

10


UK discrimination lawsThe 1998 Human Rights Act is applicable only to public bodies, such as government departments, local authorities and criminal justice agencies.

But the UK now has specific laws preventing discrimination by individuals also, on the grounds of people’s sex, race, and disability – and, since 2006, age.

From 2004, discrimination on the grounds of religion or sexual orientation in the education and employment fields has also been outlawed – but discrimination on the grounds of drug-using status remains totally legal.

11


Health/Drug Services and Rights

“The way in which health services deal with drug users is riven with prejudice … and the most dangerous prejudices are those which seem reasonable and fair”

Gordon Morse “Access to health: unlocking the truth”- paper presented at Release Conference ‘Drugs, The Law & Human Rights”, London, September 2008.

12

25


Effects of stigma of illegality on propensity to seek drug treatment

The RSA Commission on Illegal Drugs, Communities & Public Policy organised a YouGov survey of British drug users in 2006, and found that about one in ten of those who wanted treatment were deterred from doing so by ‘the stigma of illegality’ (RSA, 2007: 303)

13


Charter of Rights for Drug Treatment Clients (based on NHS Patients’ Charter)

In 1997, SCODA devised a drug users’ service charter, based on the NHS Patients’ Charter (1991):

Assessment & treatment provided in specified waiting times

Provision of full information about available services/groups

Individual treatment plans with informed client involvement

Respect for privacy, dignity and confidentiality - including a complaints procedure

Right to a second opinion when referred to a consultant

14


Proposed Charter of Democratic Rights for Drug Users

3 General RightsA. The right to consume drugs

B. The right to treatment and help for drug problems

C. The right to fair drug laws and drug policies(no discrimination/prejudice, equal opportunities)

These 3 General Rights incorporate 10 Specific Rights:* Rights 1 to 5 derive from the right to consume drugs* Rights 4 to 8 derive from the right to help for drug problems* Rights 8 to 10 derive from the right to fair drug laws & policies

15


10 Specific Rights of Drug Users1 Right to ingest drugs and to be intoxicated2 Right to possess drugs and to store drug supplies3 Right to share drugs with friends (freely give or receive)4 Right of access to quality-controlled drugs (incl. cultivation)5 Right of access to equipment to prepare and ingest drugs6 Right of access to relevant information about drugs7 Right to receive treatment & social help for drug problems 8 Right to be described accurately, and without prejudice9 Right to reasonable legal controls (eg. drug-driving laws)10 Right to social inclusion – including equal access to travel,

housing, employment, education, health services, etc.

Duties: to obey drug-related laws, and avoid harming others

16


Will ending the prohibition on drug use be supported by the public?

Eventually – given that over the last three centuries, many practices which were once considered normal in Britain have become morally and legally unacceptable, notably:

* Abducting black people, and forcing them into slavery* Making children do hard work for long hours & low pay* Raping and beating women (if they were married to you)* Imprisoning gay men for having ‘wrongful’ sex in private* Torturing/executing people for believing in ‘wrong god’* Imprisoning people for growing/using the ‘wrong plant’

[though all of these things are still practiced in some parts of world]

17


Myths about drug users whichneed debunking to improve public

support for their human rightsDrug users are badcriminal, immoral, sinful, deviant, degenerate, dishonest

Drug users are madmentally disturbed, deluded, depressed, psychotic, insane

Drug users are sadstupid, selfish, unreliable, weak, inadequate, dependent

Drug users are illsick, diseased, damaged, poisoned, unclean, dying

18

26


Summary & Conclusions1. Drug users are a minority group experiencing discrimination

and social exclusion, and their rights need legal protection2. Drug users experience unfair discrimination in 10 areas of

life, including drug laws which violate basic legal principles3. Research shows drug users are treated unfairly by criminal

justice agencies, health services, and local authorities4. Challenges to unfair drug laws and policies under UK/EC

human rights legislation have largely been rejected so far5. Drug users should have 10 specific rights, based on 3 general

rights: to consumption, treatment/services and fair laws6. Achieving rights for drug users will require four things: more

research, public campaigns, HR challenges and legal reform.

19

20


Drug Service Users Rights

10 main issues for considerationReferral-In – voluntary or involuntary (eg. DIP)?Referral-On – esp. to rehabs, counselling/therapy, etc.Waiting times – for assessment and treatmentInformation requirements & confidentiality (eg. TOP)Treatment/Care Plan – imposed or negotiated?Medical procedures – justified or not (esp. urine testing)?Equality/discrimination (gender, age, race, parents, etc.)Prescribing options – e.g. heroin and amphetamine scripts? Dispensing – pick-up periods? on-site consumption? Research – consenting or coerced? deception and debriefing?

