Supporting the Emotional, Mental and Wellbeing Needs of Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children by University of Wolverhampton

Institute for Community Research and Development

Supporting the Emotional, Mental and Wellbeing Needs of Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children: Evaluation Report

Dr Bozena Sojka and Dr Andrew Jolly

August 2021

Summary Criminal activity  UASC who were part of the project were less likely to either receive a caution/criminal conviction, or have drug misuse issues than children looked after in England as a whole.  Stakeholders attributed lower rates of crime and drug misuse to intensive multi-agency collaboration to identify the risks and provide diversionary activities. Wellbeing  Stakeholders and young people identified protective factors that the project engendered which supported emotional health and wellbeing.  Participation in psychological therapy was found difficult by some of the UASC, while others found it helpful. Stakeholders attributed these differences to different levels of familiarity with talking therapies and cultural taboos surrounding psychological health. Inter-agency working  Inter-agency collaboration took time to develop and involved improvement of communication and information sharing between all of the project partners as well as clarification of the project’s aims and objectives at its inception.  Stakeholders highlighted the importance of regular meetings during which issues surrounding project delivery were discussed. They felt that the meetings helped in developing collaboration between project partners and making well informed decisions about UASC.  Stakeholders highlighted the benefits that the project had on the development of their services and how it enhanced the collaboration with other project partners.  The Single Point of Access (SPA) provided a clear first point of contact for UASC and ensured they were assessed and directed to the service that best suited their needs in a timely manner. UASC engagement with the project  The level of UASC engagement and participation with the Wellbeing Project was rated by stakeholders as high, however, UASC initial engagement involved establishment of trust over time.  Overall, the Wellbeing Project received positive feedback from UASC about the activities in which they had engaged and had enhanced their awareness of variety of services available for them in Wolverhampton. Education  Educational outcomes varied in the cohort. Some UASC thrived in the structured environment of the Royal School and applied to university, while some others choose to withdraw from education upon turning 16 years old. The project was flexible enough to support these different educational paths but the innovative practice of offering boarding placements at the Royal had particularly positive outcomes for some young people. Integration and inclusion  Findings demonstrate that the Wellbeing Project had a positive impact on UASC integration through participation in social events organised by stakeholders, which in turn led to other opportunities. For instance, one of the UASC was volunteering as an interpreter.

Authors Dr Bozena Sojka is a Research Fellow in the Institute for Community Research and Development at the University of Wolverhampton. She has worked as part of dynamic research groups, and has more than 10 years' experience of undertaking research on vulnerable populations. She received advanced social research training with a particular focus on innovative qualitative and quantitative research methods. Dr Andy Jolly is a Research Fellow at the Institute for Community Research and Development at the University of Wolverhampton. He is a qualifiied social worker, and his research focuses on the welfare needs of undocumented migrant children in the UK.

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank to the City of Wolverhampton Council, Black Country Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, The Royal School Wolverhampton and the Refugee and Migrant Centre for facilitating the data collection. We are grateful to the City of Wolverhampton Council for funding this evaluation. Thank you to all the project partners who took part in an interview. We would also like to thank Sam Thorne (ICRD Administrator) for his time transcribing the interview data.

Contents

1. Introduction............................................................................................................. 6 1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 Research Context .............................................................................................................. 7 1. 3 Evaluation aims .............................................................................................................. 12

2. Methodology ......................................................................................................... 14 2.1 Data collection ................................................................................................................ 14 2.2 Data analysis ................................................................................................................... 14 2.3 Participants ..................................................................................................................... 14 2.4 Ethics .............................................................................................................................. 15

3. Findings – Process...................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.1. Beginning of the project and the importance of collaboration ........................................... 15 3.2 Single point of access (SPA) .............................................................................................. 18 3.3 Flexibility of the project ................................................................................................... 20 3.4 UASC engagement ........................................................................................................... 21 3.5 Educational support......................................................................................................... 23 3.6 The important role of interpreters .................................................................................... 24 3.7 Stakeholders’ recommendations for project development ................................................. 25 3.8 Sustainability of the project.............................................................................................. 26

4. Findings – Impact................................................................................................... 27 4.1 Overall impact on UASC ................................................................................................... 27 4.2 Wellbeing and asylum claim ............................................................................................. 28 4.3 Psychological support ...................................................................................................... 29 4.4 Confidence and independence ......................................................................................... 30 4.5 Integration ...................................................................................................................... 31 4.6 Preventing Radicalisation ................................................................................................. 32 4.7 Gang involvement ........................................................................................................... 34 4.8 Impact on stakeholders.................................................................................................... 35 4.9 Impact monitoring ........................................................................................................... 35 4.10 Benchmarking against national data. .............................................................................. 38

5. Conclusions and recommendations...................................................................... 39 4

5.1 Key findings of the evaluation.......................................................................................... 39 5.2 Recommendations........................................................................................................... 41

6. References ............................................................................................................. 42

1. Introduction 1.1 Introduction According to the UNHCR (2020), 79.5 million people were forcibly displaced worldwide at the end of 2019 as a result of persecution, conflict, violence, human rights violations or events seriously disturbing public order. An estimated 30 – 34 million of the 79.5 million forcibly displaced persons were children below 18 years of age, and 27% of children who arrived at the borders of southern Europe in 2019 were unaccompanied (Unicef 2020). In the UK there were just over 3,000 applications for asylum by Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children (UASC) per year in 2018 and 2019 (Home Office 2020). Additionally, more than 220 UASC were resettled in the UK from around Europe under the so called ‘Dubs amendment’ (Section 67 of the Immigration Act 2016), and 549 resettled in the UK under family reunion provisions (House of Commons Library 2020). Numbers of UASC arriving in Wolverhampton have followed national trends, with a steady increase between 2012 to 2016. Despite a drop in numbers in 2017, delays in asylum decision-making have meant that cumulative numbers have grown. The number of UASC in Wolverhampton was 55 in 2018/19, including children looked after, care leavers, and those living with family members. Although this group makes up a relatively small proportion of the general population of Wolverhampton (0.02% based on ONS population data for 2016), the resource required to adequately support their emotional and mental wellbeing needs is high. Research suggests that in comparison to other children and young people in care (CAYPIC), UASC face additional mental health difficulties arising from their immigration status and from being separated from friends and family. Chase et al. (2008) found that in comparison to other LAC, UASC were particularly likely to experience symptoms such as disturbed sleep, panic attacks, depression and eating disorders. Chase et al. also found a large number of undiagnosed mental health conditions. Children and young people who came from countries which didn’t have UK style mental health diagnosis and treatment sometimes lacked the vocabulary to describe symptoms or dismissed them. The Controlling Migration Fund, launched in 2016, provided £100 million to local authorities and their communities in England over four years to support migration in communities (Immigration Enforcement, 2018). An award was made to the City of Wolverhampton Council through this fund. It aimed to help provide additional support for UASC to settle, to be connected and integrate, to improve their wellbeing, and to minimise the impact on mainstream services and the wider community through the creation of a multi-agency partnership between the City of Wolverhampton Council , the Refugee and Migrant Centre and the Black Country Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust.

1.2 Research Context About the ‘Supporting the Emotional, Mental and Wellbeing of Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children Project’ In October 2017, the City of Wolverhampton Council was awarded a funding grant to support current and newly arriving unaccompanied asylum-seeking children (UASC) to settle into their new lives in Wolverhampton, to provide support which is protective of their longer-term wellbeing, to increase connectivity and local integration, and to minimise the impact on mainstream services. The two-year project started in 1st March 2018 and was centred on a multi-agency steering group supporting the health, social care, immigration and integration needs of UASC who are being supported by the City of Wolverhampton Council. The project took a pro-active approach to consider the holistic needs of UASC across the system, including: education, health, mental wellbeing, immigration status, and housing placement. Accommodation for UASC consisted of school boarding, foster placements, and semi-independent living provision for older teenagers. Those who came to Wolverhampton for family reunion accommodation came either through asylum support or private arrangements with their families. The project focused on providing the current UASC and developed services with the professional skills to respond appropriately to the immediately presenting emotional health and wellbeing issues for up to 55 young people through a coordinated approach. The model developed included the following elements:  Project management - service development, monitoring and oversight processes.  Case Work to support with integration, immigration advice and to develop a coherent approach to existing services for UASC.   

  

School link work - focus groups with receiving schools identified a gap in terms of the emotional wellbeing support available to UASC and the wider population of new arrivals. Project work to support therapeutic delivery and workshops. Mental Health support - providing emotional and mental health wellbeing identification screening, including: care pathway navigation, care co-ordination and delivery of therapeutic interventions to children and young people 17 years and under as referred by universal services, primary and /or secondary care, children’s social care, the Refuge and Migrant Centre, schools, and education settings. English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) packages to meet needs of children and guardians. Mentorship - support from a mentor via the Refugee and Migrant Centre who speaks the same language as the beneficiary. Specialist psychological support and interventions including Post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) support through the Black Country Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust.

Through this coordinated work, the project aimed to improve compliance across all of the stakeholders and aid the wider population by establishing baselines and metrics which could be replicated in future service modelling:  Referrals to be via single point of access (SPA) 

Connectivity and multi-disciplinary and multi-agency working across the whole pathway including paediatric services 7



Quick and effective intervention in crisis

 

Robust and effective case management Increased access to services and care pathways that are flexible and adaptable to meet complex needs



Increased access to support for parents, families’ carers and schools to build resilience for those with the greatest levels of need using systemic approaches and strongly supporting carers as a mechanism to build self-efficacy in the child and their immediate environment



Increased access to quick and effective discharge with seamless multi-agency planning from community to hospital and from hospital to community



Increased access to specialist i.e. supportive interventions including psychological therapies

In addition, the project aimed to achieve:  Reduction in the number of admissions to CAMHS TIER 4 for this cohort  

Reduction in number of re-admissions (currently at 33% for the Black Country) for this cohort Increased numbers of children and young people accessing CAMHS TIER 2 and TIER 3 services for this cohort



Reduction in the number of unplanned mental health related admissions to paediatric wards and emergency departments within Acute Trusts for this cohort Reductions in the number of Mental health related paediatric delayed discharges for this cohort Reductions in numbers of CYP becoming Looked After Children in this cohort Reductions in number of tripartite funded placements for this cohort Reduction in detention under Section 136 for this cohort

      



Reduction in number of arrests/cautions/criminal charges for this cohort Increase in choice and availability of local services Improved emotional well-being of the young person contributing to more settled communities in schools and local communities-signposting to youth activities/young people services to help with integration Improved integration with specific examples of increased settlement in local community

 

Improved education support to UASC Effective partnership working is evidenced for example with the Voluntary Sector, Mental

Health Services, Looked After Services and Education:  To increase stakeholder knowledge on UASC and support integration and awareness These outcomes would then result in the following impacts:  Support increased integration with peer groups particularly within the education system leading to improved educational attainment and subsequent employability  Relieve pressures on other services e.g. Social care – support placement stability  

Work to prevent escalation of mental health issues requiring more specialist intervention Reduce the possibility of community tensions.

