 competing priorities. 34% of all staff agreed that their team was adequately staffed to cover the different roles required under the FFCP in Feb 25, with Wave 2 areas slightly more likely to agree than Wave 1 areas (37% compared to 32%). This proportion was even lower among Education, Health or Police, where only 1 in 5 (22%) agreed (see Appendix 5, Q27). Lack of clarity around partner agency roles and responsibilities: In the survey, a lower proportion of partner agency staff agreed that they understood their roles and responsibilities (65% compared to 74% overall). As previously mentioned, when interviewed, Police stakeholders reported confusion on what their role looked like under the FFCP (see Appendix 5, Q23). “Exactly what is required from policing is not entirely clear. There are multi-agency teams, strategic teams, operational teams – but not sure about the impact on these teams or how much working together is required i.e. a few hours/or full days.” – Strategic Lead [Police], Wave 2 (November 2024) “When you read that terminology within the Working Together and the FFCP, I think it’s been mis-interpreted when it’s considering that police will be [a Family Help] lead practitioner” – Strategic Lead [Police], Wave 1 (February 2024) 26 4. FFCP set-up and delivery progress This chapter captures the approach to setting up and implementing the FFCP and explores in greater detail the progress made on implementing key elements of the programme. It also highlights the stakeholders’ perceptions on programme sustainability and what this requires. Through this, it answers the following Evaluation Questions: • What model will local areas be implementing, and to what extent do they vary between local areas? • Has the FFCP model been integrated with usual business and process