21


Workshop Questions

What democratic and human rights should drug users have – both within drugs/health services, and in wider society?

What can be done by professionals and drug-takers to develop and implement a charter of rights for users of generic and specialist health services for drug-takers?

27

Drug Interventions Programme: How Can We Make it Work Better? Peter Grime & Mary Calvert, Home Office 1

UK Drug Workers Forum Annual Conference 2008

DIP: How can we make it work better?

2 SUCCESS SO FAR

• DIP offending and effectiveness report– The overall volume of offending by a cohort of

7,727 individuals was 26 per cent lower following DIP identification.

– Around half of the drug misusers who come into contact with DIP through the custody suite showed a decline in offending of around 79 per cent in the six months following DIP contact.

– Offending levels increased following DIP contact for around a quarter of positive testers.

3

4 What are the Dashboard/Data telling us?

• Indicators are heading towards GREEN• More initial and follow-up assessments are being

attended – 84% of IA attended in Aug 2008 compared to 73%

in Q1 2007/08– 54% of FA attended in Aug 2008 compared to 16%

in Q1 2007/08• 85% of those given bail received Restriction on Bail

conditions• Changes to drug of use – greater % testing +ve for

crack/cocaine while decreasing % for opiates only and opiates/crack/cocaine

5 How does DIP fits into delivering crime

reduction?Local Area Agreements• NI 16: (serious acquisitive crime rate)• NI 18: (adult re-offending rates for those under probation

supervision)• NI 30: (re-offending rate of prolific and other priority

offenders)• NI 38: (drug-related (Class A) offending rate)• NI 40: (number of drug users recorded as being in effective

treatment)• NI 42: (perceptions of drug use or drug dealing as a

problem)• NI 143: (offenders under probation supervision living in

settled and suitable accommodation at the end of their order or licence)

• NI 144: (offenders under probation supervision living in settled and suitable accommodation at the end of their order or licence)

6 Questions

• If your process indicators are heading towards GREEN are they having the same effect on your outcomeindicators e.g. NIs?

• Or are your processes being “moulded” to meet your process indicators?

• Good progress being made to reduce attrition but:– What more can be done? – Are you using good practice from other areas?– What about attrition when transferring from one DAT

area to another?– What about attrition between community/

prison/community?• Best use of the interventions which DIP provides including

Conditional Cautions but also PPO and IOM?

28

Drugs and Young People Manfred Humer, D’n’A Services for Young People, Newcastle Upon Tyne 1

UK Drug Workers Forum National Conference 2008

Workshop

YOUNG PEOPLE AND DRUGSYOUNG PEOPLE AND DRUGS

Manfred Humer

D’n’A Services for Young People, Newcastle

2 Children & Young People Strategic Partnership (CYPSP)

LLiinnee MMaannaaggeemmeenntt Supervision

ConneXions

Safe Newcastle

Barnardo’s

NIN

Northumberland Tyne & Wear NHS Trust

Education Welfare Service

NECA

Youth Offending Team

Education Achievement Health Support Team

Streetwise

D’n’A STEERING GROUP

Service Manager

CAMHS Young Peoples Drug & Alcohol Service

Mental Health Nurses x2

+ sessions from

consultant psychiatrists

NECA Young Peoples Project Worker

Substance Misuse Workers (Vulnerable Young People)

YOT (Young Offenders) X 2 YP Workers

EAHST (Looked after Children) X 2 YP Workers

EWS (excludes/truants) X 1 YP Worker

Service Administrator

YOUNG PEOPLE’S COMMISSIONING GROUP

D D ’’ n n ’’ A T e a mA T e a m

Service Structure & Governance

3 Service UsersService Users

Young People under 19 yrsYoung People under 19 yrs, resident in Newcastle upon Tyne,who are in need positive intervention, due to use of substances having negative impact on their lives (physical, emotional/ mental health, family and social life, education/training/employment, housing, offending…)

Families/carers where this can best meet young person’s needs.