Unaccompanied asylum-seeking children (UASC) The 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention defines a refugee as: ‘person who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a wellfounded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country.1’

Separated minors who are seeking asylum with no responsible adult to care for them are referred to as an unaccompanied asylum-seeking child (UASC). The Home Office defines UASC as: ‘an individual, who is under 18 when the asylum application is submitted, is not being cared for by an adult who by law or custom has responsibility to do so, is separated from both parents and has applied for asylum in the United Kingdom in his/her own right. 2’

UASC arrive in the UK by different means including:  spontaneous arrivals  

Dubs amendment Dublin III Regulation.

Most UASC arrive in the UK via spontaneous arrivals that are by their own means and are encountered at their port of entry. The local authority in which UASC arrive is responsible for supporting them, this can be under section 20 of the Children Act 1989. This creates the need for additional resources for those authorities who are the most common points of entry, mostly in the south east of England such as Kent, due to the Port of Dover, and Hillingdon, due to Heathrow Airport. In order to address the support needs, the government established the National Transfer Scheme (NTS); a voluntary transfer arrangement between local authorities for the care of UASC. The NTS aims to ensure that the responsibility for supporting UASC does not fall disproportionately to a small number of local authorities situated as entry points into the UK. At the time of the commencement of ‘Supporting the Emotional, Mental and Wellbeing of Unaccompanied AsylumSeeking Children Project’, Wolverhampton was part of the NTS and received young people via the scheme during the early part of the project. The Dubs amendment refers to Section 67 of the Immigration Act 2016 which was sponsored by Lord Dubs. The amendment offered UASC in other European countries resettlement in the UK, with a plan to eventually accept 3,000 children and young people. The scheme was ended by the Home Office in February 2017 and an attempt by Lord Dubs to amend the EU (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill to reintroduce the scheme failed in January 2020.

The 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention available at https://www.unhcr.org/3b66c2aa10.html (accessed on 19.02.20) 2 Home Office Funding: Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children Date of Issue: 01 November 2019 available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/856451/UAS C_funding_instructions_to_local_authorities_2019_to_2020_V2.pdf (accessed 19.02.20) 1

Finally, some UASC arrive in the UK under Dublin III Regulation which determines which EU Member State is responsible for examining an asylum claim made in the EU and allows for family reunion. Government guidance regarding post-Brexit transfers of asylum seekers from the UK under the Dublin system remains ambiguous. UASC in the UK According to the Home Office there were 2,307 asylum applications from UASC in the year ending March 2018. The largest numbers of asylum applications from UASC were from Sudanese and Eritrean nationals, followed by Vietnamese nationals and Iraqi nationals. According to national statistics and data related to the year ending March 2019, there were 3,223 applications from UASCs, 31% more than the previous year, which accounted for 10% of total asylum applications in that year.

Applications

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

1,945

3,253

3,290

2,399

2,307

3,223

Table 1: Asylum applications by UASC In 2018 89% of applicants were male, and nearly three quarters were aged 16 or older (see table 2 below) Age

Percentage of UASC

Under 14

14-15

21%

16-17

74%

Table 2: Age of UASC Migration Context The West Midlands is a highly diverse area where 10.8% of the population identifies as Asian, 3.3% as Black and 2.4% of the population is of mixed ethnicity. This makes the West Midlands, after London, the most ethnically diverse region in England. Net migration to the UK was estimated to be 258,000 in 2018, a reduction from the 336,000 in the year up to June 2016, just before the EU referendum. The population of the West Midlands is estimated to be 5,800,743, the largest city being Birmingham. The West Midlands, after London, is the English region with the highest proportions of their population born abroad (14.1%) (ONS 2019). According to 2011 census data the foreign-born population of the West Midlands accounts for 8.4% of the total non-UK born population of England and Wales; 41% of West Midlands’ foreign-born residents were aged 20-39 years of age and 69% were aged 20-59 years of age; and 49% were men and 51% were women. Also, the region contains both urban areas such as the Birmingham and Black Country conurbation and Coventry which have a long history of migration, and rural areas such as Worcestershire and Shropshire with more recent patterns of migration.

In 2017 63% of migrants in the West Midlands were from non-EU countries, which includes 292,000 EU-born residents and 492,000 non-EU born. The most common countries of birth in the West Midlands in 2017 were:  India: 114,000, 15% of the region’s foreign-born residents 

Pakistan: 96,000, 12% of the region’s foreign-born residents

 

Poland: 85,000, 11% of the region’s foreign-born residents Romania: 38,000, 5% of the region’s foreign-born residents



Ireland: 35,000, 4% of the region’s foreign-born residents

Migrant populations in the West Midlands are disproportionately likely to live in areas where levels of disadvantage are highest and poverty is felt the most (Iafrati et al., 2018). There are several positive impacts of immigration on the West Midlands region. One of the most important is the positive impact on the local economy that includes an increase in the labour force as well as aggregate demand and real GDP as migrants increase the total spending within the economy. Migrants are disproportionately of working age, but are less likely to claim unemployment benefits than the wider population (Fernández-Reino & Rienzo, 2016). The Office for Budget Responsibility estimates that higher net migration reduces pressure on government debt (Vargas-Silva & Sumption, 2019). There are some challenges that immigration may bring however as, for example, migration is often percieved as a threat to community cohesion - how we can all live, work, learn, and socialise together. Putnam (2007) argues that greater diversity as a result of immigration can cause a reduction in trust and social cohesion. There are several challenges to community cohesion in the West Midlands, such as ever changing demographics, the fast changing nature of neighbourhoods, social and neighborhood segragation, neighbourhood depravation, differences in educational attainment, high levels of precarious employment and/or unemployment, communication barriers and issues with mental health etc.

Needs of Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children and Young People UASC are often perceived and treated as refugee adults rather than children (Marriott, 2001; Stanley, 2001) and although needs of UASC are similar to those of other children in care, they face additional needs related to their situation. These, include, but are not limited to:  accommodation or housing needs 

health and wellbeing needs



educational needs

 

legal and representational needs integration needs

The health and wellbeing needs of UASC are particularly important as many UASC have experienced or witnessed a range of abuse or violence before, during and after their migration journey (Montgomery and Foldspang, 2005, Jud et al., 2020). Most UASC and other asylum seeking children (ASC) experience trauma that shape their psychological state (Sanchez‐Cao et al., 2013; Ní Raghallaigh, 2014; Oppedal and Idsoe, 2015). Many experience PTSD and depressive symptoms (Hodes et al., 2008) and psychological distress (Sanchez-Cao et al., 2013). UASC experience various types of trauma (Montgomery and Foldspang, 11

2005) such as: imprisonment, serious injury, combat, brainwashing, rape or sexual abuse, forced isolation, near-death experiences, forced separation from family, murder of family/friends, witnessed murder of strangers, kidnapping and torture and deprivation from food/water, medical care and shelter. Past trauma has a strong psychological impact on UASC and includes: posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, intrusive thoughts, low mood, sleep disturbance, altered eating patterns, feeling dissociated, lonely and isolated and feeling a loss of control, certainty and safety (Flood and Coyne, 2019). UASC often report feelings of loneliness and isolation associated with the deaths of family (Groark et al., 2011), depression (Seglem et al., 2011) and loneliness (Thommessen et al., 2015). Their experiences shape their daily life as asylum seeking children which is marked by high levels of anxiety associated with their undetermined legal status (Goosen et al., 2014; Ní Raghallaigh, 2014; Ogbu et al., 2014; Thommessen et al., 2015).

1.3 Evaluation aims The evaluation approach and the data collection tools were mapped against the key aims of the ‘Supporting the Emotional, Mental and Wellbeing Needs of Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children Project’ organised by the City of Wolverhampton Council, in order to understand both if and how any impact occurred. Expected evaluation aims, outputs and impacts/outcomes were verified through a participatory workshop with project stakeholders at the beginning of the evaluation process. This was then collated into a theory of change document which was then reviewed and agreed by project stakeholders. Rationale UASC’s have particular vulnerabilities around emotional health and wellbeing which are not being adequately met because existing services do not have the capacity or specialisms to address them. The project seeks to address this issue by piloting an integrated ‘Wolverhampton’ model with a single point of access for emotional and wellbeing support, including CAMHS, Local authority children’s services, and the RMC.

Inputs • Children’s social care services for CYPiC • RMC staff and volunteer mentors. • CAMHS service External services, organisations & initiatives: • Royal Wolverhampton School • Community Safety partnership • MiFriendly cities • Wolverhampton city of sanctuary • The Way

Outcomes

Activities • Looked after children assessment and review process (City of Wolverhampton council) • One to one clinical support for wellbeing (CAMHS) • Group emotional wellbeing psychoeducation work (RMC, CAMHS & Royal Wolverhampton School) • One to one mentor programme (RMC) • ESOL classes (RMC) • Immigration advice (RMC)

•

• •

• • • •

Improved educational attendance and attainment in mainstream education classes English language skill Reduced community tension – feel safe, less likely to be targeted or hide refugee status at school Reduced bullying Reduced radicalisation Reduction in ‘Life events impact’ score reduction in vulnerability to organised groups

Impacts • Improved integration • Improved mental health - Decrease in symptomology amongst UASCs • Reduced community tension • Better coordination of services in the city • Increase in social activities • Better life chances for UASCs

Contextual factors: There are budgetary constraints amongst organisations in both the public and voluntary sector, and increased numbers of UASCs arriving in Wolverhampton. There are some community tensions within the city in relation to immigration, and also increased numbers of destitute former UASC’s. Initiatives such as MiFriendly cities, and Cities of Sanctuary in Wolverhampton support with social cohesion.

This understanding was achieved through a process and impact evaluation. Process evaluation: This element focused on understanding how, and how efficiently, the partnership project has evolved and the relationship between this and the outcomes (impact). 12

Qualitative data was collected through interviews with 10 project partners about the way the project has been developed, implemented and managed. Project management information was sought to ascertain if the project operates as intended and how this relates to the project outcomes. This element not only addressed the questions above, but aimed to help improve efficiency and project quality and identify any barriers to success. Impact evaluation: The evaluation team worked with the partners involved in the project to understand if, and how impact on UASC occurred.

2. Methodology 2.1 Data collection Qualitative research and evaluation aims at multifarious interpretations of social phenomena, therefore “it involves shift from measurement to understanding […]” (Joffe, 2012 p.219). Consequently, the choice of methods is a fundamental aspect of valuable evaluation. Qualitative research methods are used to understand how individuals make sense of their environment and experiences that frame their lives (Sarantakos, 2013). The choice of research method influences the research findings (Bryman, 2016) and is a step in the research process between setting evaluation aims and beginning fieldwork. Hence, the method is a tool to research chosen phenomena and answer research questions, and should be chosen carefully. Thus, for this evaluation a semistructured interviewing method was chosen, as it allows for in-depth research of stakeholders experiences and perceptions of Supporting the Emotional, Mental and Wellbeing Needs of Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children Programme. Over the course of the evaluation period, Wellbeing Project recorded engagement with 33 UASC. Monitoring and assessment data were available for 24 UASC. Due to the varied nature of engagement with the Wellbeing Project not all data were available for all UASC.

2.2 Data analysis Qualitative data were analysed using a process of thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Caulfield & Hill, 2018). Audio recordings of interviews were transcribed verbatim. The first step of analysis consisted of familiarisation with the data via transcription of the recordings to a Word document and reading the transcripts thoroughly. The transcribed qualitative data and thematic analysis were further managed using NVivo software. Nvivo is particularly useful in aiding the organisational aspects of managing large amounts of qualitative data (Caulfield & Hill, 2018). It enables data to be stored, coded, retrieved and interrogated with more efficiency than can be achieved using traditional methods or a word processor (Lewins and Silver, 2007). Working through the transcripts (using Nvivo) line-by-line, the data were coded inductively (i.e. the codes and themes emerge from the data itself rather than applying a pre-existing structure to the data). The iterative process of analysis allowed the coded data to form themes, which were then reviewed against the data and literature. The findings from this strand of the evaluation were written in narrative form and supported by verbatim quotations from the participants. When analysing and writing up we focused on exploring the relationship between the impact and the process, in order to provide an in-depth understanding of the successes and limitations of the West Midlands UASC Forum and to make recommendations for future developments. All findings were placed in the context of relevant literature, theory, and policy.

2.3 Participants 10 semi-structured interviews were conducted with project partners between January 2029 and April 2020. Interviews were digitally recorded with the participant’s permission and lasted, on average, just under an hour each.

2.4 Ethics A highly trained research team, with considerable experience of conducting research in the disadvantaged, at-risk, and vulnerable groups, conducted the evaluation. The evaluation was granted ethical approval on 13th December 2019 by the Faculty of Social Sciences Ethics Committee at the University of Wolverhampton. No data were collected prior to participants’ providing fully informed consent. The research team all possesses current Enhanced Criminal Record Certificates.

3. Findings - Process 17 overarching themes emerged from the data analysis, of which eight relate to the process of delivering Wellbeing Project in Wolverhampton and nine relate to impact of the project. The section below focuses on process evaluation.

3.1 Beginning of the project and the importance of collaboration Overall respondents were unanimous in reporting positive experiences associated with inception of the project and need for such project in Wolverhampton: “I think they’re fantastic.”(Stakeholder 2) “I think it was needed (…) and we put ourselves forward and volunteered to take some people (UASC).” (Stakeholder 4)

One of the main contributions that the Wellbeing Project made was centring its aims around UASC needs. The City Of Wolverhampton Council together with partners worked to find the best support for individual UASC. This collaboration was highly regarded by all of the stakeholders:

“I think it’s important that we come together to…I think it was a very good initiative to…for the young people especially for them to have the best of all services that they can possibly have, really.”(Stakeholder 7) Also, the collaboration and services provided were cantered around UASC’s needs: “I think it’s great, I think it’s really worthwhile, because it’s directly accessing for these youngsters services that we can’t provide, we’d like to provide them” (Stakeholder 1) However, some project partners expressed their concerns about the clarity of the project at its inception:

“It’s better than it has been, with the youngsters at the centre of it, it started out not so good, I think that was perhaps a lack of clarity in what we were trying to achieve. Particularly for the young people, it wasn’t very clear at the beginning what the benefits for them were going to be.” (Stakeholder 1) For stakeholders, it was important that UASC are clear about the aims of the project and why they are part of it: “Absolutely, yes it has, as I say, some of the initial difficulties have certainly been overcome, the young people can clearly identify the benefits for them.” (Stakeholder 1) The same stakeholder expressed the need for engaging UASC in the initial planning process: “And I’m not sure that the young people were properly asked at the beginning what they would want out of it, I think it was an adult professionally led plan that we think this is what they need, began to be implemented, then it’s began to evolve and has reacted to that.” (Stakeholder 1) Some of the stakeholders highlighted the slow pace of the project inception: “I suppose if we hit the road…project running, it was a bit of a slow start. If…I would say the development side of things was sort of…quick (...) I think that took longer than it should have really (…) So I would say the first six months were quite slow. (Stakeholder 7) The first phase of each project lifecycle, the inception, is about understanding the project scope and objectives and getting enough information in order to start. Some of the stakeholders felt that the beginning of the project was too slow. Project partners recognised however, that in order to work together they had to get to know each other and develop a suitable collaboration pattern: “I think I would do a lot more work beforehand, before the project started on the organisations getting to know each other and how they work, so they’re able to manage expectations.” (Stakeholder 3) While the start of the project was perceived as slow and lacking in effective collaboration, project partners recognised that these issues improved over the course of the project: “It has improved quite a lot in the sense that we are all aware of what the other agencies does now, it did take a while in the beginning, it was a bit of a slow start, but now it works well.” (Stakeholder 7) “I think at the beginning, obviously things have stagnated aren’t they? Because you’re trying to put items in place, but you have to make sure that everything hits policy and procedure and that can create some stumbling blocks, but coming back, it just seemed like it’s smooth running to me that everyone is working together..” (Stakeholder 4)

Inter-organisational collaboration between non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and statutory services is a key to achieving project aims and objectives (O’Leary and Vij, 2012). Good 16

collaboration between partners includes effective practice around sharing information. One of the stakeholders emphasised initial difficulties with information sharing: “It was difficult at first because the [one of the project partners] wanted our data and information, but we didn’t have that agreement and had the wait for the commissioners to agree.” (Stakeholder 3)

Appropriate sharing of information is a fundamental part of any practitioners’ job when working to safeguard the welfare of children (Department for Education, 2016) and the decisions on how much information to share, with whom and when, can have an impact on their lives. In 2018, the Government prepared a flowchart of when and how to share information:

Figure 1: Flowchart of when and how to share information (HM Government, 2018) Some of the statutory organisations have a duty under section 11 of the Children Act 2004 to have arrangements in place to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. Such agreements usually take time to develop which affected information sharing between some of the project partners:

“As you know, information sharing because of the hurdles we’ve come across, is a nightmare now. Because this isn’t a safeguarding concern, you can’t just jump at…so, that was a real…that took a long time at the very beginning for us to be clear about the need to share information between the 3 organisations. That being said, I believe the information sharing and the communication is really good.” (Stakeholder 9) All of the stakeholders highlighted that in spite of early hurdles, information sharing worked well: “So we all work together, to help the young people succeed and settle into life in Wolverhampton, for instance, if I know something that the other two organisations might not know I share that information with them and vice versa, and we have like regular meetings, talk on the phone, through email…”(Stakeholder 5) Knowing project partners well created closer professional relationships, enhanced collaboration and assisted in cross-organisational approach to cases: “I’m assigned a case, I get to know the person, I introduce them to the [NGO], they explain what they can do, they can go straight into sessions at the [NGO]. Then we put the [statutory] service in place, when everything’s running like clockwork.” (Stakeholder 5) Collaboration between project partners in order to solve issues for particular service users, as described in quotation above, were perceived as beneficial. Similarly regular project meetings were highlighted as supportive: “I think the steering groups have been regular, people have attended consistently, good minutes and actions so everyone knows what their role and responsibility is, that’s been key, I think having the operational groups every month, it’s mandatory.” (Stakeholder 4) Steering group meetings took place to coordinate work that Wellbeing Project partners had undertaken so far. Project partners used their experiences, skills and knowledge of working with UASC to make improvements and strategic decisions at these meetings: “One thing that’s been really positive is attending…the meetings that we have, the panel meetings, because all representatives from all agencies are there, that works really well, because then…and it’s done on a monthly basis, we catch up on the young people, we catch up on what’s going wrong, we also discuss improvements, that definitely helped to improve communications. “ (Stakeholder 7) Also, steering groups provided a platform for early measurements of project outcomes: “We do meet regularly, that’s really helpful, and (…) we’re trying to look at outcome measures, so we’re trying to measure the success if you like of the interventions that we’re putting in place.” (Stakeholder 3)

3.2 Single point of access (SPA) Through coordinated work, the Wellbeing Project aimed to improve compliance across all of the stakeholders. One of the unique features of the project was that all referrals were made via Single 18

Point of Access (SPA). The SPA provided a clear first point of contact for UASC and ensured they were assessed, if appropriate, and directed to the service that best suited their needs. The SPA protects UASC from additional harm as it identifies their needs early and refers them to appropriate services promoting effective information sharing between agencies and professionals. It was also able to identify young people, such as those who had come to Wolverhampton via family reunion under Dublin II, who the local authority might not otherwise have identified. The SPA helped project partners in referring UASC to appropriate service providers: “That’s what the assessment does, the assessment at the beginning looks at them at the beginning and their individual needs, rather than just thinking I’ve had another young person from here and this was their issue.” (Stakeholder 4) The SPA facilitated better communication about the UASC’s needs between project partners that could be discussed at the meetings: “I think it’s (single point of entry) been important because it’s a direct way of you know, communicating, we had this UASC email that everyone would link into and send referrals to, in terms of the referral method it was great, and also, in terms of meetings and attending meetings and things like that, we knew we had one place to get the information.” (Stakeholders 7) However, facilitating referrals to the appropriate team through the SPA and liaising with partner agencies, where appropriate, posed a challenge at the beginning of the project. Some UASC were assessed few times instead of once: “Lots of UASC will arrive at the [NGO], because I think that’s what normally happens, they arrive unannounced at the [NGO], and then the [NGO] was seeing them and kind of…assessing them and then asking us to assess them afterwards, and that was a bit problematic because some of the young people felt they were being asked the same questions again and again, so we had to sort that out and make sure there was one central point of access (…) because we’ve got a single point of access team that deal with all the referrals.” (Stakeholder 3) Eventually, SPA become well embedded in the Wellbeing Project and reduced the amount of assessments that UASC had to undergo: “What has worked very well is the joint screening, very early on we set-up some pathways, that was a really good piece of work so we could be clear how young people work their way in, we worked out what our pathway would be, and were clear that very early on they needed to be…to reduce the number of assessments young people were having.” (Stakeholder 9) “Yeah. Yeah, I think…there’s sort of…the system got more embedded with the single point of entry and the joint assessments (...) now, it’s quite clear” (Stakeholder 2) One of the main aims of the Wellbeing Project was to ensure that UASC needs are identified early to determine if they are struggling with mental health difficulties such as Depression, PTSD or Anxiety to ensure they are offered appropriate care and support. SPA significantly accelerated this process: “So it’s been a project to identify them and make sure the local authority are quick in referring them, and not leaving it for a few months down the line, so we’re much more quick.” (Stakeholder 8) 19

“My understanding is, is that we can see them a lot quicker, assess them a lot quicker than what we would normally (…) hopefully within two weeks as long as we get the paperwork and consent, we try and assess them within two weeks and decide where we’re going to go from there.” (Stakeholder 3) “I like the fact because of the project, we don’t just say that person is shut now, CAMS keep them on a watch & wait list, and if that person says on Tuesday that they want to be assessed, they could be within a week. Whereas in mainstream, you could be waiting 4-5 weeks for an assessment, which is a really long time if that young person has significant issues.” (Stakeholder 4)

3.3 Flexibility of the project One of the Wellbeing Project’s objectives was increased access to services and care pathways that are flexible and adaptable to meet complex needs. It is important to recognise that multi-agency projects, such as the Wellbeing Project, can become extremely complicated. Therefore the flexibility of the collaboration enables its effectiveness. All of the project partners spoke highly of the flexible way in which they could collaborate during the project. The flexibility was recognised especially by those working in statutory services. They highlighted that collaborating with NGOs, who because of their lack of statutory responsibilities were able to work in a more flexible manner, helped in project delivery. Both the statutory and third sectors have unique working cultures shaped by their legal status. Some statutory project partners took time to develop collaboration with NGOs and came to recognise the value in this:

