1. What Went Well?
This week, my experience with The School & Family Works moved from understanding the organization conceptually to seeing its impact firsthand.
Alongside continuing my work trawling through past evaluations and impact reports, I had the opportunity to visit Sparrow Farm Primary School in Hounslow, as well as participate in an SFW strategic communications workshop. Both experiences were incredibly formative in shaping how I understand the organization’s work, not merely as a model but as a lived intervention.
The school visit in Feltham was particularly eye-opening. Sparrow Farm is a state school serving a highly diverse student body in a socioeconomically distressed area, where many families are navigating complex challenges—ranging from precarious employment to asylum-seeking status. What stood out immediately was the school’s deeply trauma-informed philosophy, which places relationships at the center of education. SFW is beyond an add-on in this environment; it is embedded within the school’s approach to supporting children and families.
The visit itself unfolded in a sequence that made the program's impact especially tangible. We began by meeting with the headteacher and two student graduates (Year 5 and Year 6) of Family Group, who shared their experiences of the prgoram. Hearing directly from the students was powerful—they spoke about feeling more confident, better able to navigate friendships, and more comfortable within the school environment. One student talked about his experiences making more friends, and we learned more context about him going from unable to come to class (due to witnessing a traumatic incident at school) to becoming a highly engaged, participative student in school. We learned that another student's mother discovered the confidence through family group to begin writing CVs and applying for jobs—a second order effect of the therapeutic intervention that is not necessarily an active goal, but a highly welcome outcome. It grounded the program value in lived experience rather than abstract results.
We then walked through the school, where it became clear that the impact of SFW extended beyond those directly participating in Family Group. There was a visible sense of warmth and familiarity between students and the SFW therapist—even among those not formally in the program—which suggested that the relational approach had permeated the broader school culture. The therapist was not seen as an external specialist, but as a trusted presence within the community.
The most impactful part of the visit was a reflective session with parents currently participating in Family Group. Here, the depth of the program impact became even clearer. Parents spoke honestly, openly, and often emotionally about how the intervention had helped rebuild trust in schools and teachers, improved family communication, and supported their children’s ability to form friendships and engage with learning. There was a strong sense that the program created not just individual change, but a shared environment of support and understanding. What struck me most was that the impact was deeply relational and intergenerational. Parents described shifts in how they spoke to their children, how they managed conflict, and how they understood their own role. Moments of affirmation—such as a parent expressing pride in their child—were small but meaningful indicators of broader change.
At the same time, I began to notice important dynamics that will shape how we think about long-term impact. Gender representation stood out in particular: the group was overwhelmingly composed of mothers, with only one father present. However, the therapist emphasized that his presence was extremely valuable—not only because it created space for an adult male to openly discuss parenting challenges, but also because it provided a visible example for younger boys in the group. This highlighted both a gap in representation and an opportunity for deeper engagement. Socioeconomic pressures were also ever-present. These experiences reinforced how intertwined family wellbeing, education, and economic stability are.
The strategic communications workshop provided a completely different, but equally valuable perspective. It brought together a wide range of stakeholders—including therapists, a Family Group graduate, members of the Clinical Governance team, and individuals with experience working with funders—to collaboratively rethink how SFW presents its work.
The exercise of building a brand platform was particularly interesting. We worked through frameworks such as insight–feature–benefit, explored how to define SFW not only by what it does but also by what it is not, and tried to identify the organization’s key “discriminators”—what makes it genuinely distinct from other interventions. One of the central challenges was balancing accuracy and sensitivity: how to communicate the depth of the organization’s work without oversimplifying it or reducing it to easily marketable but incomplete narratives.
I found it especially valuable to see how different perspectives shaped the conversation. The therapist in the room focused on clinical integrity, funder-facing participants emphasized clarity and measurable societal outcomes, and the parent brought lived experience into the discussion. This diversity of viewpoints made it clear that communicating impact is not just about presenting data—it is about translating complex, relational work into language that resonates across audiences.
Overall, I feel that this week significantly strengthened my understanding of both what SFW does in practice and how it must communicate that work externally—two sides of the same challenge that my project is trying to bridge.
2. What Could Have Been Done Differently?
This week, I became more aware of the gap between understanding an organization analytically and understanding it operationally.
While I have made steady progress on the evidence-trawling side of the project, I realized that I could have been more proactive earlier in integrating insights from field experiences—such as the school visit—into how I structure my framework. Seeing the work in practice highlighted nuances (emotional dynamics, trust relationships, cultural diversity) that are difficult to capture through reports alone, and I should have more deliberately built time to reflect on how these observations feed directly into my outputs.
I also found that the communications workshop exposed an area where I am still developing: translating complex ideas into clear, concise messaging. While I am comfortable engaging with detailed analysis, distilling that into a sharp “elevator pitch” or a few key phrases that resonate with funders is a different skill. In future, I would spend more time practicing this translation—moving from depth to clarity without losing substance.
Finally, I recognized that I am still refining how I navigate environments where I am the least experienced person in the room. In the workshop, there were moments where I hesitated to contribute, even when I had relevant ideas, simply because others had more direct experience. Moving forward, I want to strike a better balance between listening carefully and contributing confidently.
3. Leadership Reflection (3Cs Model)
Values
This week, the values of Curiosity and Good were most visible in my approach. I approached both the school visit and the workshop with a strong desire to understand the deeper context of SFW’s work, while remaining mindful of the sensitivity required when engaging with families and practitioners.
There was also a subtle tension between being Curious and being Respectful—wanting to learn as much as possible while recognizing that not all questions are appropriate in every setting.
Character
My judgment was tested most in deciding when to speak and when to listen. In both the school visit and the workshop, I was aware that I was entering spaces where others had far more lived or professional experience. I responded by prioritizing listening, while recognizing the importance of contributing thoughtfully when appropriate.
Capacities
This week stretched my people and communication capacities the most. Observing interactions between families, therapists, and staff highlighted how central trust and relationships are to SFW’s model.
The communications workshop also pushed me to develop my ability to translate complex ideas into clear messaging, particularly for external audiences such as funders.
4. Ethical Engagement
This week significantly deepened my understanding of ethical engagement in practice.
The school visit made it clear that the families SFW works with are navigating highly complex and often fragile circumstances. Even in a setting where the impact of the programme was overwhelmingly positive, the emotional weight of these experiences was evident. This reinforced why any future work involving follow-up with families must be designed with care.
I also became more aware of my own role. I am not a therapist, and my contribution is not to intervene directly, but to support the organization in understanding and communicating its impact responsibly.
The communications workshop further highlighted that ethical engagement extends to representation. Capturing impact in a way that is compelling for funders must not come at the expense of accuracy or sensitivity.
5. Adjustment & Development for Next Week
Next week, I will focus on more intentionally integrating qualitative insights from field observations into my framework, particularly around relationships, trust, and intergenerational change.
I also want to improve my ability to communicate complex ideas succinctly, especially in a funder-facing context.
A concrete action I will take is to begin drafting a funder-oriented summary of SFW’s impact, drawing on both the evidence I am compiling and the lived examples I observed this week, and seek feedback on its clarity and effectiveness.