Integration Integration iimproved delivery of services: mproved delivery of services:

•• Easy access forEasy access for young people and familiesyoung people and families •• Clear referral pathwaysClear referral pathways

•• Effective info sharing, care coEffective info sharing, care co--ordinationordination

•• Central performance monitoringCentral performance monitoring

•• Shared assessments, plans, consistent qualityShared assessments, plans, consistent quality

•• Opportunity to develop practice, competenciesOpportunity to develop practice, competencies

•• Good use of resourcesGood use of resources

•• Better outcomes for YPBetter outcomes for YP

•• Inline with national policyInline with national policy

4 Range ofRange of Tier 2Tier 2--3 3 / targeted-specialist interventionsinterventions

Information Information && adviceadvice (Limited) prevention workprevention work

OneOne--toto--One One KeyworkKeywork supportsupport Early interventionEarly intervention (vulnerable YP)

Tiered assessmentsassessments, incl. CAF Brief interventionsBrief interventions

Harm minHarm min advice Care planned interventions

CAMHSCAMHS mental health services Relapse prevention, aftercare

Drug/alcohol treatmenttreatment (stabilisation, Hep and HIV screening/vaccinationdetox, subst.prescribing, inpatient)

Support accessing other servicesaccessing other services, Auricular acupunctureincl. transitional support to adult services, social and life skills, education/training/employment, benefits, housing… FreephoneFreephone,, Text ServiceText Service, , WebsiteWebsite

Briefings, coBriefings, co--working, advice/support working, advice/support for other servicesservices

Services:Services:

5 Work with Young Offenders

• 39%39% of D’n’A referrals from YOT = main referral source

• 2 f/t YOT drug workers (1 post vacant)

• Interagency protocol

• Management & supervision shared

• Ongoing improvement of operational processes

• Identification/screening via Drug Use ProfileDrug Use Profile Referral

• Substance use assessment by drug worker

• Proposed interventions/care plan shared with YOT, incl. barriers

• Coercion Coercion vsvs voluntary engagementvoluntary engagement with drug treatment ?? NTA targets

• Infosharing, recording, CAREWORKS

6

29

RAP – Resettlement & Aftercare Provision:

• YOT project

• Main remit: support around substance use, mental health, housing

and ETE issues.

• Initially funded 31 Mar 2008 + 1 year extension

• 3 project workers

• Link to D’n’A through specialist SMU worker

• Improved coordination of input with secure estate, continuity of care

7 Local trends and figures / Newcastle

main problem substance

alcohol55%

cannabis28%

ecstasy4%

cocaine3%

solvents3%

amphetamine2%

heroin2%

benzos1% other

2%

General observations (over past 3 years):

increase: alcohol, amphetamine, benzos, other (ketamine, ‘subbies’)

decrease: heroin similar: ecstasy, cocaine, cannabis

(D’n’A service clients 2007-08)

8

Clients by Gender and Problem Substances

0

20

40

60

80

100

57 78

female male

drugs

alcohol

Apr – Sept 2008

9 YP employment status

pupil/student50%

NEET/unemployed41%

regular employment2%

special school/PRU7%

YP housing situation at assessment

living with parents/relatives67%

living independ./settled9%

living indep./unsettled8%

LAC in care placement6%

LAC settled own acc5%

LAC unsettled own acc2%

no fixed abode3%

10

Referral Sources

social services13%

housing provider/support11%

education we lfare/PRU9%

youth/adv ice serv ice5%

other drug service1%

Connexions1%

school/college4%

community/youth project1%

parent/care r3%

family support2%

CAMHS1%

training provider2%

Self8%

YOT39%

11 1998 Tackling drugs to build a better Britain (10 year strategy)

2008 Drugs: Protecting families and communities (10 year strategy)

2005 NDTMS - National Drug Treatment Monitoring System

Children Act 2004 - ECM Outcomes Framework for Children & YP

2007 Memorandum of Understanding NTA & DCSF

2007/08 compulsory needs assessment & treatment plans for every DAAT 2008 Quarterly progress reports & panel reviews

2002 & 2006 Models of Care

Oct 2007 TOP – Treatment Outcome Profile

2003 NTA - National treatment monitoring forms

2008 PSA Delivery Agreement Youth Alcohol Action Plan

1999 QuADS (Alcohol Concern/SCODA), 10 Key Principles (SCODA)

2005 ‘YP Substance Misuse Treatment Services - Essential Elements’

1996 HAS: The Substance of Young Need

2007 NICE Guidelines community based interventions for Vulnerable YP

12

30

Drugs: Protecting Families and CommunitiesThe 2008 Drug Strategy

• Protecting Communities through robust enforcement

• Preventing harm to children, young people and families affected by

drug use

• Delivering new approaches to drug treatment and ‘social

reintegration’

• Campaigns, communications and community engagement

13 ‘Preventing Harm to Children, Young People and Families’

• ‘Hidden Harm’: Prompt access to treatment for drug misusing parents, interventions

for families most at risk, incl. parenting skills, intensive interventions

• Support for the wider family including young carers

• Mainstreaming prevention: > Review of drug education,

> Earlier identification of YP most at risk

• Improvements to treatment: Memorandum of Understanding DSCF - NTA

improved accessibility,

targeting most at risk,

workforce development,

better quality and outcomes, …

14 Alcohol

• National/Regional/Local Alcohol Strategies• Youth Alcohol Action Plan

• Enforcement activity to address young people drinking in public.

