Foundations Executive Chair Josh MacAlister awarded OBE for services to vulnerable children in New Year Honours list

30th December 2023

Josh MacAlister, Foundations Executive Chair, has been awarded an OBE for his services to vulnerable children in the 2024 New Year Honours list.

Josh has been the Executive Chair of Foundations since December 2022. A former schoolteacher, Josh founded the social work charity Frontline in 2013. 150,000 children have since been supported by social workers on Frontline programmes. Josh also chaired the Independent Review of Children’s Social Care from July 2021 until May 2022. The recommendations in the review have informed the government’s current strategy on children’s social care, Stable Homes, Built on Love.

Jo Casebourne, Foundations Chief Executive, said:

“I am absolutely delighted to extend Foundations’ congratulations to Josh on his well-deserved OBE. This prestigious honour is a resounding acknowledgement of his unwavering dedication to bringing about positive change for the most vulnerable children and families. We look forward to witnessing the continued positive impact of his endeavours and the inspiration he provides to us all”.

Alliance House
Third Floor
12 Caxton Street
Westminster
London
SW1H 0QS
Linkedin
About Us
Our Strategy
Priority Areas
Our Team
Join our team
EDIE
Our Partners
Our Work
Publications
Tools
Current Projects
Opportunities
Funding
Other Opportunities
News & Blogs
Events & Webinars
Press
Contact
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Data Archive
Foundations 2023. Foundations, the national What Works Centre for Children & Families is a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales with company number 12136703 and charity number 1188350.

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.