After the success of last year’s walk and picnic trips to local venues, funding was secured to access venues further a field.
The trips were aimed at the whole community, and new venues were carefully thought about, in order to extend people’s experiences and bring different perspectives to walking. The venues also offered different levels of walking, with advice being given if the walking trip was unsuitable for very young children, or if the going was hilly or rough.
Advice sheets were issued to participants when booking walks to inform of any lack of facilities or rough terrain.
This year, there was a different range of centre based and playpark activities.
Centre based activities on offer were a clay workshop, a ceramic workshop and a kite making workshop.
These workshops were all facilitated by professional tutors and staffed by project and partner agency staff. The workshops went really well, and parents and children participated together.
The ceramic workshop in particular was very successful, with children being able to decorate a raw ceramic plate with designs of their choosing, and when these were complete, the plates were taken away and fired.
The resulting plates were returned to the children as a permanent reminder of their hard work.
Pennywell Neighbourhood Centre has a Community Garden located on the centre’s premises, and it offers a safe and secure place for children to play, and for parents and carers to get together. It also houses a well equipped playpark with climb and slide facilities and a small greenhouse.
With funding for a worker from BBC Children in Need, the centre was able to provide playpark facilities all summer. The benefits of being able to offer the playpark sessions are that the environment is safe and secure, and as there is always a member of staff in attendance, parents and carers can access support if they need it.
It also provides parents and careers with the opportunity of making new friends and supporting each other. These sessions also had small art activities taking place which children and adults joined in with.
In addition to the playpark being open, several extra playpark activity sessions took place. These included Treasure Hunts, a Teddy Bear’s Picnic and an Animal Masks workshop.
All activities were staffed by qualified workers from both Pennywell Neighbourhood Centre and the Pennywell Early Years. The Treasure Hunt was also carried out at the Pennywell Early Years site.
The family away day is a firm favourite for the Breakout scheme.
As usual, venues were chosen so that once you get to your destination, you can spend the day there with little expense.
Hamsterly Forest
Morpeth
Preston park
Tweddle farm
At the end of the holidays every year, the project holds a family barbecue. This year the theme was varied slightly and a Summer Fair was planned.
The format would still include face painting, activities and food, but in addition, the project’s women’s group would set up stalls to sell bric a brac, hold raffles and raise funds for their group. In the run up to the fair, staff and the women’s group collected donations for prizes and for the stalls. Posters went up and rotas were drawn up for the big day.
However, one thing that couldn’t be planned for is the good old British weather. On the day of the fare the heavens opened, the thunder and lightning came down and the fair had to be relocated indoors!
The weather had a massive impact on attendance on the day, with approximately 20-30 people attending compared to over 100 last year.
However, the good news is that over £200 was still raised for the women’s group project.
Thank you to all who attended, and special thanks to Joan Whitmore - the women’s group tutor - who donated boxes and boxes of good quality bric a brac and Ben Sloanes – the project’s volunteer gardener – who should receive a salesman of the year award for selling most of it!
- Activity evaluations and a summary of participant information
Information was gathered from participants in order to build a clear picture of the scheme’s client group, and help target services better.
In order to do this, a new registration system was introduced, and evaluation forms were also issued to parents and workers so that data could be collected and analysed and then be used to plan and improve future services.
An evaluation system was introduced for participants.
On each activity, adult participants were asked to complete a simple questionnaire on behalf of themselves and the group they were travelling with. It was felt that this approach would mean families could fill in one form between them, rather than fill in one each, and this may be an easier way of encouraging people to take part in the evaluation process.
The questionnaire asked the following:
- How is your group made up No. adults / children
- How did you find out about the programme
- Were you given enough information when booking / was it easy to book
- Was the activity good value for money
- What did you think about the transport arrangements
- What did you think about the venue facilities
- What did you think about the activity arrangements
- Did you receive enough support from the workers
- Would you do the activity again
There were also spaces for comments for improvements etc.
The evaluations have been grouped into 3 categories, family away days, walks and centre based activities. No evaluation was carried out for the summer fair.
The trips left on the first 4 Wednesdays of the summer holidays.
For the first time, a visit to Tweddle Farm – a family farm in Blackhall – was arranged. The farm does charge an entrance fee, but as the project negotiated a very reasonable charge with the farm, this was not passed onto the families.
A full coach of 45 passengers accompanied by a family support worker left Pennywell Neighbourhood Centre at 10.00am each week of the scheme for the venue, and returned at approximately 4.30pm.
The family support worker was on hand to offer advice, hand out first aid, and generally to support the families.
As with all sessions, these trips could only be booked the week before, and tickets could only be bought in person for that person’s immediate family.
This system allows the fairest take up of what is an extremely good value for money family trip, and most people understand the reasoning behind the procedure.
In total, 172 people attended the family away days
Evaluations were completed by 40 family groups, consisting of 95 children and 61 adults. The ratio of adult to child participants was 1 to1.5
- The evaluations showed that users found out about the services in three main ways, 55% through centre staff, 25% through friends or relatives, and 20% through the school leaflet.
- Over 97% of all people surveyed thought that the trip was good value for money, the booking arrangements were easy and they were given enough information when booking.
- Travel arrangements were good or satisfactory for 95% of people surveyed, however comments for improvements mentioned that air conditioning could be improved on transport, and that bus companies should provide child seats for children.
- A problem with transport surrounding coach seating for young children arose part way through the scheme, as new legislation being introduced meant that children could not travel without a child safety seat. These seats are not provided by the coach companies, and the project does not have access to these either, and so had to request that families with small children arrange their own child safety seat. This may become an issue for future trips and may lead to changes in the way that family away days are provided.
Venue evaluations were mixed, and although 72% of people asked thought that the venues were good and 18% satisfactory, this is a lower percentage of good marks usually received. 10% thought that the venue was poor. This has been broken down further in order to identify the problem areas:
Venue evaluation | Good | Satisfactory | Poor |
Easy Access | 89% | 8% | 3% |
Eating Facilities | 57% | 24% | 19% |
Toilet provision | 68% | 13% | 18% |
Safety | 74% | 26% | |
- The venues visited were Preston Park in Middlesbrough, Tweddle Farm in Blackhall, Hamsterly Forest in Teesdale and Morpeth Market Town in Northumberland.
- All eating facility problems related to Tweddle Farm. The farm does not have its own café, and an information sheet issued with each booking advised users of this, and asked them to ensure that they brought packed lunches. Usually, in term time visits, the farm can also ensure that there is use of the school room to eat lunches, however this had already been booked by another party, and so this may be the reasons for the negative reactions from users. In addition, the trip had to be cut short due to torrential rain and thunder storms which may account for the complaints. It is usually one of the project’s most popular term time visits.
- Toilet provision was a problem for some users at both Tweddle Farm and Preston Park. A health and safety venue check was carried out prior to visits and no problems were identified by workers regarding either eating or toilet facilities at either these or any other family away day venue.
- The most popular trip was to Morpeth, which was timed – quite by accident – to coincide with a town party, with activities being held all over the town, and free food being given away.
100% of people asked would come on a family away day again.
Some positive comments from family away day users ‘This was a very cheap and enjoyable day for the kids – thanks to the person who organised it’. (Morpeth)
‘We had a great day at Tweddle farm, despite the rain – can we have good weather please’
‘Enjoyed a nice day with my sons at Hamsterly – would love to come again’
‘Nice walk, nice change and lovely people’(Hamsterly)
‘Kids had a great time at Preston park – many thanks’
Venues were all located in areas of natural beauty, giving participants the chance to go to places they may not have been able to experience. Trips went to Hamsterly Forest, Hadrian’s Wall, Chopwell Woods and Beamish Woods.
44 people attended.
- Evaluations were completed by 17 family groups, consisting of 36 children and 25 adults. The ratio of adult to child participants was less than1 to 1.5
- The evaluations showed that 67% of users found out about the services through centre staff. Other ways accounted for 20%, with school leaflet and friends/relatives accounting for 7% each.
- 97% of all people surveyed thought that the trip was good value for money, the booking arrangements were easy and they were given enough information when booking.
- Travel arrangements were good or satisfactory for 94% of people surveyed, however comments for improvements again mentioned that air conditioning could be improved on transport, as well as a better informed bus driver.
- It is worth mentioning that for walk trips, the centre uses the local community transport business, and it is the responsibility of the customer to provide appropriate directions for the driver. This will need to be ensured that in future.
- Again, venue evaluations were mixed, with 66% of users asked saying that the venues were good, and 24% satisfactory with10% thinking that they were poor. This has also been broken down further in order to identify the problem areas:
Venue evaluation | Good | Satisfactory | Poor |
Easy Access | 64% | 14% | 21% |
Eating Facilities | 56% | 44% | 0% |
Toilet provision | 69% | 13% | 9% |
Safety | 75% | 25% | |
- The venues visited were Hamsterly Forest, Chopwell Woods, Hadrian’s Wall and Beamish Woods. The venues were intended to be rural and in some cases a little more challenging than normal term time walks. This enabled the project to travel to more unusual venues such as Hadrian’s Wall.
- Hadrian’s Wall received the majority of the negative comments, examples of such commenting on the area being hilly and hard to walk on. All walks had an information sheet issued on booking outlining the walk and the venue, and in addition, with the Hadrian’s Wall activity, users under 3 years were not accepted due to the challenging nature of the walk. 87% would come on a walk with us again.
Walk comments - the good and the bad ‘Very good – Hadrian’s Wall - thank you’
‘We need warmer weather – otherwise a fab day ( Hadrian’s Wall)’
‘Hadrian’s wall is too steep for children and OAP’s’
‘Loved it – more like these please (Hadrian’s Wall)’
‘No toilet provision in Chopwell Woods – unhappy about this’ 
- Centre based and playpark activities
- Evaluations were completed by 8 family groups, consisting of 19 children and 10 adults. The ratio of adult to child participants was almost 1 to 2
- Most users surveyed found out about the activities through centre staff (57%) or friends/relatives (29%). 145 found out through the school leaflet.
- 100% of all people surveyed thought that the activities were good value for money, the booking arrangements were easy and they were given enough information.
- Venue evaluations and activity evaluations were 100% good and all who took part would do so again.
In all evaluations, support from staff was rated as satisfactory or above, with 91% being rated as good.
A new system of registering for activities was introduced, aimed at collecting essential data regarding the make-up of client group, and ensuring emergency contact details were available for health and safety arrangements.
All participants were required to complete a registration form when they first booked an event. This form was completed once by each person, and all information stored securely. The registration form would cover the participant for the whole 4 week period. The form differed for adults and children.
All adults (parents, carers extended family members) completed a project registration form containing
- Personal details
- How they found out about the programme
- Emergency contact details
- Medical conditions they wished to make us aware of
- Marital Status, Ability status, Ethnic origin
- Whether they had children under the age of 16
- Age range they were in.
These contained the following information:
- Personal details
- Details of family doctor
- Allergy and medical information to be aware of
- Whether permission was given for photographs to be taken and used for project publicity
- Sun aware information and request for permission to apply sun cream in hot weather
- Emergency contact details
These forms were then taken on each trip and activity to provide the worker with information on each person if an accident or problem arose.
In addition, this information was then entered onto the project’s database, and analysed at the end of the programme to provide information about who used the service. All information was treated as strictly confidential and stored in accordance with Data Protection guidelines.
- Results of data gathered from registration forms
The summer breakout programme has been a well attended, with 348 people attending all sessions.
- Gender of adult and child participants
There were 80 females registered and 49 males.
The adults were made up of 45 female and 7 male.
During term time activities, the project has more female parents or carers who attend activities, and to have nearly 14% of male parents or carers attend in the summer activities is better than expected.
However, among the children, there was a more even split with 35 female and 42 male children.
The majority of participants worked with were under 16, and the largest group of adults ranged between the ages of 22 and 35 years.
This was expected as the activity programme is aimed at families with children under the age of 16, and the publicity leaflet for the activity programme is mainly advertised through the local primary schools although local shops and businesses are also leafleted.
However, the fact that 8% of participants were over 46 years old is evidence that the programme is also attracting other members of the
community.
This is important, as the summer programme is an ideal opportunity for older people to mix with young people and so encourage a break down in age related barriers.
In addition, through term time, the project has adult activities taking place and so do not want adults without school aged children to feel isolated through the summer months. By ensuring older people are using the services this can be achieved.
Pennywell Neighbourhood Centre’s work is generally within the Pennywell Community and neighbouring environs. This includes South Hylton, Grindon, Ford Estate and Nookside.
The project is not restricted to working solely within these areas, but as the project is based in Pennywell, it would be expected that the majority of participants would be local to the project.
However 6% of its users came from outside of these named areas which means that the project has appeal to residents from further a field.
It is interesting that for the first time ever, no participants came from the Ford Estate area. The fact that Pennywell Neighbourhood Centre staff based at Ford Sure Start also offer a small summer programme could be one of the reasons for this.
- Effectiveness of project publicity.
As part of the service evaluation, data was collected to identify how people find out about the service.
The summer activity programme is publicised through the infant and primary schools local to the project.
Posters and leaflets are also issued to local shops, and staff provide current term time users and visitors to the centre with information and leaflets.
Although leaflet publicity is effective, with a quarter of participants being contacted through this methods, and it may well reach new participants, it is word of mouth publicity, either from staff, friends or relatives which reaches most users, with 65% of participants reached in this way. This is good news for the project as staff work hard to provide a comfortable and supporting atmosphere.
- Equal Opportunities Information
A range of information was obtained from adult participants only relating to equal opportunities and other user information.
This information was gathered purely for the purposes of monitoring and improving the service on offer and to allow the project to identify areas where services may need to be targeted further, if client groups were being left out.
Information was collected and a separate graph was created to show this information. The area has a high proportion of single parent families, with 13% of participants identifying themselves as lone parents. This figure may be misleading, as of the 26% who identified themselves as single, many also had children under 16.
42% of participants were either with a partner or married.
It may be better to reflect this in the registration form and remove the classification of lone parent, and allow participants to just identify whether they have children under 16.
Other information collected showed ethnic and ability information as well as new and previous user information
- The scheme reached 12 new adult users
- 40 users have children under 16 years old.
- The majority of our users are white and able bodied.
This can be useful to know as it can inform whether outreach methods need to be looked at in order to reach non-abled users and users from other ethnic groups.