“I think we all work quite differently, so you know the NHS works very differently to the local authority, the NGO works very differently” (Stakeholder 7) “We’ve never worked so much with voluntary organisations, and that’s been really…it was just a little bit…teething problem (…) I think it took a bit of a while at first because we’re not used to working closely with voluntary sectors (…), us and the local authority have always worked together anyway (…) working with the [NGOs] is really helpful because they have a lot more access to UASC and the different organisations they work with and with the local authority.” (Stakeholder 3) It has been recognised that NGOs, unlike statutory services, were able to have more face-to-face and personalised time with UASC: “we’ve got really good relationships (…) I can phone (…) to ask about this, I can phone (…) to ask about that, so I think there’s been a lot more face to face intervention which has broken the barriers down quicker rather than telephone calls, putting a face to a name breaks down barriers quicker.” (Stakeholder 4) Also, NGO partners had a more flexible schedule and were able to travel to the places of UASC engagement more frequently than those engaged in statutory services: “they’re (NGO) not conditioned so they can go out and about and assess (UASC) and they can travel long distances, (they) thought nothing of going to…I think it was Coventry or Worcester way to see a young person, but we’d struggle to do that and go out that way, so that was a bit of an educating process that we were letting 20

them know that we can’t just be free…here and now and every day, we kind of have set slots each week where we’re free, so we’re unfortunately a little bit more limited with our time.” (Stakeholder 3)

3.4 UASC engagement Overall, UASC engagement in the project was very high. It was important to engage with the UASC and establish as much rapport as possible in order to achieve all of the project aims and objectives and as a consequence, enhance the lives of UASC in Wolverhampton. Project partners spoke of the importance of building trust when working with UASC: “To build those relationships, specifically…we always talk about trust, the young person has got to have trust in the people that they’re working with, that takes time to develop (…) ended up being such more of a mentoring thing, because that mentoring thing was in place it also helped us with the case work elements as well.” (Stakeholder 2) “They’ve engaged…most of the people have engaged really well with the project.” (Stakeholder 5) However, some of the UASC engaged with the project less than anticipated: “Not as well as we thought they would, okay, not every young person has engaged (…) so the work we’re doing, it has to be young person-led, because they need to be at a place where they feel that that level of support will benefit them, so if they’re not, then you can force that on anybody and shouldn’t be doing that either.” (Stakeholder 9) “One of the major things is…it was just quite a struggle to engage.”(Stakeholder 2) “Yes, not all of them (…) it was difficult for them to engage at the beginning for whatever reason, coming to the end of the project where they’re engaging and doing so well.” (Stakeholder 7) However, these initial difficulties with engagement were overcome by establishing trust between UASC and practitioners. Trust of young people at the beginning of engagement usually starts low and grows steadily over time (Griffith, 2016). Stakeholders explained: “Initially reluctantly, but the ones remaining with us are more positive about it once they’ve experienced (…) support (…). So, reluctant to start off with, once they found out the value of it, I believe that they’ve engaged.” (Stakeholder 1) “I think some of them were suspicious, kind of like why is this happening (…). Some were worried about was it going to affect their home office application if they did or didn’t engage with us.” (Stakeholder 3) “Some were reluctant to engage at the beginning, as I said before, once they get to know me and they know what’s going on, they want to engage.” (Stakeholder 5) Youth become significantly more engaged in the programmes when they can trust programme leaders (Griffith & Larson, 2016; Close et al., 2017). Engaging UASCs meaningfully in the project was 21

highlighted as important by all of the stakeholders however, it has been recognised that their participation was voluntary and UASC were free to choose the activities they want to take part in. For example, some UASC chose not to participate in additional English classes: “Even though we were offering these extra ESL sessions, there was a challenge in a way because the majority of the young persons were in education already full time, so didn’t really want an extra class to go to even though it would be useful to them.” (Stakeholder 7) Some stakeholders commented that UASC’s engagement with psychological therapy was particularly challenging. UASC’s relationship with psychological services was shaped by their lack of familiarity with UK mental health services or psychological therapy. Once psychological support was explained to UASC however, most participated enthusiastically: “They’ve taken it on board, they’ve come to the United Kingdom, and they’ve experienced a lot of emotional and physical issues along the journey, so you can see that they are traumatized by what they’ve gone through, and through the home office system, applying for live to remain, when you tell them and explain to them about the CAHMS service and that it’s one to one and that a translator can be with you for the one to one session, they’re really responsive, they want to do the actual counselling session, it has helped a lot of them overcome the emotional trauma that they have gone through.” (Stakeholder 5) UASC experience high levels of loss and trauma, and post-traumatic stress symptoms (Majumder, 2015) but might have less psychological distress if offered intensive support (Hodes et al., 2008). The Wellbeing Project offered support tailored for their needs. All of the stakeholders agreed that most of the UASC who participated in the project benefited from it: “I would say 90% of the young people have benefited even if they haven’t carried on with the process because the worker has been informed. Then there are 10% that really don’t want to engage, but I think you’d find that with any project and it’s up to the individual.” (Stakeholder 4) Youth are more likely to attend activities that are less formal and do not resemble a school setting (Deutsch & Jones, 2008; Strobel et al., 2008). Stakeholders pointed out that places where engagement happens influenced whether UASC participated in activities. For example, some UASC were more likely to attend meetings when they happened in an informal setting: “Learning and understanding a little bit about trauma, why they might be feeling as they’re feeling, but I think as it’s a little bit hit and miss who attends, they’ve been a bit more on the youth aspect, there’s always food involved, have something to eat…I think that’s a really positive pull, and like playing games, socialising…” (Stakeholder 3) Use of mental health services in adolescents in general population is low (Cheung and Dewa, 2007) and UASC often find the setting where such meetings take place intimidating (Majumder et al., 2018). Therefore, UASC are more likely to engage in activities that take place in relaxed settings outside of traditional healthcare settings. One of the stakeholders explained how organising activities required ‘thinking outside the box’: “I didn’t expect it’s been a little more thinking outside the box, which is great, they’ve met for cricket in the summer and have played cricket, they’ve gone 22

bowling, they had a trip to Birmingham last week, that’s great, so that’s really good because typically we wouldn’t do (…), we’d ask them to come in here (…) we’ve been able to be more flexible and I think the young people have appreciated that.” (Stakeholder 3) Also, developing therapeutic relationship with UASC required more time in comparison with youth in general: “It’s taken a lot more time to develop the therapeutic relationship, taken a lot longer with this cohort of young people (…) I’ve learned that it takes a lot longer with the population of people that I work with, the initial building rapport, developing a therapeutic assessment, a relationship has taken a lot longer.” (Stakeholder 3) There is a growing evidence base for psychosocial interventions with asylum-seeking children that includes provision of safe and calm space (Hobfoll et al., 2007; Fazel and Betancourt, 2017); maintaining their cultural links (Weine et al., 2014) and resilience‐building (Eruyar et al., 2018). Such varied responses to UASC’s needs were embedded in the Wellbeing Project. However, some UASC were adamant on not taking part in psychological therapy: “We have had some that have been very clear that they don’t want (psychological, therapeutic) any support from us. It’s been clear that perhaps it’s not been the right time, or they don’t want to talk about…perhaps the stigma around talking about mental health difficulties, those kinds of things.” (Stakeholder 3) This particular stakeholder explained that for some of the UASC psychological therapy is a foreign concept, and they do not feel comfortable discussing their psychological struggles. Cultural differences in how psychological assistance is perceived played a role in UASC engagement with therapy:

“Oh and the main barriers in terms of the project are obviously culturally with the young people…it’s quite an alien concept, the idea that they can see someone for support, it’s perhaps a bit of a taboo talking about their mental health difficulties”(Stakeholder 9) It is important to mention that UASC were given the choice to have a therapy but were not forced to do so. Their wish was always respected and they were not obligated to attend therapeutic sessions. Instead, they were offered various other activities that could assist them in their daily struggles. There is evidence that counsellors do not work from one particular therapeutic approach but rather adapt a variety of therapeutic methods to meet the needs of UASC (Warr 2010).

3.5 Educational support The educational needs of UASC are important because getting adequate education is one of the most important markers of migrant integration (Ager and Strang, 2004; O’Higgins et al., 2017). Also, access to education shapes UASC’s psychosocial development and long-term outcomes (Ott and O’Higgins, 2019). Importantly, improved education support to UASC was one of the main aims of the Wellbeing Project. One of the unique features of the Wellbeing Project was placing some of the UASC as boarders at the Royal School Wolverhampton, which is a non-selective, non-denominational Free School, which welcomes boys and girls aged 4-19 from all ethnic, social and cultural backgrounds. All 23

of the stakeholders expressed positive views on this placement. For instance, one stakeholder praised the variety of activities that UASC can choose from at the Royal School: “I think they’re fantastic, I think due to the range of activities that are open to the Royal, there’s lots going on, lots of stuff they can get involved in, lots of support around the curriculum, they don’t just go to school and come back, they’re…they’ve got things always going on after school, if they’ve got interests in specific things they can get involved with that, I think that’s interesting.” (Stakeholder 2) One of the stakeholders explained that placing UASC at the Royal School works well for those who are ‘academically gifted’: “The Royal school and the teachers are all very good, they’re very nice people, some of young people have gone to the Royal and excelled, they’ve gone onto university, they wouldn’t have had that university if they hadn’t have come to the United Kingdom and gone to the Royal school, and they’re doing really well, I’ve got another young man at college at the Royal, he’s going to go on to do Further Maths at university which is amazing.” (Stakeholder 5) As with children within general population, UASC have a range of academic abilities and learning styles. Evidence suggests that among refugee and asylum seeking children there are educational gaps and difficulties in learning new languages alongside adjusting to a new educational system (Bloch et al., 2015; Crul et al., 2016; O’Higgins, 2019). The same stakeholder explains that placement at the Royal School did not work for all UASC: “Then you’ve got the other side of things where some of the boys who come (…) they’ve haven’t been to school, have never had the…the regimented academic system so they’re coming (…) to the United Kingdom, they’re put into a boarding school, they say you have to wear this uniform, you’ve got make sure you’re up at 6 o clock, you’ve got to go to bed at 9 o clock, you’ve got to be at the school from 9 till 5, then do extra-curricular activities on the weekend, they rebel against it. They don’t want to do it because they’re not used to it. Because they’re not really academic…they’re far behind, they’re put on their own in a room away from other young people and they’re taught one on one and then they rebel against the school, the placement breaks down, then they’re asked to be removed from the Royal.” (Stakeholder 5) As pointed out in the quotation above, some of the UASC are not used to formal education and find it difficult to adjust to the strict timetable and structure of an environment such as the Royal School.

