I've nothing but admiration for people like Scott Hengeller, Jim Alexander, Caroline Webster -Stratton and the other developers of evidence based programs. They went against the grain when the orthodoxy was "nothing works," and they succeeded in finding out that some things do work. And when people didn’t believe them, even though they'd used rigorous scientific techniques, they persevered.

But they don’t seem to be able to describe in words that mere mortals can understand what their programs do. Maybe they know too much. Maybe there's too much evidence. But too often this week, after a couple of hours of presentation, we've found ourselves asking, "And what does this program do?"

Or as the politicians and business people put it "what's the offer?"

My colleagues from Dartington have had a running joke, this week, with our colleague Ali Abunimah who is a user of the internet tool Twitter. (He's had more fun at our expense than we have at his.)

Twitter facilitates social interaction by getting users to answer the question, in fewer than 140 characters, "what are you doing now?"

Could we summarize Multisystemic Therapy, Functional Family Therapy, the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program, Incredible Years and the other programs we've observed this week in fewer than 140 characters?

I may try. I think it's a big ask. (The last two sentences come to 33 characters.)

Maybe there's a potential partnership here? Maybe we should be trying to say in as few characters what these programs do, and how. And getting "sign off" from the people who developed the idea.

Maybe it would encourage them to explain their work more clearly.