ta? Particularly the risk scores.” (Early Intervention practitioner) Such a concern is brought into greater relief in light of the fact that Insight Bristol aren’t clear themselves about how the risk models were built and developed. Although the risk models considered in this evaluation have either been withdrawn or shortly will be, demonstrating clearly what data these use and how they work for practitioners and the public would need to be a consideration for their next iteration. Instances of risk models giving inaccurate outputs to practitioners also represented a concern in relation to 'fairness'. Namely, that potentially some families are being erroneously identified, or not- Social Finance Limited +44 (0) 20 7770 6836 87 Vauxhall Walk, London SE11 5HJ socialfinance.org.uk 67 identified, as being vulnerable. However, we also found that processes were in place within frontline teams to check and correct any inaccuracies, though this perhaps shouldn’t be relied upon in future. Beyond this, we received no feedback in relation to fairness issues. Many of the people we spoke to discussed how the TFD simply unifies data that professionals would have access to anyway, but does so in a far more timely and intuitive way. As Section 5 outlines, the outcome of this serves to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of practitioners in Children’s Services. In this sense, it can be argued that a key strength of the approach has been its innovative interpretation of legislation in order to provide better or fairer services for vulnerable children and families. Accuracy Since the TFD principally visualises factual information taken directly from source, rather than processed data, the scope of our review didn’t extend to understanding the accuracy of underlying data sources in de