A randomised controlled trial of a social care intervention
Mental health and wellbeing of children with social care input (i.e. Child in Need (CiN) or Child Protection Plan (CPP) status)
The intervention group receives unconditional financial assistance in the form of cash. Each family receives payments for over 45 weeks. There are fixed dates for starting the intervention and receiving cash, and there is tapering near the end. The control group (Business-As-Usual; BAU) receives all forms of service as they would were they not part of the trial. This includes financial or material support provided by local authorities via social workers' provision through s.17 of the Children Act 1989. It also includes existing community resources and financial capability support (e.g., accessing benefits, money management) provided by a range of statutory and third sector organisations. This is likely to be heterogeneous across participating areas. All families in the trial can access existing financial/material support and financial capability support in line with the respective services’ eligibility criteria. This study is a two-arm efficacy RCT: UCT + BAU vs. BAU only. Randomisation occurs at the individual child level, meaning that if a family has multiple children who meet the inclusion/exclusion criteria, one is selected (the youngest). A 1:3 allocation ratio (UCT + BAU: BAU only) is used to maximise power whilst keeping the intervention costs as low as possible, to enable the trial to be feasible.
1. Child aged 10-16 years 2. Child under Child in Need or Child Protection Plan 3. Family eligible for financial support under S17 at a minimum for three weeks from the time of identification, by which time the intervention would have begun for those assigned to this condition
1. The sole reason for the CiN status is the child having a disability 2. The practitioner identifying the family knows of a risk of financial exploitation for the family or members thereof 3. The practitioner identifying the family knows of a risk of harm that could arise from taking part in the study (i.e., serious, harmful, and persistent parent/child substance use that would be escalated through increased financial resources; a family member is subject to Prevent input; a family member is at imminent risk of serious physical harm requiring sustained hospitalisation from another family member) – this would be agreed on a case-by-case basis by the SPOC/ practitioner with the payment agent 4. There is an imminent escalation of social care/ state input, meaning that the child is likely to be taken into care (e.g., the family is subject to Public Law Outline proceedings) or into the children and young people’s secure estate 5. The family or members thereof are under criminal investigation for fraud or financial offences