Community Circles
a report by
Helen Sanderson, Sarah Carr, Max Neill
Community Circles
a report by
Helen Sanderson, Sarah Carr, Max Neill
Community Circles // a report
Contents
Introduction
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
Community Circles – Circles at Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
What is the problem we are trying to solve? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
What have we learned from person-centred planning? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
What would it look like if we applied the same approach to Circles? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
What have we learned from existing evidence on Circles’ initiatives
from UK and international sources? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Cost effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Developing Circles of Support further . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
What could Community Circles look like? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Structure and funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Clarifying success and matching to a facilitator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Matching and support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Resources for facilitators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
How it works in practice – meeting by meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
What are some of the challenges? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Appendix 1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
24
Canadian models of Circles and supportive social networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Family Service Toronto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
US approaches to Circles of Support
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26
Circles of Support for people with long-term mental health problems
in Scotland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
The Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3
Community Circles // a report
Introduction
In our earlier paper we looked at the contribution of Circles of
Support to delivering personalisation and asked the question;
“What would it take to see Circles happening at scale?”
Neill and Sanderson 2012
This paper looks at the contributions from people and organisations who
have been developing Circles of Support, evidence from practice and research
sources, and what has been learned from person-centred planning over
the last decade. We bring these together to build on the existing ideas and
practices around Circles and offer a fresh approach called Community Circles.
This is a way of delivering Circles at scale. We describe this approach, and
how we are starting to pilot this in the North West.
4
Community Circles // a report
Community Circles – Circles at Scale
What is the problem we are trying to solve?
In the 1990’s Owen Cooper invited John O’Brien to think with a
group of people who were part of Circles of Support in the North
West.
John facilitated people sharing their stories and experiences of being part of
Circles, and then we focused on the question; “Why are there so few Circles,
when we know that they are powerful ways to create change with people?”
A decade later not much has changed. Circles of Support can be an important
way to assist people in using personal budgets, and can demonstrate coproduction in practice (Needham and Carr 2009). So why are there so few of
them in the North West?
This is our understanding of where we are now in the North West (based on
the Lancashire Convention on Circles in 2012):
✱✱ There are a small number of initiatives that support people to have a
Circle. Here are some examples; a funded co-ordinator (Lancashire);
a provider incorporating it within another role (Mencap); an initiative
supported by a provider (United Response)
✱✱ Most of the focus has been on people with learning disabilities and their
families
✱✱ At a time of cuts to frontline services in the public sector (Wood et al
2011) it is difficult to see how local authorities will fund for co-ordinator
or facilitator posts. Even where it did exist, two-year funding for coordinator posts has not been continued
✱✱ Circles are an untapped potential in relation to supporting the
implementation of personal budgets in social care and health. People
could use their personal budget to buy a service from a Circle facilitator,
yet we do not see this happening, and in some places it is not permissible
to use a personal budget in this way.
5
Community Circles // a report
We need to find a way to extend the opportunity for people to have a Circle,
to all disabled people and to health, and even beyond disabilities to make them
commonplace for anyone who wants one, no matter their situation or living
arrangement. There are already some pilots to extend Circles to people living
with dementia, and recovering from drug addictions, but we don’t know of
work that is specifically looking at how to deliver Circles at scale.
What have we learned from person-centred
planning?
The government introduced person-centred planning into policy through
Valuing People in 2001. In Putting People First (2009) there was an
expectation that person-centred planning be mainstreamed. There have been
many lessons learned from this, both in terms of what worked well, and what
to avoid. We think some of these lessons are applicable to extending Circles.
✱✱ We have learned that when person-centred planning is dependent on
a few highly trained people it cannot have the impact at scale that is
needed. (Personalisation through Person-Centred Planning, DH, 2010)
✱✱ We have learned that deconstructing person-centred planning into a
series of practical person-centred thinking tools, and teaching these to
all staff can enable a change in culture and practice that has an impact
on many more people’s lives (Sanderson and Lewis 2011)
✱✱ We have moved from having a few highly trained person-centred
planning co-ordinators and planners in a local authority, to everyone
needing to know about person-centred thinking tools and seeing how
these apply in their work. This is starting to happen.
Source: Personalisation through Person-Centred Planning, DH, 2010
6
Community Circles // a report
What would it look like if we applied the same
approach to Circles?
Could we create a process that used person-centred practices in
meetings, and made use of external expertise in person-centred
planning rather than expecting every facilitator to have this?
This could, for example, include supporting facilitators to develop ‘Circle
Meeting Maps’ that record the purpose of the Circle, the ground rules and the
roles that different Circle members have within the meetings.
We will be supporting facilitators in the use of other person-centred thinking
tools such as one-page profiles and four plus ones and providing access to
helpful resources and trained person-centred practitioners.
7
Community Circles // a report
What have we learned from existing evidence
on Circles’ initiatives from UK and international
sources?
The information below was gathered through online searches and
in particular the Social Care Online bibliographic database.
The scope suggests that very little formal evaluation of the impact and
effectiveness (including cost effectiveness) of Circles of Support has taken
place in the UK. The majority of traditional research evidence derives from
evaluations in the US and UK of Circles of Support and Accountability which
focus on the rehabilitation of sexual offenders in the community. Outside
social care Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) exist to support the
rehabilitation of sexual offenders into the community. The key learning points
below are derived from the scoping outline of practice and evidence from
UK, Canada and US. This is not an exhaustive list but rather an indicative
overview. More detail about individual projects is given in appendix 1.
✱✱ There appears to be little formal evaluation of effectiveness or cost
effectiveness of social care Circles in research but there are practice
descriptions and user testimony
✱✱ All models have a ‘focus person’ who is in control and each Circle is
unique to that individual
✱✱ Duration of Circles can vary and flexibility is important
✱✱ Circles can take time to build, particularly as trust and relationships take
time to build
✱✱ Family, friends, volunteers, community members and paid professionals
can be part of a Circle and building on existing relationships is helpful.
However, it is the focus person that makes decisions about Circle
members and activities
✱✱ Circles can be small (possibly only two people) or large and should
be able to expand and contract according to the focus person’s
requirements
✱✱ Circles can be temporary and problem-focused or can offer long-term,
lifetime support
8
Community Circles // a report
✱✱ Circles appear to work best when a paid facilitator is involved but there
can be difficulties with funding and potential issues of professional control
✱✱ Anyone can have a Circle of Support but the model originated with
people with learning disabilities and disabled people. The approach is
being tested for people living with dementia and people recovering from
addiction
✱✱ Circles of Support for people with long-term mental health problems
are being explored as a way to support recovery and prevent episodes
of ‘mental distress’. Circles of Friends have been deployed in schools for
children and young people experiencing exclusion or difficulties such as
bullying
✱✱ Circles should focus on strengths and mutuality and empower the focus
person
✱✱ The use of technology, including online and digital, can help expand
Circles to include remote relatives and friends
✱✱ Circles of Support have the potential to generate both bonding and
bridging social capital. Bonding is consolidating and organising the
support a person already has and bridging is bringing in new people,
support and activities into the person’s life.
In Appendix 1 we summarise our learning on international models and
evaluations.
We want to build on this by:
✱✱ Ensuring that the focus person stays in control of who is involved and
what happens
✱✱ Keeping the duration of Circles flexible
✱✱ Ensuring that family, friends and community members are invited, using
relationship circles
✱✱ Keeping the flexibility of how many people are part of a Circle
✱✱ Staying focussed on the purpose of the Circle and the changes that the
person wants to make in their life – whether the Circle is to overcome a
specific problem or for long term support, and clarifying this early on
✱✱ Using technology to enable people who live in different parts of the
country to participate in Circles, and in supporting facilitators through
social media.
9
Community Circles // a report
Cost effectiveness
It does not appear that Circles’ initiatives have been subject to
cost effectiveness evaluation (that is, how they help resources to
be used more efficiently and achieve better outcomes for people).
However the broader literature suggests that building community
capacity and applying techniques to develop personalisation in a
socio-economically productive way, could be cost effective.
In their paper on making an economic case for building community capacity,
Martin Knapp and colleagues looked at time banks, befriending services and
community navigators (Knapp et al 2010).
Although they acknowledge the methods they used posed certain
limitations on their findings, they say:
“We calculated the costs of three particular community initiatives – time
banks, befriending and community navigators for people with debt or
benefits problems – and found that each generated net economic benefits
in quite a short time period.” Knapp et al 2010 p. 9
In an overview of evidence on personalisation and productivity, Sarah Carr
explored what this might mean for building community capacity and found
that:
“The self-directed support approach was designed to recognise and
support a person’s informal support networks such as family and friends,
neighbours and volunteers...Greater involvement with and access to
community networks and support is being shown as having a preventative
effect.” Carr 2010 p.vii
10
Community Circles // a report
Developing Circles of Support further
We wanted to develop an approach that built on the international
learning about Circles, and learning from implementing personcentred planning in the UK.
We asked ourselves; how could we develop an approach that:
✱✱ Could be attractive to many people in the community because it was
possible to do alongside having a full time job, being a carer or bringing
up a family?
✱✱ Was seen as valued – paid (just enough not to affect benefits if that is
a concern) and the skills acquired could be applied to other areas of life
and look good on a CV?
✱✱ Was affordable – possible for individuals and families to pay for either
through a personal budget; for self-funders, or through mutual time or
skills exchange with another facilitator?
✱✱ Was personalised - individuals and families were matched to a
facilitator, the facilitator and the family/individual have their purpose
for the Circle (could include supporting implementation of a personal
budget)?
✱✱ Was replicable - had a process that could be easily and inexpensively
taught, and did not require years of facilitation skills?
✱✱ Was sustainable and robust - ensured that facilitators were wellsupported and connected, in a time and cost effective way that utilised
social media?
✱✱ Was lean – does not require a well-staffed office?
✱✱ Builds connectivity – could contribute to better interconnected and
therefore more resilient communities?
We are not suggesting that other approaches do not cover some of these,
and we have learned a lot from the pioneering work of Circles Network. We
believe that the combination of all of them could help us answer the question
of creating Circles at scale.
11
Community Circles // a report
What could Community Circles look like?
While Community Circles is an attempt to answer these
questions, it is not a radical departure from previous Circles’
work. It is simply an attempt to learn from the best that this
work has achieved and to apply this learning in the context of the
movement towards personalisation in health and social care.
Making full use of the opportunities that this development presents for
positive change in people’s lives. It is an application of the Circles’ tradition in a
new context, combined with a resolution to spread their benefits more widely,
and using person-centred practices, as well as person-centred planning.
The key strength of the Circle is its simplicity. It is a way of drawing together
people around the focus person to think and act together. It acknowledges
the powerful tendency in present day society to become socially isolated,
and attempts to prevent it. The Community Circles’ model recognises that
people experience deep social isolation even in circumstances where paid
help, healthcare and support is present in their lives, as typically these
paid interventions are focused on priorities other than the need for human
connectedness.
Just because it originates from a simple concept does not mean it is easy. The
work of bringing together a Circle, and helping it meet and think together, and
thus begin to overcome the forces that isolate and disempower people often
requires careful facilitation. If it were simple it would have happened already.
Community Circles is recognition that the desired connection is not going to
happen without intentional and sustained effort.
A key element in focusing this effort and in sharing the connecting skills
required will be the Circle facilitator. This will be a person with a deep
commitment to building the capacity of communities to be inclusive. It will be
desirable to seek out facilitators with knowledge of the local community and
experience of social exclusion.
This facilitator will themselves require support guidance and training. The
more effective this support and the clearer the guidance and training, the
12
Community Circles // a report
more people will become competent and confident facilitators. Support for
the facilitator will be offered by mentors and by a coordinator, along with
comprehensive written and video guidance.
In order to be replicable at scale, adequate information about each aspect of
the model and what we are learning about how to make it work best will need
to be recorded and shared. We aim to apply the Community Circles model
while recording the learning that occurs through this application in enough
depth and detail for others to be able to replicate the model in new areas.
We hope this will increase the number of people who have the opportunity
to benefit from the use of a Circle of Support as a method of managing their
support and creating positive change in their lives.
We are looking to explore the development of Community Circles in two
places in the North West, with people living with dementia, and with families
with a child with a disability.
13
Community Circles // a report
Structure and funding
There would be a Co-ordinator whose role is to identify and train
facilitators, match them to families, buddies and mentors, and be
responsible for the quality of the service. They would be a homeworker with a dedicated phone number for the service.
Facilitators are likely to be family, friends, community members, members
of faith or cultural communities, people with lived experience of services,
students, and people working in services.
We hope to find facilitators through word of mouth and through a local
communication strategy. We would also talk to local businesses and services
about providing facilitators and/or funding a Circle, as part of their social
responsibility. We would talk to education and training establishments
looking for mature students and specifically those working towards a career
in social work, health and wellbeing.
Each facilitator would be asked to facilitate no more than two Circles, and
offer eight to ten Circle meetings a year (around two hours per meeting)
to a family/individual. This would be paid at £18 - 25 per hour, and means
that the annual cost to a family (paying personally or through a personal
budget) would be around £600 - 750 per year. This would deliver on average,
a two hour Circle meeting (with preparation) every four to six weeks. Travel
expenses would not be paid, and facilitators would be matched to local
families. This service could also be offered through time-banks, rather than
for money. Some people may not want to accept money, or instead could have
this donated to a charity of their choice. The Local Authority would be able to
buy Circles for individuals as well.
Each facilitator would have a ‘buddy’ someone who is also a new facilitator,
and a mentor. There would be one mentor for each five facilitators. Mentors
are people who have a lot of experience in Circles and person-centred
planning. Each facilitator negotiates with their buddy and mentor how they
stay in contact and support each other.
14
Community Circles // a report
Mentors are also likely to be Path Map or person-centred review facilitators
who could be brought in to do this on meeting three (see below).
