Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 11
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Ball, Emily Batty, Elaine and Flint, John 2016. Intensive Family Intervention and the Problem Figuration of ‘Troubled Families’. Social Policy and Society, Vol. 15, Issue. 02, p. 263.

    Boddy, Janet Statham, June Warwick, Ian Hollingworth, Katie and Spencer, Grace 2016. What Kind of Trouble? Meeting the Health Needs of ‘Troubled Families’ through Intensive Family Support. Social Policy and Society, Vol. 15, Issue. 02, p. 275.

    Parr, Sadie 2016. Conceptualising ‘The Relationship’ in Intensive Key Worker Support as a Therapeutic Medium. Journal of Social Work Practice, Vol. 30, Issue. 1, p. 25.

    Sen, Robin and Churchill, Harriet 2016. Some Useful Sources. Social Policy and Society, Vol. 15, Issue. 02, p. 331.

    DOBSON, RACHAEL 2015. Power, Agency, Relationality and Welfare Practice. Journal of Social Policy, Vol. 44, Issue. 04, p. 687.

    Nethercote, Megan 2015. Neoliberal Welfare, Minorities and Tenancy Support. Social Policy and Society, p. 1.

    Batty, Elaine 2014. Learning and Soft Outcomes: Evidence from Intensive Intervention Projects. Social Policy and Society, Vol. 13, Issue. 03, p. 357.

    Malin, Nigel Tunmore, Jane and Wilcock, Angela 2014. How far does a whole family approach make a difference. Social Work and Social Sciences Review, Vol. 17, Issue. 2, p. 63.

    Linney, Jo and Flint, John 2013. Policing public housing: New York and British cities. Safer Communities, Vol. 12, Issue. 1, p. 13.

    Tonkens, Evelien and Verplanke, Loes 2013. When Social Security Fails to Provide Emotional Security: Single Parent Households and the Contractual Welfare State. Social Policy and Society, Vol. 12, Issue. 03, p. 451.

    Flint, John 2012. The Inspection House and Neglected Dynamics of Governance: The Case of Domestic Visits in Family Intervention Projects. Housing Studies, Vol. 27, Issue. 6, p. 822.


Conceptualising the Contexts, Mechanisms and Outcomes of Intensive Family Intervention Projects

  • Elaine Batty (a1) and John Flint (a2)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 23 March 2012

Intensive family intervention projects have become an increasingly prominent mechanism within anti-social behaviour and social policy programmes in the UK and are supported, in principle, by the new coalition government. They have also been the subject of considerable academic controversy within the evaluative and critical literature. This article attempts to inform continuing debates about the purpose and effects of these projects by conceptualising the contexts within which interactions between projects and families occur; classifying the component aspects of roles and support provided; and presenting a three-part typology of potential outcomes from project interventions.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

J. Aldridge , J. Shute , R. Ralphs and M. Medina (2009) ‘Blame the parents? Challenges for parent-focused programmes for families of gang-involved young people’, Children and Society, 25, 5, 371–81, doi: 10.1111/j.1099-0860.2009.00282.x [accessed 02.01.2011].

A. Blamey and M. MacKenzie (2007) ‘Theories of change and realistic evaluation: peas in a pod or apples and oranges?’, Evaluation, 13, 4, 439–55.

J. Flint (2012, forthcoming) ‘The Inspection House and Neglected Dynamics of Governance: The Case of Domestic Visits in Family Intervention Projects’, Housing Studies, 27, 7.

J. Frauley (2007) ‘Towards an archaeological-realist Foucauldian analytics of government’, British Journal of Criminology, 47, 4, 617–37.

P.M. Garrett (2007) ‘“Sinbin” solutions: the “pioneer” projects for “problem families” and the forgetfulness of social policy research’, Critical Social Policy, 27, 2, 203–30.

K. E. Gerdes (2011) ‘Importance of empathy for social work practice: integrating new science’, Social Work, 56, 2, 141–8.

S. Maruna (2004) ‘Desistence from crime and explanatory style: new direction in the psychology of reform’, Journal of Contemporary Justice, 20, 4, 184200.

J. Mayer and N. Timm (1970) The Client Speaks: Working Class Impressions of Casework, London: Routledge.

J. Nixon , H. Pawson and F. Sosenko (2010) ‘Rolling out anti-social behaviour families projects in England and Scotland: analysing the rhetoric and practice of policy transfer’, Social Policy and Administration, 44, 3, 305–25.

S. Parr (2008) ‘Family Intervention Projects: a site of social work practice’, British Journal of Social Work, 39, 7, 1256–73.

W. J. Reynolds and B. Scott (2000) ‘Do nurses and other professional helpers normally display much empathy?’, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31, 1, 226–34.

B. Skeggs and H. Wood (2008) ‘The labour of transformation and the circuits of value “around” reality TV’, Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, 22, 4, 559–72.

P. Starkey (2002) ‘Can the piper call the tune? Innovation and experiment with deprived families in Britain, 1940–1980s: the work of Family Service Units’, British Journal of Social Work, 32, 5, 573–87.

K. Valentine (2007) ‘Methadone maintenance treatment and making up people’, Sociology, 41, 3, 497514.

M. Zadoroznyi (2009) ‘“Professionals, carers or strangers?” Liminality and the typification of postnatal home care workers’, Sociology, 43, 2, 268–85.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Social Policy and Society
  • ISSN: 1474-7464
  • EISSN: 1475-3073
  • URL: /core/journals/social-policy-and-society
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *