ICS-HE Project Overview

1. Preparing health professionals for work in integrated children services Hilary Burgess Project Chair ICS-HE

2. ICS-HE Project Overview • Integrated Children’s Services in Higher Education (ICS-HE), funded HEFCE through HEA. Partners: • HEA Subject Centres for: • Education (ESCalate), • Psychology, • Medicine, Dentistry and Veterinary Medicine (MEDEV), • Health Sciences and Practice (HS&P), • Social Policy and Social Work (SWAP), • Children’s Workforce Development Council (CWDC). • Children's Workforce Network (CWN).

3. Education, Early Years, Social Work, Nursing, Midwifery, Other allied health professions, Psychology, Youth and Community, Careers, Medicine, Police, Probation. Relevant disciplines and professions

4. Intended Project Outcomes • Raising awareness of the evolving agenda in children’s services for HE staff working across the disciplines and professions, • Identifying examples of emergent practice for integrated provision in HE, • Identifying barriers to change & ways to overcome these, • Promoting collaboration between disciplines, • Contributing to knowledge generation about IPE in this arena, • Promoting dialogue between HE and Sector Skills Councils.

5. Policy context • Laming Inquiry (2003) into death of Victoria Climbie, • Every Child Matters (2003) and The Children Act (2004), • Children’s Trusts and The Children’s Plan (DCSF 2007: 17), • National Service Framework for forChildren, Young People and Maternity Services (2004+2006), • Youth Matters (2006), • Baby P, • CAMHS Review Nov 2008, • Healthy lives, brighter futures: The strategy for children and young people's health (2009) • Etc…

6. Knowledge Review Prof Imogen Taylor, University of Sussex: Research question:What is known about the nature, contexts and participants in IPE in Higher Education Institutions (HEI’s) in England that brings together students from two or more disciplines to contribute to the development of collaborative practice with children, young people and their families?

7. Research Review Key Findings • Learning for integrated children’s services is inadequately conceptualised and theorised; • Variable findings - researchers agree about the logistical challenges of developing interprofessional learning for integrated children’s services; • Dearth of robust evidence about outcomes for students; outcomes for children, young people and families are rarely discussed.

8. Practice Survey in HEIs Scoping study of HE Practice re ICS: on-line and telephone survey (Sept-Dec 2007) of 36 universities (43 interviewees) in England plus one each in Wales and NI. There is a wealth of innovative initiatives at all levels, and primarily at foundation and undergraduate levels, in full programmes, individual modules, practice and work-based learning.

9. Typology of approaches to IPE for ICS-HE • 6: Four types of integrated children’s services provision in HEIs • Interprofessional students and interprofessional staff. • Uniprofessional students and interprofessional staff. • Uniprofessional students and uniprofessional staff teaching interprofessional issues. • Generic non-professional programmes and interprofessional staff.

10. Network Co-ordination and conference Prof Judy McKimm, University of Beds: Commissioned to identify and engage HE bodies, develop networks and plan and coordinate the national conference and dissemination. National conference, Manchester Nov 2007. Web-site: http://icshe.escalate.ac.uk/

11. Enabling factors for ICS-HE • Enthusiastic students. • Entrepreneurial interest, individual commitment. • Senior HEI leadership. • Strategic cross-faculty appointments. • Good external partnerships with stakeholders. • Seed funding (e.g. by HEIs or stakeholders). • Seminar programme to promote and disseminate. • Linked to research. • 7 HEI’s ‘whole system change’ most or all of the above; other HEIs opting for incremental change.

12. Barriers to ICS-HE • Equivocal research findings from existing IPE & mixed views about ‘transferability’ • Variable interpretations by HEI’s of ‘integrated children’s services’ and implications for HE. • Disciplinary ‘silos’ and departmental administrative boundaries. • Lack of suitable space for large groups. • Lack of development time and funding. • Lack of sustained stakeholder support (to make business case). • Lack of synergy between accrediting bodies. • Fast changing, complex policy context and fragmented practice context.

13. Engaging students How can students best be introduced to the notion and practicalities of interprofessional working and the ‘team around the child’? • At pre-registration level • At post-registration levels

14. Engaging staff How might staff be encouraged to develop curricula for interprofessional working and the ‘team around the child’?

15. Engaging with local agencies How might this best be achieved?

16. Recommendations (1) • Government should involve HE as strategic partners in researching, developing and implementing policy & practice for the ICS workforce, nationally & regionally; • Universitiesshould strengthen their links with SSCs and employers and appoint ICS coordinators; • Regulatory bodies should explore collaboration, building on initiatives like the Joint Statement of interprofessional values underpinning work with children and young people (GTC, GSCC, NMC);

17. Recommendations (2) • Professional bodies should commission initiatives; • Employers, supported by government should collaborate with universities to develop programmes with a sustainable and robust business case; • Children, young people and families should be supported to contribute to learning, teaching and assessment;

18. Recommendations (3) • Research funders should targetfundingto ensure a robust evidence-base and to develop the conceptual and theoretical base essential to learning for ICS; • The Higher Education Academy and Subject Centres should extend the dissemination of the ICS-HE project across disciplines and stakeholder groups, and support educators through information exchanges and briefings.