The document outlines the Meitheal Model, a framework implemented by Tusla to provide a more integrated preventative approach to child and family interventions. It discusses stakeholder perspectives on the early implementation of the model through interviews. Key findings include enthusiasm for the model's partnership approach and interagency collaboration. However, concerns around resources and training needs were also raised, particularly engaging schools. The conclusion recommends further evaluation and stakeholder input to help guide Meitheal's development.

1. A snapshot in time:
stakeholder perspectives
of Tusla’s Meitheal Model
Louise McCormick BSW

2. Outline of the Meitheal Model
 Integral part of TUSLA’s Prevention Partnership & Family
Support (PPFS) framework
 More integrated approach to intervention
 Outcomes-focused, preventative strategy that may be
implemented in cases that come below the threshold for
social work intervention
 Each case is Tusla-led but referred back to community
agencies through Local Area Pathways
 A lead practitioner from a community agency will be decided
upon in each case
 Underpinned by a holistic, strengths-based approach that
works in partnership with families to create a “team around
the child” (Tusla, 2014, p.4)

3. [T]he implementation of Meitheal, a
National Practice Model for all
Agencies Working with Children,
Young People and their Families...will
deliver a standard and consistent
approach on how we support and
intervene with children and families.
(Tusla, 2014, p.2)

4. Springboard Agency
 A community-based child and family support agency
in Knocknaheeny area … … 4th most
disadvantaged area nationally (SAHRU Technical Report 2013: Deprivation)
 Implements a three-pronged approach: universal,
selective and indicated preventive intervention
(Weissberg et al., 2003)
 Children assessed and if appropriate a holistic family
support plan created in partnership with family,
often includes interagency collaboration
 Very similar approach to the Meitheal Model

5. Rationale
 Meitheal – a new approach with potential to transform
child protection and welfare services
 Systemic changes can elicit fear of unknown
 Stakeholder opinions – a snapshot to reflect on its
current status & help guide its future development

6. Principal Aim
To offer insight into how the Meitheal
approach is working in practice through
perspectives of those most closely involved

7. Research Questions
 What are the perspectives of Meitheal stakeholders,
from service users to managers, at this early stage of
its implementation?
 How do these perspectives compare with the views of
those involved in similar models?
 How can these findings be used to inform the Meitheal
process going forward?

8. Research Design
 Small-scale qualitative study
 Limitations – Undergrad. Dissertation, time & word count
 Purposive sample – Four stakeholder cohorts:
1. TUSLA professionals involved in coordinating Meitheal implementation
– two participants
2. Professionals with lead role in Meitheal interventions (Springboard)
– four participants
3. Multidisciplinary professional participants of Meitheal interventions
– two participants
4. Service users (parents/carers) of a Meitheal intervention
– one participant
Eight participants in total

9. Structure
 Introduction & background
 Research Design
 Policy & Literature Review
 national & international
 theories
 comparable models – esp. * Limerick Assessment of Need System (LANS)
* Identification of Need Initiative (ION)
 Stakeholder Perspectives
 Semi-structured interviews
 Thematic analysis of findings
 The Value in a Snapshot – Discussion & recommendations

10. Findings
THEME ONE: An Air of Enthusiasm from all participants
“There’s lots of goodwill and ... people just seem very, very eager really and
enthusiastic about it I think, which is great you know” (CFSN Coordinator)
 Family partnership approach – one of the best things about Meitheal
– takes away a lot of apprehension for parents/carers
– empowers
 Interagency working
– Holistic view of child & family from different perspectives & information sharing
– Team-around-the-child
– "opportunity to network" & learn about "initiatives .. happening in the community" (SP)
– Improves efficiency – clarifies roles etc. – cuts down on duplication
 Improved outcomes – the subjective experiences in most cases
“’cause once yourself is okay and stuff your kids just follow on” (parent)
– Long-term evaluation needed for accuracy and
– Outcome measurement criteria?

11. Findings cont.
 Relationship-building – total consensus on its importance
Meitheal will "stand or fall on the quality of [the] relationships” (Senior Manager for PPFS)
– with families; with professionals
– implies trust
– where 1 is not important and 10 is vitally important – all scored between 9 and 10
 Support
– All TUSLA and leading professional participants agreed they were well supported by their
colleagues
– Cited importance of mutual support – the “Team-around-the-worker” (Lead Practitioner 2)
Correlate with similar studies in the main

12. Findings cont.
THEME TWO: Resourcing & Training Needs
Resourcing needs
"A lot of the main statutory bodies have gone through huge amounts of change ...
which makes it much more difficult ... so there's again a need for more integrated, more
coordinated planning … from government down” (Senior Manager for PPFS)
 Meitheal Coordinators required – a factor that was “standing out” (Senior Manager
for PPFS)
 Extra workload for Practitioners with lead roles – coordinating/chairing meetings;
minutes
 Investment needed for “bodies on the ground” [because] “it’s meant to be
wraparound … if there are waiting lists … it won’t work!” (CFSN Coordinator)

13. Findings cont.
Training needs
 Providing clarity – explaining Meitheal NOT answer to crisis; different roles;
needed in order to streamline things as "people can veer off into different ...
understandings" (SCW)
 Changing mindsets, getting buy-in
"[Some] professionals ... wouldn't even respond to the request to have a Meitheal ... and
things still are breaking down but they're still not buying in, that's quite difficult” (LP1)
– Protective of their work / methodologies
– Fear of unknown / change / being asked to do more with same
– A barrier to interagency working – need to develop a culture
Correlate with similar studies in the main

14. Findings cont.
SURPRISING FINDING
 The special position of schools
“Schools and educational welfare services are core members of a child and family support network
and may be key participants in Meitheal where appropriate”
(Tusla, 2014, p.65)
 Marginalised in Meitheal grouping – Not part of interagency culture
 Risk losing special relationship with families
– sometimes school is “only door left open” (SP)
 Frustration & distrust with Child Protection services due to high waiting lists – could impact
on buy-in to Meitheal
 Differing interpretation of acceptable thresholds – lack of training generally e.g. Children First
 Senior Manager recognised need for specialised training for certain groups including
schools, such as "a more in-depth kind of knowledge around Children First" to address "gaps and
needs"

15. Conclusion & Recommendations
 Keen enthusiasm for collaborative, preventative Meitheal approach,
together with legitimate concerns about inadequate resources & training
 Most findings correlate with other evaluation studies
 Surprising element – situation of schools in Meitheal process
 Raised interesting questions as to how to better inform and include
schools around interagency family work
– specialised training by LAPs?
 Long-term evaluation in future, to ascertain whether Meitheal's primary
aim of improving outcomes nationally, has been realised
 Short term
– undertake similar small-scale studies from different Meitheal locations to
build a clearer picture of how Meitheal is progressing
– to inform the framework's architects in the process

16. Author contact details: