Vital lifeline for disabled children

Project
The Family Fund

Funding
Included £35.4m from the four governments in the UK in 2011/12

Purpose
To support families with disabled or seriously ill children and ensure children and young people have access to the same opportunities as their peers

Background
Families with disabled or seriously ill children are more likely to be on low incomes or live in poverty. The Family Fund was set up in 1973 to offer these families financial support. It was initially part of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, but became an independent charity in 1996.

Action
Families have to submit written applications to the fund, giving details of their family situation and child’s condition. Many first-time applicants are visited at home from one of 200 self-employed advisers who help assess their needs and give advice. Decisions are made swiftly and families can apply every year with subsequent applications made online.

One of the key advantages is the fund’s flexibility, explains Cheryl Ward, interim chief executive of the Family Fund. “We consider all sorts of requests that can include anything from specially adapted knives to help a young person embark on a career in catering, to an iPad for a child with communication difficulties,” she says. However, the fund has also seen an increase in families applying for essentials such as clothing, bedding and washing machines.

The charity’s funding has reduced despite increased demand. Nevertheless, for the past five years it has managed to ensure 91p of every £1 of funding goes directly to families. One way it has achieved savings is through contracts with companies including Argos, Comet, Thomas Cook and Haven holidays.

Outcome
In 2011/12, the fund received more than 77,000 applications and helped more than 59,000 families to avoid taking on debt. The average grant was £500 and the top ten items funded included family breaks, white goods, furniture and costs associated with hospital appointments. A 2010 survey of 1,001 families who received a grant found that 85 per cent marked the service nine out of 10, with 93 per cent reporting they were “very satisfied” overall. Forty-one per cent said they would have to do without the item if the Family Fund turned down their request, 12 per cent said they would have to borrow from family or friends, while 15 per cent said they would use credit. 

If you think your project or programme is worthy of inclusion, email supporting data to janaki.mahadevan@markallengroup.com