Facilitators would have three days equivalent of training. This would be
offered either at weekends or in evenings to enable people who work to
participate. They would not be paid to attend this. The training would be
pitched as something that can benefit anyone in their life and central to
the role of the facilitator. This is also a way of introducing person-centred
thinking and a person-centred way of running meetings (Positive and
productive meetings) to lots of people, and to show how they are used
for problem-solving, and future planning. There is a detailed manual for
facilitators.
Becoming a facilitator is dependent on completing the training, and the
trainer agreeing that they have the characteristics and skills needed. We
anticipate that a minimum of half of the people who went through the
training would end up being facilitators. Potential facilitators would do their
own one-page profile as part of the training, and this would be the basis
for matching with potential families. Matching criteria would include the
facilitators’ availability and how far they were able to travel.
Clarifying success and matching to a facilitator
The co-ordinator would meet every family or individual who was
interested in a Circle.
At the meeting, the co-ordinator would make sure that the family understood
what a Circle could and could not achieve, so that expectations were managed;
identify the purpose of this Circle, and what success would look like from
their perspective.
The co-ordinator and person can then review the range of facilitators
and choose the person where there is the best fit and match, based on the
facilitators’ one-page profile.
See Max’s one page profile on the following page.
15
Community Circles // a report
Name: Max Neill Address: 86 Beech Street South
Preston
Lancashire
PR1 8JQ
What people appreciate about you? • My commitment to Person-centred
approaches and inclusion
• I’m loyal to my friends
• A calm approach
• Knowledge and experience
• I’m articulate
• I’m logical and structured in
my thinking and writing
• I’ve a dry, almost arid sense of
humour
• I can be critical, as well as
constructive and creative
What is important to you? In my work I want to feel that what I’m doing makes a positive difference. I want people whose voices are not
typically heard to be listened to by people and systems that have previously tended to ignore them.
I want to see more people enjoying good lives in strong, well-connected communities.
Social justice, human rights, humanity. Seeing underestimated and excluded people stepping into new worlds of
possibility.
That any change I’m involved in is enduring, rather than precarious.
Sharing person-centred ideas, skills and tools through my speaking, training and writing.
I enjoy real freshly ground coffee, or tea made with a teapot when I can!
Time to think and plan – chances to discuss or read about ‘big’ issues as well as things directly connected with my
work.
Trying out new ideas and approaches.
My MA course (Critical Learning Disability Studies).
Keeping up with the news, via official news channels, twitter (@maxneill) and facebook.
Time with my family.
The end of a perfect day would be to watch the sun set over Derwentwater with a bottle of real ale and a
reasonably warm tent behind me.
How to support you in your role? I prefer to be contacted by email, text or tweet rather than telephone, though I accept this is sometimes
unavoidable. This particularly applies to appointments so I can check my availability on my electronic diary.
I’m ready to work anywhere within about an hour or so drive from Preston, and can go further if I have plenty of
notice.
Be as clear as you can about exactly what you expect from me. Ask as many questions as you like!
I’m usually available on Wednesdays in the morning and early afternoon (up to 3.30), most evenings after 6.30pm
(except Tuesday and Wednesday) and from 10 – 6 at weekends.
Because this is pioneering work, and because I need it anyway, I really appreciate clear and honest feedback about
what is working and anything that needs to change about my work, give me this feedback any way you like, many of
my best ideas have come about because of criticisms and suggestions about my work. 16
Community Circles // a report
Matching and support
The family and co-ordinator would look at potential facilitators
(via their one-page profiles) and match the facilitator to the
family.
The co-ordinator would also match the facilitator to a buddy and mentor.
The co-ordinator negotiates with the family and the facilitator how he/she
will stay in contact (i.e. phone call to the family after the second and fourth
meeting?).
There would be an annual ‘gathering’ each year, which facilitators are
expected to attend to update the family and coordinator and share learning.
This would take place over a weekend.
Resources for facilitators
We have a closed facebook group for facilitators to stay in touch
and feel part of a community, and a groupsite to share problems
and solutions; as well as the detailed manual.
We are looking at developing an App about Circles, a You Tube Channel with
videos for families (to know what to expect) and potential facilitators. There
would be regular free webinars for facilitators, and links to other helpful
websites and resources.
17
Community Circles // a report
HOWCOMMUNITYCIRCLESWORK
Julie and Helen meet
Julie and Helen talk
Can you tell
me about
Community
Circles?
How will this work?
Julie heard about Community
Circles from the Information
and Advice Services website
Julie, Lucy’s mum
YES,
let’s meet
What do you want to achieve?
• WheredoyouhopeLucywillbe
in a year - how can the Circle
helpwiththis?
• Howoften,whenandwhere
will the circle meet?
• Howwillthecirclebepaidfor?
In time or money.
Helen, Circles
co-ordinator
Andchangehappens...
Gettingconnected
• HelenmeetswithJulieandLucyoncea
year to see how things are going
• TheCircleusesaPATHnexttofocuson
the future in more detail
When choosing a suitable
facilitator. Consider:
• Geography
• Availability
• Personality
• Sharedinterests
PATH
(: !
%&&'$(t South
$!%&'((!
"#
!"#$:
4plus1questions
h Stree
86 Beec
Preston
Lancashire
PR1 8JQ
!
!
Ongoing Circle meetings
!
of
35,
2.3+,4. a dry, almost arid sense
as
$01"+$,"and experience • I’ve
humour
l, as well
be critica creative
ledge
-/$,"--'
• I can
e and
in
late
constructiv
*"+,-$.t to Person-centred ••Know
!
I’m articu l and structured
)
logica
writing
• Welcome
• Howarewedoingwiththeactions?
• Whathavewetried?Whathavewelearned?What
arewepleasedabout?Whatareweconcerned
about? Based on this what shall we do next?
• Closinground
!
!
!
itmen
ion
• My comm and inclus
approaches my friends
to
• I’m loyal
approach!
• A calm !
!
• I’m
ng and
my thinki
!
e
35,
e whos
e them.
6+,+.,4. ve difference.uslyI wanttendepeopl
d to ignor
of
worlds
s.
previo
into new
,1#-.'+" makes amspositi
communitie stepping
that have
onnected ded people
)*"+,1( to feel that whatby I’mpeopldoing
, well-c
e and syste
and exclu
in strong
/$5,
sometimesdiary.
,4.3','.though I acceptonthismyis electr
onic
of
plenty
+,4.3,16
bility
one,
r if I have
my availa
go furthe
(3--.'text or tweet rathertsthanso Iteleph
can check on, and can
,
ntmen drive from Prest
7.8,+., cted by emailapplie
so
s to appoi
you like!
hour or
conta
ions as
ularly
r to be
about an
6.30pm
I prefe
many quest
. This partichere within
ngs after
Ask as
anyw
unavoidable
most eveni
to work
t from me.
3.30),
I’m ready
(up to
you expec
about
ly what
afternoon
notice.
feedback
about exact
and early
many of
honest
ends.
you can
morning
clear and way you like,
s in the 10 – 6 at week
clear as
Be as
appreciate
ack any
Wednesday
and from
ble on
ay, I really me this feedb !
esday)
it anyw
ly availa
give
work.
and Wedn
I need
I’m usual
my work,
about my
Tuesday
because
e about suggestions
(except
work, and
to chang
and
ering
sms
needs
pione
ing that
this is
se of critici
and anyth about becau
Because
working
what is
have come
ideas
my best
Julie and Max meet
First meeting
Responsibilities
Meetingmap
Julie and Helen decide Max is a
good match and he is asked to be
the Community Circles facilitator
lives
I want
ed to
estimated
to be listene enjoying goodSeeing under
In my work
g.
heard
with my
rious.
g and writin
typically see more peopl , humanity.
rights
than preca ing, trainin
connected
to
rather
I want
human
directly
speak I can!
gh my
justice,
enduring,
as things
Social
ed in is and tools throu a teapot when s as well
with
skills
possibility.change I’m involv
‘big’ issue
ideas,
tea made read about
That any person-centred d coffee, or
ss or
y groun
es to discu
Sharing
ook.
real freshl plan – chanc
I enjoy
a
and faceb
think and
.
xneill)
ale and
es).
Time to
of real
approaches ility Studi els, twitter (@ma
a bottle
Disab
ideas and
work.
ter with
Learning
news chann
out new
l
entwa
al
Derw
(Critic
Trying
, via officia
course
set over
My MA up with the news
the sun
be to watch
Keeping my family.
would
Time withof a perfect day
me.
behind
The end
warm tent
reasonably
Second meeting
• Maxwelcomeseveryoneand
introducesMichelle,thePersonCentred Review facilitator
• Michelleexplainstheprocess
• EveryonecontributestoLucy’s
Person-CentredReview
• MaxtalksabouthowtheCirclewill
be taking forward the actions and
lookingatprogress
• Agreedatesforthenext3meetings
• Closinground
are not
voices
• Introductions
• Whyarewehere?Circlepurposeand
creatingameetingmap(purpose,roles,
ground rules)
• Whatwillwebedoingtogetheroverthenext
few months?
