Part 3: Is 35 mechanisms too many? Learning through a realist evaluation of safe accommodation for children affected by sexual exploitation and/or trafficking

Children in care feature disproportionately in the case loads of services supporting those at risk of or experiencing sexual exploitation. This reflects both the prior vulnerabilities of victims and the additional risks... [ view full abstract ]

Children in care feature disproportionately in the case loads of services supporting those at risk of or experiencing sexual exploitation. This reflects both the prior vulnerabilities of victims and the additional risks presented by experiences of poor care. In response to growing concern about children who are trafficked and/or sexually exploited when missing from care, Barnardo’s was awarded a grant from the DfE to deliver a ‘Safe Accommodation Project’ from 2011-2013. This paper presents the findings of the evaluation of the Safe Accommodation Project, and some key lessons learned in this attempt to apply a realist evaluation methodology to a small mixed-methods multi-case study.

The project piloted a specialist foster care program with 14 young people who were either known or suspected victims of child sexual exploitation (CSE) or child trafficking. This involved recruiting carers to the program and providing them with two days training on CSE and trafficking. A specialist project worker then offered weekly support to the young person, and advice to the foster carer(s) as requested. The evaluation gathered qualitative interview data at up to three points in time over each placement with carers, young people, project workers and social workers. Further qualitative date was gathered through foster carers’ weekly logs, which also collected quantitative data on missing episodes, school attendance and contact with the police.

The evaluation tracked a series of outcomes including placement stability, rates of going missing, and the young person’s awareness of healthy/unhealthy relationships. Warm and trusting relationships developed between the carers and young people in the majority of the placements, and these were a key that unlocked wider outcomes relating to the young people’s safety and well-being (educational attendance, reduced missing incidences, awareness of risk).

The application of a realist evaluation methodology was limited in light of the small number of young people in the pilot. It was not possible to identify significant outcome patterns across the placements for example. However, though few of the findings are generalizable, realist evaluation’s foregrounding of theory provided a meaningful framework and goal for this small but in-depth piece of research. A placement model was produced at the beginning of the evaluation, drawing on consultations with those involved. This was then revised in the final report to take account of new insights about how the programme actually worked in practice.

The presentation will critically reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of this specific endeavor to take a realist evaluation approach including: insights that came through the CMOC analysis; the struggle to build causal pathways; presenting theories as the product of research; and deciding on the right level of description for mechanisms.