Reducing Parental Conflict Planning Tool

This is a self-assessment planning tool to support local authorities and their partners to deliver a system-wide approach to reducing the negative impact of conflict between parents on their children.

Reducing parental conflict is a complex issue which requires a system-wide approach. This self-assessment tool is designed to support local leaders and commissioners to identify local system strengths and areas for development, and to monitor progress over time.

In this document you will find:

  • A brief overview of the evidence on parental conflict, and link to further information.
  • An introduction to using a systemic approach to reduce the impact of parental conflict on children.
  • Descriptors for eight key elements which make up a reducing parental conflict system.
  • A list of questions to use to monitor practical changes in your local area.

The planning tool guidance has been updated for 2024/25 returns, this reflects changes made to the ‘Measuring your progress’ section of the return. 

The Planning Tool is one of a suite of early intervention matrices developed by the Early Intervention Foundation and is produced in partnership with HM Government as part of the national Reducing Parental Conflict Programme. 

Submitting a completed Planning Tool

Local authorities are encouraged by DWP to submit their completed Planning Tool using this downloadable return form.

The return form has two sheets to fill in: 

  1. Measuring your progress is a short series of survey questions
  2. Self-assessment asks local areas to provide an estimate of the stage of progress that has been made against the eight planning tool criteria.

Once filled out, the return form should be sent to caxtonhouse.rpc@dwp.gov.uk

Running a stakeholder workshop

You may want to use the planning tool as part of a multi-agency stakeholder workshop in your area. The workshop is a way to bring together your key stakeholders to consider your area’s current position on tackling parental conflict, understand local progress and identify priorities for action.

If you plan to use the tool in this way, you should consider the following:

  • Reducing parental conflict is a complex issue which involves a range of different organisations. Make sure to involve strategic and operational stakeholders from across the spectrum of services and organisations that provide child and family services.
  • No one sees the whole picture, so planning workshops are most effective when there is lots of time to hear different perspectives, to hear from families themselves, and to find common ground.
  • Stakeholders often need to take time to understand what the evidence says about parental conflict and child impact before being able to actively engage in a local assessment and plan.
  • The purpose of the workshop is to move from talk to action, so sufficient time should be allowed for agreeing specific next steps.

You may also want to share the accompanying worksheet with local stakeholders to help them to engage with this agenda.

RPC Planning Tool

Download

Looking to speak to us about something?

Contact Foundations

Related TOols

March 17, 2025

Understanding police involvement in responding to conflict between parents

September 9, 2024

Enablers for involving children and families in reducing parental conflict service planning

Keep Up to Date

Sign up to receive our newsletter for the latest news, events and research from from Foundations

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. For information on how we process your personal data please review our privacy policy.

Cost ratings:

This rating is based on information that programme providers have supplied about the components and requirements of their programme. Based on this information, EIF rates programmes on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates the least resource-intensive programmes and 5 the most resource-intensive. 

1: A rating of 1 indicates that a programmes has a low cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of less than £100.

2: A rating of 2 indicates that a programme has a medium-low cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £100–£499.

3: A rating of 3 indicates that a programme has a medium cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £500–£999.

4: A rating of 4 indicates that a programme has a medium-high cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £1,000–£2,000.

5: A rating of 5 indicates that a programme has a high cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of more than £2,000.

Child Outcomes:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.

Supporting children’s mental health and wellbeing: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing child maltreatment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Enhancing school achievement & employment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing crime, violence and antisocial behaviour: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing substance abuse: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing risky sexual behaviour & teen pregnancy: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing obesity and promoting healthy physical development: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Evidence ratings:

The evidence ratings distinguish five levels of strength of evidence. This is not a rating of the scale of impact but of the degree to which a programme has been shown to have a positive, causal impact on specific child outcomes.

Level 2: Recognises programmes with preliminary evidence of improving a child outcome, but where an assumption of causal impact cannot be drawn.

Level 2+: The programme will have observed a significant positive child outcome in an evaluation meeting all of the criteria for a level 2 evaluation, but also involving a treatment and comparison group. There is baseline equivalence between the treatment and comparison‐group participants on key demographic variables of interest to the study and baseline measures of outcomes (when feasible).

Level 3: Recognises programmes with evidence of a short-term positive impact from at least one rigorous evaluation – that is, where a judgment about causality can be made.

Level 3+: The programme will have obtained evidence of a significant positive child outcome through an efficacy study, but may also have additional consistent positive evidence from other evaluations (occurring under ideal circumstances or real world settings) that do not meet this criteria, thus keeping it from receiving an assessment of 4 or higher.

Level 4: Recognises programmes with evidence of a long-term positive impact through multiple rigorous evaluations. At least one of these studies must have evidence of improving a child outcome lasting a year or longer.