• Person-CentredReview(watchYouTubeclip)
• PreparingforPerson-CentredReview
• Closinground
• HelenandMaxtalkonphoneand
email to share information
• JuliewantsaCircletohelpher
daughter Lucy make a transition
from school to adult life
• FromtalkingtoJuliewewantto
plangoalsandactions
• StartwithaPerson-Centred
Review
• JuliewantstheCircletomeeton
Tuesdayevenings
• PayingfortheCirclethrougha
personalbudget
Relationships
Max and Julie meet to talk about
• Invitations-who,how,whattocallthemeeting
• Startarelationshipcircletodecidewhotoinvite
Practicalitiestoconsider
• Creatingawelcomingatmosphere
• GettingstartedwiththeCirclesmeetingmap
• WhatwillittakeforLucyandthefamilytofeelsafe?
• WhatMaxcando-lookatexpectationsandroles
18
Community Circles // a report
How it works in practice – meeting by meeting.
Meeting one
Who? Just the facilitator and the family
What?
✱✱ Confirm the purpose of the Circle – put this on the Circle Meeting Map
✱✱ Do a relationship map based around the purpose of the Circle
✱✱ Think about who could be invited to join the Circle
✱✱ Who needs to do what to invite people.
Meeting two
Who? The Circle – first meeting with the full Circle.
What?
✱✱ Introductions
✱✱ Clarify the purpose
✱✱ Create a Circle Meeting Map
✱✱ Prepare for the next meeting (for example show a section of video on
Path) or start on working/not working and agree actions to build on
what is working and change what is not working.
Meeting three
This depends on the purpose. If it relates to creating a 0-25 single plan or a
support plan, then start with that, otherwise it could mean doing a personcentred review or Path/Map.
We would use external facilitators who would assist the Circle facilitator with
this, rather than trying to train facilitators to be able to use all these processes
competently.
19
Community Circles // a report
Meeting four and future meetings
Review actions and plan next steps: use four plus one person-centred thinking
tool to reflect on progress and learning.
Annual reflection and review
Each year the co-ordinator would facilitate the meeting, with the co-ordinator,
the family and Circle.
The purpose would be:
✱✱ To take stock and celebrate success
✱✱ To decide whether people want to continue for another year, and what
the purpose and focus would be.
In a separate discussion with the family the co-ordinator would also explore:
✱✱ If the group wants to continue, whether they want to use the same
facilitator
✱✱ If not, do they want another facilitator from the project, or whether
there is someone from within the Circle who wants to be supported to
be the facilitator and how to make that happen.
20
Community Circles // a report
What are some of the challenges?
Providers and Commissioners can find Circles challenging for a
number of reasons. We need to explore this with people locally in
the Stockport and Lancashire Community Circles’ initiatives.
✱✱ Explaining why it is worth using a Circles’ approach: For many/
most people it is not immediately obvious why going to the bother of
organising a Circle will make a difference in their lives. Most people will
need to see Circles working in practice for people they know before
they will trust what may at first seem an unfamiliar process.
✱✱ Providing evidence that Community Circles lead to improved
outcomes for people who use them: Circles aim for improvements in
people’s lives that are defined by the focus person and the Circle rather
than any outside party. We believe that Circles will enable people to
organise and apply the resources available to them more effectively in
order to reach these self-defined outcomes.
✱✱ Developing a practice that remains values based, person-centred
and authentic when applied at scale. The facilitator becomes seen
as a community organiser and enhancer, allied to the person and the
community, rather than ‘just another professional’.
21
Community Circles // a report
Conclusion
We hope that we have shown that we are building an approach
that is rooted in the learning from existing Circles’ work, and
learning from implementing person-centred planning.
We have begun by recruiting our first seven facilitators – small beginnings for
an ambitious plan! We are starting small to make sure that all the components
of the way we are structuring meetings and support work are in place, and
the facilitators guide is refined. Our work is being evaluated externally and
we hope to share regularly blogs on our progress.
We know we will not get everything right, and the eventual approach may
look different from what we have described here, but we wanted to record
our process for getting here, and our plans, and then keep sharing what we
learn.
Helen, Max and Sarah are part of Community Circles who are exploring
how to create Community Circles at scale, using person-centred practices,
so everyone can benefit. You can follow Community Circles on twitter
@C_Circles.
We have a dedicated groupsite for anyone interested in circles,
please email Max or Helen if you want to join.
Max: [email protected]
Helen: [email protected]
22
Community Circles // a report
Acknowledgements
The work is funded through the H S A Foundation with contributions from
United Response and TLAP (North West).
Thank you to Helen Smith, Michelle Livesley, Cath Barton, Lowri Cornwall,
Laura Upton, Ben Harrison, Martin Routledge and Owen Cooper for their help
in reviewing this paper and the thinking behind it.