3.6 The important role of interpreters There is growing evidence of the importance of quality interpreters when working with asylum seekers, especially in asylum hearings (Pöllabauer, 2004) and in regards to medical interpreting (Čemerin and Črnko, 2020). Fennig and Denov (2020) pointed out that lack of adequate interpretation acts as a barrier to care and that the interpreter has an impact on the process of psychotherapy and/or mental health intervention and thus, on the intervention outcome. Stakeholders recognised the important role that interpreters played in the Wellbeing Project:

“We make sure we’re offering the correct support for young people in their first language, that’s something we need to continue to work on, not just for this project.” (Stakeholder 9) Several of stakeholders pointed out the shortage of interpreters as one of the main barriers in the project: “I think the biggest barrier has been interpreters, hugely on interpreters, although we…as I say, difficulties with the Vietnamese, but even with the other interpreters, say we have Kurdish interpreters, it’s not always the same interpreter, that’s been a bit difficult, for therapeutic work, you want to always try and have the same interpreter, that’s been a bit difficult.” (Stakeholder 3) “That was an important part of the project, it’s just finding the right people to do the interpretation and the translation for us is difficult, particularly for Vietnamese speaking interpreters, there is a shortage, and that’s been difficult. That’s been a barrier. We’ve tried to find a way around that but that has been a barrier.” (Stakeholder 9) Provision of good quality interpretation is crucial as a lack of interpreters may slow down UASC’s initial assessment: “The issues we have are around interpreters, that would be the only thing to slow us down, we have issues especially with Vietnamese interpreters, that sometimes holds us up and we haven’t been able to assess within two weeks.” (Stakeholder 3)

3.7 Stakeholders’ recommendations for project development All of the stakeholders expressed the need for further training on trauma and how it influences UASC: “A little bit of training and sharing information about trauma and the nature of trauma, how it might affect young people, and signs and symptoms to be aware of.“ (Stakeholder 3) Although the Wellbeing Project provided extensive training opportunities to all of the project partners, most of the stakeholders would like to learn more about psychology of UASC. Stakeholders also expressed that they would like to expand on their cultural awareness about countries from where UASC are coming from and their journey to the UK: “I think it needs to be about different cultures, how the young people travel here, so workers understand their journey, if they had to do that at the age of 12, 13, that’s quite high in terms of trauma.” (Stakeholder 4) Training could also include legal information about asylum process in the UK, as suggested in the quotation below: “Then the other things like what to do when a young person has no status, how to plan, what happens when somebody is ARE which is what we’re facing now, it’s quite broad, but I think you’d only need that once a year.” (Stakeholder 4) 25

UASC experience significant distress in regards to their asylum claim and until it is resolved they occupy indeterminate status positions. It is crucial for all of the stakeholders to understand and regularly update their knowledge of policy surrounding children's asylum claims in the UK. The knowledge of legal aspects of children’s asylum claims can assist them in their work. Some of the UASC are placed in foster placements. The need of training on UASC needs for each foster placement was pointed out by one of the stakeholders, who are new to fostering UASC: “More thinking about more training for all the foster carers of UASC because it is quite difficult for foster carers, one of the foster carers is a new foster carer, she’s doing amazingly, but it’s been difficult because it’s her first child but also the child doesn’t speak English, with these difficulties perhaps more specific training around UASC.” (Stakeholder 3) The impact of high caseloads in social work and other caring professions has been well documented (BASW, 2012). Interviews did not find any evidence that caseloads were higher than usual, but interviewees did mention how busy social workers were: “Since the project started, the training helps as well to know what the other agencies do, so I would say communication now, although the only negative I would say is that with social services, the social workers are very busy, so to get a response back…it’s been difficult at times.” (Stakeholder 7) The competing demands on professional’s time were mentioned in more than one interview, and one suggested that having a specialist young person’s advisor who works with UASC exclusively would help: “I would like to see a young person’s advisor who just deals with UASC, because we’ve got a team of say 8 or 9 young person’s advisors and they’re all split amongst the officers, I would like to see one person on the team just do UASC, and that means they can just concentrate on people coming to the United Kingdom on the home office applications, on all of those different things, because what I notice is, I’ve got a case load of 27 people, sometimes the UASC work takes a lot of my time up, so my other people get neglected because I can’t do stuff for them because I’m doing stuff for the UASC, or vice versa, if something needs doing for the UASC and my time is being spent with other people, I can’t divert my time to them so I don’t think we need more staff, but I do think we need someone who is more specialist.” (Stakeholder 5)

3.8 Sustainability of the project Recommendations were made regarding how to support the sustainability of the Wellbeing Project. Looking at sustainability from a service provider’s view point of view, it means continuing to perform and deliver project benefits to UASC after the funding ran out or until UASC become adults: “the only way to sustain the project is to have UASC young people coming through so if it gets to a stage where all the current UASC children have turned 21 and 26

moved on, then they don’t want support, and there’s no new ones coming through, then there’s no need for the service .” (Stakeholder 5) The above example showcases a successful scenario in which UASC are granted their status and become adults with no need for further assistance, however, despite no longer being part of the NTS, Wolverhampton continue to receive newcomers that need assistance, and care leavers with continuing needs for support to remain in the city, sometimes facing issues of destitution when they become appeal rights exhausted. Therefore, all of the stakeholders highlighted the need for further funding in order to sustain the Wellbeing Project: “It’s about funding.”(Stakeholder 4) “The barrier will be now that there’s reduced funding (…) are we able to try and keep this project going without the funding?” (Stakeholder 4) Funding obtained for the Wellbeing Project allowed a holistic and flexible approach to working with UASC that has been described earlier and in stakeholder interviews. One stakeholder expressed his worries about further financing of the project: “So for us, to give them to holistic approach to the young person, it’s been fabulous, it’s been wonderful, I suppose when it stops, when the money runs out.” (Stakeholder 1) The flexible approach of the project involved quite extensive community outreach which would not be possible without additional funding: “It would be lovely if there were funding for it to be carried on (…) it would be difficult to carry on without the funding, certainly because there’s been a lot of outreach as well.” (Stakeholder 7) “Yeah, I think so, I think it’d be finances just to make sure someone can still provide the outreach work rather than people coming to us. Us going to them sort of thing…That would be useful…” (Stakeholder 2) Although, stakeholders were worried about further funding and the sustainability of the project, they remained optimistic: “I’m hoping that the funding will be found, however, we do think that if the funding doesn’t continue.” 3

4. Findings – Impact 4.1 Overall impact on UASC UASC have particular vulnerabilities around emotional health and wellbeing which are not always adequately met because previously existing services did not always have the capacity to address them. The Wellbeing Project sought to address this issue by introducing ‘Wolverhampton model’ with a single point of access (see section 3.2) for emotional wellbeing support, including CAMHS, 27

Local Authority Children’s Services, Royal School and RMC. This section presents impact that this joint effort had on UASC. All stakeholders expressed that the project was worthwhile and had received positive feedback UASC about the activities in which they had engaged. All stakeholders shared examples of the impact of the Wellbeing Project on UASC. Stakeholder’s perspectives of the impact of Wellbeing Project on UASC are discussed below. All of the stakeholders highlighted positive comments that UASC shared with them about the assistance received: “On the whole, people (UASC) have been very positive about the group, about the support, they felt that it has been quite coordinated” (Stakeholder 3) “I think the young people have felt really supported and really…we’ve had some really good positive feedback that they’ve felt really thought of and really grateful that they’ve got this additional support.” (Stakeholder 3) One of the impacts of the project on UASC was their enhanced awareness of variety of services available for them: “It’s something that I mentioned before, as well, is just knowing what services, what help is there, their awareness really, of the young people, as to what’s out there and where you can get that help, it can be quite difficult to know where to get help if you’re quite new to the city. And also, the awareness of the professionals as well, that was a definite positive, knowing what challenges have as well.” (Stakeholder 7) Searching for local and national services in the UK is challenging for UASC as they are unfamiliar with UK’s institutional culture and often have a language barrier to overcome. The SPA as an important feature of the ‘Wolverhampton model’ proved to be effective in overcoming those barriers by providing various services effectively: “For example, it could be accommodation, finding them accommodation, help them with accommodation, keep them settled, education, getting them into college or school, university…one of my young people has applied for university, I’ve helped him with the UCAS application, I’ve also helped him with getting him a flat in Wolverhampton, settling him in, setting up utility bills, those kinds of things, might just be day-to-day issues such as health, mental wellbeing (…).” (Stakeholder 5)

4.2 Wellbeing and asylum claim Introduction of an SPA impacted positively on quick and effective access to CHAMHS and Social Services, rapid assistance with housing and education, as well as legal assistance by specialist Immigration advisors. Some of the stakeholders participating in the Wellbing Project assisted UASC in their asylum claims. Numerous sucessful asylum claims, as well as successful appeals, are tangible evidence of the positive impact of the project: “Well I think some of them, thinking of a couple individuals, they’ve definitely got something from it, one of them has got settled status.” (Stakeholder 1) 28

“Just seeing the positive influence that we’ve had on the young people, there’s quite a few I would say in terms of…in my end as well, the immigration, quite a lot of them their anxiety came from not knowing when they would get their status…what their status means…just getting that little help with things being explained to them (…) even the ones who were refused, being told that there is something else that could be done.” (Stakeholder 7) “We’ve got a young person who’s appeal rights were exhausted, which was obviously having a huge impact on his mental health, straight away that worker is phoning [adequate services] to see if we can get a session in terms of the trauma, phoning [adequate services] to see if there’s any legal advice (…) to see if there’s anything that we’re missing.” (Stakeholder 4) “The ones who have had positive decisions as well from the Home Office, that’s been nice to see, like from the beginning, you didn’t have anything and were very anxious about it, you’ve had a lot of help, and I’m not saying the decision was down to us, but just seeing the difference from somebody who had a lot of anxiety from the beginning, and doing very well at the end of the project, it’s been brilliant.” (Stakeholder 7) “He…a young person had absconded and gone to a different city, didn’t know where he was, when they found out where he was, he was unwilling to come back because he had said he was working illegally (…) Managed after a lot of dialogue actually to get him back to the city and get some help, and he eventually got his status and could work legally.” (Stakeholder 7)

4.3 Psychological support All stakeholders reported that the UASC’s wellbeing improved as a result of the project. “I think the project does what it sets out to do, which is to improve their mental wellbeing. (…). I think the project though actually deals with the things that are unsaid I suppose, those concerns about family, those concerns about their journey, or the guilt in some cases that they seem to carry with them that we would find difficult to deal with, having professionals involved has made a big difference to that, actually they have more confidence (now).” (Stakeholder 3) “It’s been extremely useful because they’ve got trauma, and without that support they might not be in education and settled in a placement, they could have significant mental health issues and be going off the rails, really.” (Stakeholder 4) The wellbeing project improved mental health among UASC through various social activities that they could engage in: “And also just socialising among themselves, knowing there is another person going through what you’re going through, I suppose going through the sessions here, they met other young people in the same position (…) so…it was sort of a…building a community amongst themselves and support amongst themselves as well which was brilliant.” (Stakeholder 7) 29

Socialising with peers has been identified as an important factor that contributes to the emotional wellbeing of UASC (Farmbrough, 2014). The Wellbeing Project included various opportunities for UASC to socialise with others in order to improve their wellbeing. Many UASC suffer from anxiety and sleep disturbance (Montgomery, 2011; Lawrence and Michelmore, 2019). Sleep problems experienced by UASC negatively influence their wellbeing. One of the stakeholders explained how the Wellbeing Project improved sleep patterns among UASC that participated: “They might have some support around coping strategies and good sleep, as I say we do a lot of work around good sleep. Just to have that I think is a real positive impact for the young people (...). One of them told me: I was really struggling with sleep, with flashbacks; I’m doing okay now” (Stakeholder 3)

4.4 Confidence and independence UASC often lack confidence due to the past traumas, new surroundings and language barriers. Enhanced confidence and independence was pointed out by stakeholders as further positive impact that the project had on UASC. One stakeholder noted that gaining confidence takes time, but results in UASC being happier: “Their confidence increases, they become more open to you, they’re more friendly, they’re more happy, once they’ve dealt with…it’s a long process, they’re dealing with their issues with their journey to the United Kingdom, once they start dealing with those issues with (…), they do start to open up more and they’re more cheerful and happy. So they’re no longer depressed or down, or…scared of the future.” (Stakeholder 5) “I suppose the longer a person spends here, then the more confident they become with living in the U.K and getting used to the way things are different.” (Stakeholder 2) Once UASC gain confidence they become more independent in their daily lives. For instance, they were able to arrange and keep their appointment with services and make informed choices: “One of my young people had an appointment (…) the young person actually goes into the appointment on their own.” (Stakeholder 5) “They’ve been able to kind of make informed choices a lot more easily, opt in and out of treatments which is great, I would say they’re a lot more empowered, because as I say the trust is there, and some young people have said you know I’m okay, I don’t want support anymore, which is great.” (Stakeholder 3) Also, with time past, UASC are able to navigate services provided by the Wellbeing Project and beyond. The ability to navigate services is important as UASC will need to manage their lives independently once they leave care: “I would say the young people themselves being aware of where to get help, I think that’s…that’s a huge thing because they are not always going to be…in looked after care, they will become adults at some stage, so making them aware of not only 30

services they’re getting while they’re looked after, services that are outside that as well has been a great success.” (Stakeholder 7) It was also reported that, as a result of the Wellbeing Project, UASC strive for the independence: “I just think they sort of want to head towards independence, they’re just wanting to sort things out for themselves and stuff like that (…) a few of the young people have just gone to university so they’re at that age where they’re wanting to do things by themselves.” (Stakeholder 2) Some of UASC had started living independently: “They’ve gone onto university, they’re now living in their own accommodation, they’re living independently, they’re capable young people who can live in society alone.” (Stakeholder 5)

4.5 Integration One of the aims of the Wellbeing Project was integration of UASC into the local community. This was one of the most difficult impacts to measure, however, there are positive indications of the impact of the project in this area. Ager and Strang (2004) provided an ‘indicators of integration’ framework (Figure 2) which identifies key markers and means by which integration can be attained. The key markers include: employment, housing, education, heath, community safety and social connections. The Wellbeing Project addressed all of the sufficient means in order to help UASC in integration.

Figure 2: The indicators of integration framework (Ager and Strang, 2004) The creation of social connection with others supports social cohesion. UASC took part in several social events that assisted them in meeting their peers and others in order to build their social connections in Wolverhampton: 31

“I would say so, particularly with the young Vietnamese, I’ve seen a difference with them meeting the other UASCs really, and having that support and you know…getting to know what there is to offer out there, yes, definitely, I saw a difference.” (Stakeholder 7) Meeting others assists UASC in improving English language proficiency as well as getting to know different cultures: “I think so, yeah, I think the [project] helps to integrate them more (…), because when you go to the [events], there’s such a diverse background of people, they’re meeting all different people from the Muslim world or the far east, or wherever they come from originally. So they’ve got to know a lot of people, and then in education as well they’re meeting people as well, English people, they’re getting a diverse number of friends.” (Stakeholder 5) One stakeholder spoke of UASC who decided to volunteer. Volunteering is an example of active citizenship that facilitates rapid integration: “We had one young person actually who volunteered for us, he did…he enjoyed the work that we did and he saw himself as…the type of stuff he would like to do, he volunteered for us for a while, that was good.” (Stakeholder 7) Access to, and progress with, education is a significant marker of integration as education creates greater opportunities for employment in the future. The Wellbeing Project assisted in meeting the educational needs of UASC. Two care leavers who had arrived in Wolverhampton as younger teenagers and were placed at the Royal Wolverhampton School had passed their A levels and were now studying at University: “So the ones who are academically gifted, they’re in the Royal, they’ve done well at school and GSCEs, they’ve done well in College, they’ve been living in independent accommodation, they’ve gone on to university, everything’s great, brilliant future for them.” (Stakeholder 5) “And certainly for the first 3 students we had and some of the subsequent ones, it’s worked out really well – 2 of those have just gone onto university, one to Coventry University, one to Swansea University, and the other one is very likely to go to university next year.” (Stakeholder 1) Both of the quotations above show the direct impact that the Wellbeing Project had on UASC, particularly when they were able to take advantage of the unique opportunity that a placement at the Royal represented. Not all young people excelled academically and placement at the Royal did not suit every young person, however, the Project addressed the educational needs of all of the students and not only those who were perceived as ‘academically gifted’: “So there are some young people who are now in education and they’re doing well academically, there are some young people who have struggled.” (Stakeholder 4) “He (UASC) was adamant that he didn’t want to go to a house placement, but he’s in a transition flat and he’s surprised us all, he’s doing really well, he’s accessing education (again).” (Stakeholder 3)

4.6 Preventing Radicalisation 32

One of the planned impacts of Wellbeing Project was preventing radicalisation. Ongering (2007: 3) defines radicalisation as a ‘process of personal development whereby an individual adopts ever more extreme political or politic-religious ideas and goals, becoming convinced that the attainment of these goals justifies extreme methods’. Stakeholders received training on how to prevent radicalisation, how to identify potential risks and developed a strategy for UASC safeguarding: “I think what panel (of stakeholders) does, is it looks at the young person holistically, it might not just be about ‘let’s refer to the [NGO]’, let’s refer to it might be like that could be a potential issue, we need to talk to somebody in safeguarding, you need to do a risk assessment.” (Stakeholder 4) “And we’ve all kind of had the relevant training about radicalisation and organised crime.” (Stakeholder 4) Overall stakeholders have not reported any cases of potential radicalisation of UASC, however, it is not possible to establish the extent to which the project prevented radicalisation. Nonetheless, issues of low self-esteem, grief, and community tension have been identified as vulnerability factors for radicalisation (NSPCC 2020), and these were all factors which the Wellbeing Project identified and sought to address.

4.7 Gang involvement According to the Office of the Children's Commissioner (2019) there are 27,000 children in England who identify as a gang member, however, this estimate does not include children who are being groomed and exploited by gangs, but do not identify as gang members. UASC are particularly vulnerable and thus at significant risk of being groomed by gangs. The nature of gangs in Wolverhampton is changing but the number of gangs remains small in number. The Safer Wolverhampton Partnership (SWP) however, highlights the rapid emergence of younger and more violent groups that cause community tensions across the city. One of the aims of the Wellbeing Project was to reduce the possibility of community tensions, thus stakeholders paid attention to early signs of UASC being groomed to join gangs: “I would say we’ve been quite lucky in terms of we’ve had boys on the fringes, no one has been fully kind of…whilst they’re at the taken in by a gang (…) obviously with the UASC students they are pretty much the most vulnerable people in society and they are susceptible to anything, we have had to be vigilant.” (Stakeholder 8) Stakeholders remained vigilant and supportive of UASC at risk. According to another stakeholder, UASC who focus on education tend to stay away from gang involvement and those how are less academically driven are more likely to be groomed: “Again, it seems that the academically gifted boys, they kind of stay away from that way of life and they don’t get involved in the gangs, or grooming, or illegal activities, they’re doing well, their path is set to university, but the ones who are not academically gifted, they don’t have the same opportunities as the others, they do tend to go down that route where they…they get involved with gangs, meet people involved with gangs…maybe because of their vulnerabilities they’re preyed on.” (Stakeholder 6) It can be challenging to identify if a UASC is being groomed as the signs are not always obvious and may be hidden. One of the UASC who left education showed early signs of being groomed to join gangs, such as possessing money and new things like clothes that he could not explain and having new friends: “For example, one young man, he left the Royal (school), he had his own accommodation, he (…) was ignoring us, you’d go into the property, it was messy, no food in the fridge looked like he wasn’t living there, but his clothes were immaculate, you don’t buy the clothes that you’ve got one with the money that is given by social services, so that’s an indicator that something was going on, he was mentioning new people’s names (…) we were noticing things, new people, new clothes, new money, not wanting to engage with us, we could see there was something going on…” (Stakeholder 6) In this particular case, stakeholders managed to re-engage the individual with several activities provided by the Wellbeing Project which prompted him to get back into education and remove himself from potential gang control. Through its coordinated work, the Wellbeing Project aimed to improve compliance across all of the stakeholders. Connectivity and multi-disciplinary and multi-agency working was helpful when working with UASC in danger of being groomed to join gangs and moving them towards a more positive direction in life: 34

“My first thing to do was contact my manager, explain what was going on, contacted the RMC and CAHMS, because that person was also involved with the other agencies, we got him back on track where we spoke to him about what was going on, why he was doing that, those different things, RMC kind of reinforced what I was saying, we got him back in contact with CAHMS, all three of us came together to help that young person out of that difficult situation and now they’ve moved away from that negative influence, they’re at college and they’re in their own property.” (Stakeholder 5) The vast majority of UASC who took part in the Wellbeing Project were not involved in gangs however, the small number of UASC who became involved were helped through the coordinated work to disassociate themselves from gang activity.

4.8 Impact on stakeholders Being part of the Wellbeing Project had a positive impact on stakeholders who participated. Participating in the project allowed some of the stakeholders to learn more about UASC, their journeys and experiences upon arrival, as well as improved their cultural awareness. One stakeholder spoke about how he became more open-minded as a result of taking part in the Wellbeing Project: “It’s taught me a lot, I’m more open-minded now, because before the UASC coming I was just dealing with British children really, so, dealing with people from different parts of the world, has made me understand different cultures, and different nationalities, different religions, it’s made me more humble in a way (…) I understand why they’re coming into the country, when you hear about their backgrounds, what they’ve come from and the journeys they’ve made, it makes me more humble that I’ve had a good start in life.” ” (Stakeholder 5) All stakeholders unanimously agreed that participating in Wellbeing Project and collaborating with partners in particular re-shaped the ways in which they deliver their services. For instance, one particular stakeholder shared how his awareness of UASC needs enhanced the way he works: “I think it (being part of the Wellbeing Project) has, I think it’s directly affecting my service delivery because I feel more informed now, more aware of the issues and individual needs, I feel that I now know who to signpost my staff to go to, and then I think in terms of the whole team in service delivery, it’s definitely had an impact.” (Stakeholder 4)

4.9 Impact monitoring There is significant evidence that NGOs and Local Authorities collect and generate vast amounts of rich and detailed data, most of which are not used for research or evaluation purposes (Masefield et al., 2020). Challenges in using data across government and sharing them with other organisations, such as universities, are also constrained by General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). NGOs and providers of statutory services such as social workers (Quinn et al., 2019) are additionally busy with their caseload and therefore, gathering of monitoring data is problematic. The National Audit Office (2019) highlighted two substantive issues with using data across government: 35



Data is not always seen as a priority.



The quality of data is not well understood.

Issues with collecting quantitative indicators of impact were shared among most of stakeholders. For instance, one stakeholder explained how there is a lack of wider quantitative understanding of the impact that the Wellbeing Project had on UASC: “What’s the impact of what we’ve done, we know how it works, we know how many young people are accessing which bits of it, what we don’t know is what difference that is making to the young people, how has it impacted on their emotional wellbeing, their successfulness in other aspects of their independence, or their education, that we don’t know in comparison to a cohort that haven’t engaged. And you know, hopefully the work that you’re doing will help us understand that better.” (Stakeholder 9) Although there is a lack of quantitative understanding of the impact that the project had on UASC, stakeholders were positive that such impact is certain based on UASC testimonies: “So, as you say, we do know the things that young people are telling us that are working well, and because they’re attending more often, but we don’t…those are the things we’ve pulled into sustainability, but we don’t know that those other things are making a difference. You would hope that it will make a difference, but we’ve got no evidence as a steering group of that at the moment.” (Stakeholder 9) Contract monitoring data were collected by the CCG that showed no young people required specialist support and there were no referrals to specialist services. This was a surprise to stakeholders and was raised in interviews. It is not clear why this was but data from stakeholders indicated that this was because of lower level support being available elsewhere through the programme. The reduced need for specialist support enabled more resources to be spent on other areas. The following indicators are drawn from returns from the CCG during the project period. 1) Number of holistic needs assessments undertaken specifically to identify MH needs with negotiated Action Plan with CYP completed. Q1 1819

Q2 1819

Q3 1819

Q4 1819

Q1 1920

Q2 1920

Q3 1920

2) Number of young people referred to service requiring emotional health and wellbeing support. Q1 1819

Q2 1819

Q3 1819

Q4 1819

Q1 1920

Q2 1920

Q3 1920

3) Number of awareness raising sessions jointly delivered with RMC for up to 10 professionals from each of the services (social care, health and education.) across agencies in the city of Wolverhampton Q1 1819

Q2 1819

Q3 1819

Q4 1819

Q1 1920

Q2 1920

Q3 1920

4) Number of young people referred to service, who are engaging with therapeutic sessions (IRW06) Q1 1819 3

Q2 1819 14

Q3 1819 48

Q4 1819 16

Q1 1920 10

Q2 1920 8

Q3 1920 7

5) Outcome monitoring systems being used with clear articulation of journey travelled as a result of intervention provided. Q1 1819

Q2 1819

Q3 1819

Q4 1819

Q1 1920

Q2 1920

Q3 1920

6) Provision of data from Outcome measuring tools which demonstrates the progress made by the young person around their emotional health and wellbeing.

Q1 18- Q2 18- Q3 18- Q4 18- Q1 19- Q2 19- Q3 1919 19 19 19 20 20 20 YES

YES

Numbers of young people referred to CAMHS and the number of assessments completed, rose sharply in the first quarter of the project, following the project launch, and peaked in quarter two before consistently falling. This is likely to be because stakeholders were more confident with dealing with support ‘in house’ as this decline in referrals corresponded with delivery of training sessions to professionals in the later part of the first year of the project. This assumption was corroborated in interviews with stakeholders.

9 8 7

Number of holistic needs assessments Quarterly Number

6 5 4

Number of young people referred to service requiring support. Quarterly Number

3 2 1 0 Q1 18- Q2 18- Q3 18- Q4 18- Q1 19- Q2 19- Q3 1919 19 19 19 20 20 20

Figure 3: Indicator progress over the course of the project

4.10 Benchmarking against national data. Not all of the young people who engaged with the project were children looked after by local authority however as some were living in families, and others were care leavers. The data on children looked after by the local authority is useful to provide a comparison with national standards. Out of the 24 UASC looked after by the City of Wolverhampton Council during the project time period, none were convicted or subject to youth cautions or youth conditional cautions. Similarly, none were identified as having a substance misuse problem during the project. The nature of the project did not allow for a control group, however, outcomes can be benchmarked against the ‘children looked after in England’ tables, based on returns from local authorities across the country (Department for Education 2020). 4% of children looked after in England received a caution or conviction in 2018-2019, and 10% of boys aged 16-17. For a cohort this size, if UASC in Wolverhampton were tracking the national average, there would have been one young person convicted or cautioned in each year of the project. If age and gender are controlled for, this number rises to 2. Similarly, 4% of children looked after in England were identified as having a substance misuse problem, and 11% of boys aged between 16 and 17 who were the most common demographic in the Wellbeing Project user group. If UASC in Wolverhampton were tracking the national average, there would have been 1 young person with an identified substance misuse problem in each year of the project, and when the age and gender of the cohort are controlled for this number rises to 3 per year. Based on these indicators, the prevalence of drug misuse and of criminal activity appears to be lower amongst UASC in Wolverhampton than in England as whole. It is difficult to establish if there is a casual relationship between the Wellbeing Project and the lower prevalence of drug use and criminal activity. 38

The Wellbeing Project activities such as peer support groups and psychological therapy however, addressed many of the key risk factors identified by research for substance misuse such as PTSD, depression and gang affiliation (Whitesell et al. 2013), and for youth offending such as poor educational achievement (Farrington, Ttofi and Piquero 2016). The data derived from semistructured interviews with stakeholders and young people, indicate that young people engaged with these activities, and these are likely to have been protective factors which reduced the risk of offending and of substance misuse.

5. Conclusions and recommendations The Wellbeing Project is an ambitious and multifaceted project that has taken an innovative approach in seeking to assist UASC living in Wolverhampton. The evaluation provides important new information about how the project developed over time and it’s impact on UASC as well as the stakeholders. It also provides suggestions for further improvement of the ‘Wolverhampton model’ that involves collaboration between the Children and Young People Service, who are part of the City of Wolverhampton Council, Black Country Partnership Foundation Trust (BCPFT), Wolverhampton Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS), and Refugee and Migrant Centre (RMC).

5.1 Key findings of the evaluation The report focused on evaluation of the Wellbeing Project that was designed to introduce a coordinated approach to providing for the needs of UASC living in Wolverhampton and develop services with the professional skills to respond appropriately to deal with their emotional health and wellbeing issues. This is important because relatively little is known about how this kind of coordinated approach assists in working with UASC at Local Authority level. The findings from this evaluation suggest that the ‘Wolverhampton model’ of collaboration has effectively developed coordinated services that, in turn, have a positive impact on UASC overall wellbeing. In trying to better understand how this impact occurs, this report focused on process and impact evaluation. This section presents the key findings of the evaluation. The findings from this evaluation demonstrate positive experiences of stakeholders who participated in the project. All of them highlighted the benefits that the project had on the development of their services as well as how it enhanced the collaboration with other project partners. The latter took some time to develop and involved improvement of communication and information sharing between all of the project partners, as well as clarification of the project’s aims and objectives at its inception. Good relationships between stakeholders resulted in the project being flexible enough that stakeholders felt comfortable to refer UASC to each other and collaborate in order to meet all of the needs that individual UASC may have. Stakeholders highlighted the importance of regular meetings during which issues surrounding project delivery were discussed. They felt that the meetings helped in developing collaboration between project partners and making well informed decisions about UASC. Some of the collaboration was less formal and involved spending time with UASC beyond standard working hours in order to develop trust between service providers and UASC. Through coordinated work, the Wellbeing Project improved compliance across all of the stakeholders via introduction of a Single Point of Access (SPA). The SPA provided a clear first point 39

of contact for UASC and ensured they were assessed and directed to the service that best suits their needs. It is clear from the evidence presented in this evaluation that SPA accelerated UASC assessment and referral process. The level of UASC engagement and participation with the Wellbeing Project was rated by stakeholders as high however, UASC initial engagement involved establishment of trust over time. Participation in psychological therapy was found difficult by some of the UASC, while others found it helpful. Often the variation in engagement with therapy is linked with the cultural perception on psychology and taboo surrounding psychological health (Weine et al., 2014). Stakeholders accommodated cultural needs of UASC and have not forced anyone to engage in therapy providing them with a choice of various activities that they were free to engage with instead. Education creates significant opportunities for future employment. The evidence collected during the course of this evaluation show that the Wellbeing Project addressed the educational needs of UASC. UASC who were academically minded thrived in the Royal School while some others choose to withdraw from education upon turning 16 years old. Again, stakeholders respected UASC choices and helped to plan transition to self-contained housing. There is growing evidence of the importance of quality interpreters when working with asylum seekers, especially in asylum hearings (Pöllabauer, 2004) and in regards to medical interpreting (Čemerin and Črnko, 2020). The information gathered for the evaluation confirms it and several stakeholders highlighted the need for high quality interpretation when working with UASC. The evaluation also provides evidence of the direct impact of the Wellbeing Project on UASC themselves. Overall, the Wellbeing Project received positive feedback from UASC about the activities in which they had engaged. The evidence presented in this report shows how UASC significantly enhanced their awareness of variety of services available to them in Wolverhampton. Young people who were part of the project were less likely to receive a caution or criminal conviction, or have drug misuse than children looked after in England as a whole. Participating in the project allowed them to get accustomed with UK’s institutional culture and learn how to navigate it in order to access services. Consequently, UASC became more confident and independent. As mentioned earlier, the introduction of an SPA impacted positively on quick and effective access to CAMHS and Social Services. The evaluation shows that participating in the project enhanced UASC wellbeing and helped with sleeping issues and anxiety, which was often shaped by the uncertainty of their asylum claims. Findings demonstrate that the Wellbeing Project had a positive impact on UASC integration. For example, some of them succeeded in education and are now studying at the university level. Others enhanced their social-network and connections through participation in social events organised by various stakeholders. For instance, one of the UASC now volunteers as an interpreter. The Wellbeing Project prevented some of the UASC from radicalisation and being groomed by gangs through intensive multi-agency collaboration to identify the risks and provide diversionary activities.

Finally, the evaluation reflected on recommendations for project improvements shared by all stakeholders. Section 4.2 below is based on these suggestions and the researcher’s careful consideration of them.

5.2 Recommendations The findings of the evaluation suggest that the Wellbeing Project is making a significant impact on UASC and the development of coordinated services through innovative ‘Wolverhampton model’ and use of an SPA, however, the evaluation was intended as a form of ‘action-research’; providing evidence-based recommendation for further development of the Wellbeing Project. The recommendations are intended to support this development and are listed below: 

Consider more frequent regular and consistent communication about the progress of the project



Make the aims and objectives of the project explicit to stakeholders and explain stakeholders role in it Explain the aims of the project to UASC and what it offers to them Consider including UASC in planning of the project activities according to their needs

   

Consider providing further training on trauma and the psychological needs of UASC to all stakeholders Future quantitative data collection should be streamlined, focusing on impact measures and that project partners share with one another good practice in systematic quantitative data collection



Acknowledge the on-going need for flexibility of approach with UASC and the time investment required to build trusting relationships. Engage UASC and be responsive to their specific needs



Identify future funding streams to sustain the project



Disseminate the findings presented in this report among other Local Authorities working with UASC access in the UK Facilitate relationship building with local partners to aid sustainability of the programme and build opportunities for UASC.



6. References Ager, A., & Strang, A. (2004). Indicators of integration: Final Report. Home Office, Development and Practice Report 28, London: Home Office. Bloch, A., Chimienti, M., Counilh, A. L., Hirsch, S., Tattolo, G., Ossipow, L., & de Wenden, C. W. (2015). The children of refugees in Europe: aspirations, social and economic lives, identity and transnational linkages. Country reports-Working paper, Geneva, Switzerland. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2): 77-101. Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford University Press. Caulfield, L.S. & Hill, J. (2018). Criminological skills and research for beginners: a student’s guide. London: Routledge. Čemerin, V., & Črnko, M. (2020). Language of relief: medical interpreting within the scope of the refugee crisis response. AUC Philologica, 2019(4), 107-116. Chase, E., Knight, A., & Statham, J. (2008). Promoting the emotional wellbeing and mental health of unaccompanied young people seeking asylum in the UK. London: Thomas Coram. Cheung, A. H., & Dewa, C. S. (2007). Mental health service use among adolescents and young adults with major depressive disorder and suicidality. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 52(4), 228-232. Crul, M., Keskiner, E., Schneider, J., Lelie, F., & Ghaeminia, S. (2016). No lost generation? Education for refugee children. A comparison between Sweden, Germany, The Netherlands and Turkey. The integration of migrants and refugees. Florence: European University Institute. Department for Education (2020) Children looked after in England. London: HM Government Deutsch, N. L., & Jones, J. N. (2008). “Show Me an Ounce of Respect” Respect and Authority in Adult-Youth Relationships in After-School Programs. Journal of Adolescent Research, 23(6), 667688. Donlan, A. E., McDermott, E. R., & Zaff, J. F. (2017). Building relationships between mentors and youth: Development of the TRICS model. Children and youth services review, 79, 385-398. Eruyar, S., Huemer, J., & Vostanis, P. (2018). How should child mental health services respond to the refugee crisis?. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 23(4), 303-312. Farmbrough, J. (2014). Factors that contribute to the emotional wellbeing, educational success and social connectedness of those arriving in one local authority as unaccompanied asylum seeking children (Doctoral dissertation, University of Birmingham). Farrington, D. P., Ttofi, M. M. and Piquero, A. R. (2016) Risk, promotive, and protective factors in youth offending: Results from the Cambridge study in delinquent development, Journal of Criminal Justice, Journal of Criminal Justice, 45, pp. 63–70, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2016.02.014. 42

Fazel, M., & Betancourt, T. S. (2018). Preventive mental health interventions for refugee children and adolescents in high-income settings. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 2(2), 121-132. Fennig, M., & Denov, M. (2020). Interpreters working in mental health settings with refugees: An interdisciplinary scoping review. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. Fernández-Reino, M., & Rienzo, C. (2016). Migrants in the overview. Migration observatory briefing, 6th revision.

UK labour market: An

Flood, C., & Coyne, I. (2019). A literature review of the psychological status of asylum-seeking children: implications for nursing practice. British journal of nursing, 28(7), 461-466. Goosen, S., Stronks, K., & Kunst, A. E. (2014). Frequent relocations between asylum-seeker centres are associated with mental distress in asylum-seeking children: a longitudinal medical record study. International journal of epidemiology, 43(1), 94-104. Griffith, A. N. (2016). Trajectories of trust within the youth program context. Qualitative Psychology, 3(1), 98. Griffith, A. N., & Larson, R. W. (2016). Why trust matters: How confidence in leaders transforms what adolescents gain from youth programs. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 26(4), 790-804. Groark, C., Sclare, I., & Raval, H. (2011). Understanding the experiences and emotional needs of unaccompanied asylum-seeking adolescents in the UK. Clinical child psychology and psychiatry, 16(3), 421-442. Hawkins, O. (2020). Asylum Statistics. London, House of Commons LibraryHodes, M., Jagdev, D., Chandra, N., & Cunniff, A. (2008). Risk and resilience for psychological distress amongst unaccompanied asylum seeking adolescents. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49(7), 723732. Hodes, M., Jagdev, D., Chandra, N., & Cunniff, A. (2008). Risk and resilience for psychological distress amongst unaccompanied asylum seeking adolescents. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49(7), 723-732. Home Office (2020) Asylum and resettlement datasets. HM Government, London. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/asylum-and-resettlement-datasetsJoffe, H. (2001). “Thematic Analysis.” Qualitative Research Methods in Mental Health and Psychotherapy. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, p. 209–223. Jud, A., Pfeiffer, E., & Jarczok, M. (2020). Epidemiology of violence against children in migration: a systematic literature review. Child Abuse & Neglect, 108, 104634. Lawrence, H., & Michelmore, O. (2019). Understanding sleep problems experienced by unaccompanied asylum-seeking children and children in care. Lewins, A. & Silver, C. (2007). Using Software for Qualitative Data Analysis: A step‐by‐step Guide. Sage Publications, London: UK. Lusthaus, C. (1999). Enhancing organizational performance: a toolbox for self-assessment. Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research Centre. 43

Lynch, O. (2013). British Muslim youth: radicalisation, terrorism and the construction of the “other”. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 6(2), 241-261. Majumder P, O’Reilly M., Karim K. (2015) ‘This doctor, I not trust him, I’m not safe’: the perceptions of mental health and services by unaccompanied refugee adolescents. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 61 (2), 129-136. Majumder, P., Vostanis, P., Karim, K., & O’Reilly, M. (2019). Potential barriers in the therapeutic relationship in unaccompanied refugee minors in mental health. Journal of Mental Health, 28(4), 372-378. Marriott, K. (2001). Living in Limbo; Young separated refugees in the West Midlands. Save the Children, London: UK. Masefield, S. C., Megaw, A., Barlow, M., White, P. C., Altink, H., & Grugel, J. (2020). Repurposing NGO data for better research outcomes: a scoping review of the use and secondary analysis of NGO data in health policy and systems research. Health Research Policy and Systems, 18(1), 1-22. Merrill Weine, S., Ware, N., Hakizimana, L., Tugenberg, T., Currie, M., Dahnweih, G., ... & Wulu, J. (2014). Fostering resilience: Protective agents, resources, and mechanisms for adolescent refugees’ psychosocial well-being. Adolescent Psychiatry, 4(3), 164-176. Montgomery, E., & Foldspang, A. (2005). Seeking asylum in Denmark: refugee children's mental health and exposure to violence. The European Journal of Public Health, 15(3), 233-237. Ní Raghallaigh, M. (2014). The causes of mistrust amongst asylum seekers and refugees: Insights from research with unaccompanied asylum-seeking minors living in the Republic of Ireland. Journal of Refugee Studies, 27(1), 82-100. Niño, A. P. (2020). Promoting Resilience in Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking and Refugee Minors (Doctoral dissertation). UT Southwestern Medical School, Dallas, TX, United States NSPCC (2020) Radicalisation. London, NSPCC. Retrieved https://learning.nspcc.org.uk/safeguarding-child-protection/radicalisation#heading-top

from:

O’leary, R., & Vij, N. (2012). Collaborative public management: Where have we been and where are we going?. The American Review of Public Administration, 42(5), 507-522. Ogbu, H. U., Brady, B., & Kinlen, L. (2014). Parenting in direct provision: parents' perspectives regarding stresses and supports. Child Care in Practice, 20(3), 256-269. O'Higgins, A. (2019). Analysis of care and education pathways of refugee and asylum‐seeking children in care in England: Implications for social work. International Journal of Social Welfare, 28(1), 53-62. O'Higgins, A., Sebba, J. & Gardner, F. (2017). What are the factors associated with educational achievement for children in kinship or foster care: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 79(C), pages 198-220. Ongering, L. (2007). Homegrown terrorism and radicalisation in the Netherlands: Experiences, explanations and approaches. Testimony to the US Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, 1-10. 44

Oppedal, B., & Idsoe, T. (2015). The role of social support in the acculturation and mental health of unaccompanied minor asylum seekers. Scandinavian journal of psychology, 56(2), 203-211. Ott, E., & O’Higgins, A. (2019). Conceptualising educational provision for unaccompanied asylumseeking children in England. Oxford Review of Education, 45(4), 556-572. Pöllabauer, S. (2004). Interpreting in asylum hearings: Issues of role, responsibility and power. Interpreting, 6(2), 143-180. Putnam, R.D., 2007. E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2), pp.137–174. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x. Quinn, A., Ji, P., & Nackerud, L. (2019). Predictors of secondary traumatic stress among social workers: Supervision, income, and caseload size. Journal of Social Work, 19(4), 504-528. Refugee Council (2019) Children in the Asylum System, May 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Children-in-the-Asylum-SystemMay-2019.pdf; Accessed 10th August 2020. Sanchez‐Cao, E., Kramer, T., & Hodes, M. (2013). Psychological distress and mental health service contact of unaccompanied asylum‐seeking children. Child: care, health and development, 39(5), 651-659. Sarantakos, S. (2013). Social Research. (4th edn.). Palgrave Macmillan Publications, London: UK. Schmid, A. P. (2013). Radicalisation, de-radicalisation, counter-radicalisation: A conceptual discussion and literature review. ICCT Research Paper, 97(1), 22. Seglem, K. B., Oppedal, B., & Raeder, S. (2011). Predictors of depressive symptoms among resettled unaccompanied refugee minors. Scandinavian journal of psychology, 52(5), 457-464. Stanley, K. (2001). Cold comfort. Young separated refugees in England. Save the Children, London: UK. Strobel, K., Kirshner, B. E. N., O’Donoghue, J. & McLaughlin, M. (2008). Qualities that attract urban youth to after-school settings and promote continued participation. Teachers College Record, 110(8), 1677-1705. Sumption, M., & Vargas-Silva, C. (2019). Love is not all you need: income requirement for visa sponsorship of foreign family members. Journal of Economics, Race, and Policy, 2(1-2), 62-76. Thommessen, S. A., O., T., Corcoran, P., & Todd, B.K. (2015). Experiences of arriving to Sweden as an unaccompanied asylum-seeking minor from Afghanistan: An interpretive phenomenological analysis. Psychology of Violence, 5(4), 374. UNHCR (2020) Figures at a glance. United Nations high commissioner for refugees. UNHCR, Geneva. Retrieved from: https://www.unhcr.org/en-au/figures-at-a-glance.html. Accessed 19 Jul 2020

Unicef (2020) Latest statistics and graphics on refugee and migrant children. Unicef, New York. Retrieved from: https://www.unicef.org/eca/emergencies/latest-statistics-and-graphics-refugeeand-migrant-children Warr, S. (2010). Counselling refugee young people: approaches. Pastoral Care in Education, 28(4), 269-282.

exploration

therapeutic

Whitesell, M., Bachand, A., Peel, J., & Brown, M. (2013). Familial, social, and individual factors contributing to risk for adolescent substance use. Journal of addiction, 2013, 579310. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/579310