• Take action with industry.

• Develop national consensus on young people and drinking.

• Establish partnership with parents on teenage drinking.

• Support young people make sensible decisions about alcohol.

• Ensure access to treatment

15 What does this mean for YP services in Newcastle?

‘‘good and bad bitsgood and bad bits’’

Mainstreaming prevention: Very limited work by D’n’A, not picked up by

mainstream not ready (skills shortage, need for ‘culture change’), TYS not meeting expectations…

☺ CAF development, opportunities to promote universal screening tool

☺ Potential to further integrate drug/alcohol work in CYPSP

Training needs: DAAT & Children Services task (DSCF)

☺ Targeting most at Risk: Work w vulnerable YP well established in D’n’A

☺ Access to Effective Treatment: Specialist services integrated in D’n’A

‘Top down’ approach, annual YP needs assessment & treatment plan,

dominating role of NTA – ‘treatment heavy’…

Quality of Treatment: Evaluation via NDTMS / TOP ?

☺

16

YP budget disaggregated: 3 funding streams PCT/Children Serv/YOT

10% reduction in YP funds locally since 2007 (staffing?)

Main problem substance = alcohol funding?

Possible need to diversify worker roles YOT/EWS/CSC?

☺ Working with Families: Some good services, further development in D’n’A

needed (no additional funding).

Other challenges: Transitional issues/info sharing, vulnerable YP aged 16-17, substance misuse and housing,Service user involvement, community links, engagement strategies,Scope for innovation?

☺

17

Questions...? Questions...?

18

31

““Quo Quo vadisvadis, drug and alcohol work , drug and alcohol work

with young people?with young people?””

GROUP WORK

19 In your group: [20 mins]

1. Briefly introduce yourself.

2. As a group, scale your confidence (0-10) that the new drug strategy will ‘deliver the goods’ for young people, discuss reasons for your score.

3. Scale your local services/DAAT’s current ability to deliver on the strategy, explore reasons, particular strengths…

4. Where on the scale would you like to get to in the next 3 years and what do you need to achieve this?

5. Note down your scores and key points of your discussion on a flipchart, include any other points you would like to raise.

6. Prepare to briefly feed back the above to the whole group.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10worstworst

☺☺bestbest

32

Presenter and Workshop Facilitator Contact Details

Name Email

Owen Rowland [email protected]

Steve Stebbings [email protected]

Ian Wardle [email protected]

Farida Anderson [email protected]

Deborah Coles [email protected]

Vivienne Evans [email protected]

Thomas Kattau [email protected]

Susan Hart [email protected]

Ranjeev Choudhry [email protected]

Ben Lynam [email protected]

Russell Newcombe [email protected]

Peter Grime [email protected]

Manfred Humer [email protected]

Alan Rushmore [email protected]

33

2009 Conference – York The Forum Board is very grateful to those delegates who completed the evaluation forms as the feedback is very useful in helping to shape the next event. The Forum always strives to ensure workers are provided with information they want and need to support their work in the drugs field and following on from this year’s feedback, next year’s event will focus on ‘the worker’ and the sharing of successful practice to improve effectiveness in worker-related roles. Conference fees will endeavour to be kept to a minimum to encourage wider participation by voluntary organisations. The event will be structured to allow maximum time for discussion, debate and information sharing and we will attempt to incorporate time for viewing relevant DVDs and films. We will look at ways of structuring the event to enable delegates to attend only those sessions relevant to them with costs structured accordingly. Suggestions are invited for topics that you would like to see covered in next year’s event and if you would like to join the Conference Organising Committee to help make the next conference a success, please contact: [email protected]. We look forward to seeing you again in York in 2009 or at one of our Regional Events during the year, details of which will be posted to the Forum website shortly.

www.ukdrugworkersforum.org

34

Date post:	22-Sep-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Conference Presentation Slides PPTminimizer€¦ · CONTENTS Page 2008 Conference Evaluation...

Documents