References
Carr S (2010) Personalisation, productivity and efficiency London: SCIE
Knapp M, Bauer A, Perkins M &Snell T (2010) PSSRU Discussion Paper 2772:
Building community capacity: making an economic care London: LSE/PSSRU
Needham C & Carr S (2009) Co-production: an emerging evidence base for adult
social care transformation London: SCIE
Neill M and Sanderson H (2012) Circles of Support and Personalisation Stockport:
HSA
Wilson R, Cortoni F & Vermani M (2007) Circles of Support and Accountability: A
National Replication of Outcome Findings Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada
www.robinjwilson.com/articles/r185-eng.pdf
Wood C, Cheetham P & Gregory P (2011) Coping with the Cuts London: Demos
23
Community Circles // a report
Appendix 1
Canadian models of Circles and supportive social
networks
Several of the UK initiatives refer to their basis in a Canadian Circle of Support
Model developed at the Plan Institute for Caring Citizenship which was
originally founded to support families of disabled people plan for the future:
www.institute.plan.ca/
Other UK Circles developments particularly for disabled people and people
with learning disabilities refer to other social network development projects
by the Inclusion Network, based in Toronto:
www.inclusion.com/circlesoffriends.html
Furthermore, the Family Service Toronto describes their approach to creating
and sustaining Circles of Support which describes concentric circles, starting
with intimacy in the centre and then moving though friendship, participation
and economic exchange:
“Think of those closest to your heart; those you can hardly imagine living
without. Identify them in the circle closest to you, the circle of intimacy.
Think of those you count as true friends; those who hold an important
part of your personal story; those you can call on and count on; those who
can call on and count on you. Identify them in the circle of friendship.
Think of those you meet - or have met - because you belong to a
particular association, or work in a specific place, or live in a particular
neighbourhood. You share some time or activity or interest. You might
call or be called on for engagement in projects related to your shared
association or interest or for information or for connections to others.
Identify them in the circle of participation.
Think of those you count on because they provide a paid service to you.
Identify them in the circle of economic exchange.”
(Adapted from: http://www.familyservicetoronto.org/programs/options/circles.html )
24
Community Circles // a report
Family Service Toronto
This 2003 Toronto Star article via Family Service Toronto illustrates the
challenges of supporting disabled people to live independently, including
building and sustaining Circles of Support:
http://www.familyservicetoronto.org/programs/options/stararticle.html
Judith Snow who lives independently with a Circle of Support has outlined
the following learning points:
✱✱ “Don’t wait for a crisis like a blackout; build Circles for life.
✱✱ The biggest struggle is inviting people into your life. People are
embarrassed because we live in a culture that doesn’t accept different
abilities. Get over it. Often people you’d least expect it from say they are
honoured to have been asked.
✱✱ Remember, you know more people than you think.
✱✱ A family may think that a teenager who doesn’t speak, can’t connect to
the community. But if you follow him for a day, you’ll see he’s a regular
at a local burger chain, where they know he likes gravy on his fries. Try
building on that connection.
✱✱ Your Circle may contain a mix of family, friends, community people and
people in health care services.
✱✱ Celebrate people for who they are. That means connecting by
recognising strengths and building on them.
✱✱ For example, more than 80 per cent of those who know people with
Down’s Syndrome say they have the ability to make other people happy.
Think of turning that into a job, like welcoming visitors to a community
event.
✱✱ Bring everyone in your Circle together so they can get to know each
other. That helps empower them.
✱✱ Learn how to ask for what you really want, not what you think you can
get.
✱✱ Challenge and stretch. Circles aren’t about being nice, but about helping
people thrive and survive.
✱✱ Take the time to build trust.
25
Community Circles // a report
✱✱ Prepare people for disappointment. Not everyone you approach will
follow through. Your Circle may expand and contract. At different times
people can have as many as 50 and as few as five in their Circle.
✱✱ If at first you don’t succeed try and try again.
✱✱ Don’t be afraid to give voice to dreams.”
Adapted from: www.familyservicetoronto.org/programs/options/stararticle_2.html
US approaches to Circles of Support
The UK organisation Keys to Inclusion cites the US project
‘Beyond Welfare’ at the Asset Based Community Development
Institute.
This is an asset based approach to building community connections, examples
of which are presented in this document:
www.sesp.northwestern.edu/docs/abcd/hiddentreasures.pdf
Lois Smidt founded Beyond Welfare, a group in Iowa founded with people
living in poverty to harness their social assets to improve their situation.
The approach focuses on poverty and social inclusion through community
capacity building: www.aecf.org/~/media/Pubs/Initiatives/Making%20
Connections/F/FindingNewWaysToGetBeyondWelfare/Beyond%20Welfare.pdf
The Idaho Department of Health and Welfare promote a ‘My Voice, My
Choice’ support broker approach, with online training materials available.
This includes a module on developing and sustaining Circles of Support:
www.healthandwelfare.idaho.gov/portals/0/medical/developmentaldisabilities/
training/sbt2005/moduleC/c1-1.html
The module outlines The Employment and Disability Institute’s four steps to
creating a Circle of Support:
26
Community Circles // a report
1. Begin with a vision – What does the person wants to accomplish? How
can their friends and family members help to reach the vision in manageable
steps?
2. Leverage capacities to empower the focus person – The person with a
disability has natural resources, talents, and interests that can assist to reach
the goal. Recognise the strengths of the person.
3. Find people who are interested in and care about the person – Who will
commit their own talents to help the person move forward by doing things
with them rather than for them.
4. Find community connections – Both the internal community of the
person’s life such as family and friends and the external community such as
neighbours and community resources can assist in reaching the goal.
(Adapted from: www.healthandwelfare.idaho.gov/portals/0/medical/developmentaldisabilities/training/
sbt2005/moduleC/c1-3.html)
27
Circles of Support for people with long-term mental
health problems in Scotland
In 2004 the Scottish Recovery Network and Outside the Box
Development Support examined the case for developing Circles of
Support for people with long-term mental health problems. The
Canadian PLAN approach influenced their proposals.
Their position is that Circles of Support can promote community connections
and networks which in turn support a person’s recovery. There is a specific
focus on reciprocity, asset-based approaches, peer support and the notions of
bridging and bonding social capital.
Connor A (2004) Recovery and community connections In Bradstreet S & Brown W (eds.) SRN Discussion
Paper Series No.2 Glasgow: Scottish Recovery Network www.lx.iriss.org.uk/sites/default/files/
resources/Recovery%20and%20community%20connections.pdf
Community Circles // a report
Another 2004 report from Outside the Box Development Support describes
some of the practice emerging for their Circles of Support development for
people with long-term mental health problems and for those with learning
disabilities.
The report includes learning points from the people who have had their
own Circle of Support. Overall, the key practice messages are:
✱✱ ‘Keep it open around issues like diagnosis, labels
✱✱ Start with people at as early a stage as possible, and when people are
as young as possible – there are huge benefits around preventing later
problems, and the ones that do still happen are less damaging
✱✱ Remember it is about encouraging and building friendships, and about
all of the people involved being citizens
✱✱ Remember it is about relationships: that is the source of the
contribution
✱✱ Remember that this won’t in itself solve all the other things that are
wrong - for that person, or with the system
✱✱ Be ready to support families as well’
(Outside the Box Development Support, 2004 p.17)
Outside the Box Development Support (2004) Circles of Support: a discussion paper Glasgow:
Outside the Box Development Support: www.otbds.org/assets/uploaded_files/project/Circlesreport.pdf
The Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA)
approach
The COSA approach is community supported and professionally
driven and aims to give the ‘core member’ social support.
This approach has been formally evaluated in Canada, with the results as
follows:
✱✱ “Results show that the offenders who participated in COSA had
significantly lower rates of any type of reoffending than did the matched
comparison offenders who did not participate in COSA. Specifically,
28
offenders who participated in COSA had an 83% reduction in sexual
recidivism in contrast to the matched comparison group (2.1% vs.
12.8%), a 73% reduction in all types of violent recidivism (including
sexual – 8.5% vs. 31.9%), and an overall reduction of 72% in all types of
recidivism (including violent and sexual – 10.6% vs. 38.3%).
✱✱ Overall, COSA participants were responsible for considerably less
sexual, violent, and general offending in comparison to the matched
comparison group.
✱✱ These findings suggest that the impact of participation in COSA is not
site-specific. In addition, these results provide further evidence for
the position that community volunteers, with appropriate training and
guidance, can and do assist in markedly improving offenders’ successful
reintegration into the community. (Wilson, Cortoni & Vermani 2007 p.i)
Again this Circle model had its origins in Canada and the US, and grew out
of an ad hoc, faith-based response to the need to support high risk, sexual
offenders from reoffending after release into the community in South-Central
Ontario, Canada and with an example being in Ottawa: http://cosa-ottawa.ca/
Circles of Support and Accountability have been subject to research and
effectiveness evaluation, with two these two papers being available:
Wilson J et al (2007) Circles of Support and Accountability: Engaging Community
Volunteers in the Management of High-Risk Sexual Offenders The Howard Journal
46 (1) pp1-15 www.robinjwilson.com/articles/HOJO_450.pdf
Wilson R, Picheca J & Prinzo M (2005) Circles of Support & Accountability: An
Evaluation of the Pilot Project in South-Central Ontario Ottawa:Correctional
Service of Canada www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/reports/r168/r168-eng.shtml