1 / 24

Results/Outcomes Based Accountability

Results/Outcomes Based Accountability. Based on the Work of Mark Friedman ‘ Trying Hard is Not Good Enough ’ (Working smarter not harder). RBA is. A way of thinking and working to improve quality of lives for communities (population)

cornelius
Download Presentation

Results/Outcomes Based Accountability

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Results/Outcomes Based Accountability Based on the Work of Mark Friedman ‘Trying Hard is Not Good Enough’ (Working smarter not harder)

  2. RBA is • A way of thinking and working to improve • quality of lives for communities (population) • performance of services / agencies (performance) • Development of measures to be able to demonstrate success

  3. Leaking Roof ? Fixed Outcome thinking in everyday life The Leaking Roof Experience: Not OK Inches of Water Result: Measure: Turning the Curve Story behind the baseline (causes): Partners: What Works: Action Plan:

  4. Population • Where a group of partners take on the responsibility for the well being of a population in a geographical area • Neglected children in Oxfordshire • Families affected by DV in Oxfordshire

  5. Principles • Know where you are and where you want to be • Simple well understood language • Use data wisely • Devise a simple plan – low cost / no cost • Making change happen – talk to actions • Be more ambitious about less • Conditioning • Timing • Tipping point

  6. Population Questions • What are the quality of life conditions we want for children who live in our community • What would this look like if we could see them • How can we measure these conditions • How are we doing on the most important measures • Who are the partners that have a role • What works • What do we propose to do about it

  7. Talk to Action Which Population Results Experience Data Story behind Partners What Works Strategy

  8. Performance • A manager or group of managers take on responsibility of a program, agency or service • OSCB • Training Subgroup • M & E Subgroup

  9. Questions • Who are our customers • How can we measure if our customers are better off • How are we doing on the most important measures • Who are the partners that have a role to play • What works • What do we propose to do?

  10. Performance Measurement How much did we do? (Quantity) How well did we do it? (Quality) • Customers Served • Activities • % Common Measure • Workload ratio, staff turnover, staff morale, % staff trained • Did we treat you well • Activity-specific measures • %of actions timely and correct • % of clients completing actions • % of clients meeting standards Is anyone better off? % Skills / Knowledge achievements, test scores, participants in training who show improved skills % Attitude / Opinion customers who believe the service helped them with their problems % Behavior % Circumstances

  11. Not All Performance Measures Are Created Equal Quality Quantity How well did we do it? How much did we do? LeastImportant Least 2nd MostImportant Effect Effort Is anyone better off? Most Important

  12. Proposed National Indicator Set How well did we do it? How much did we do? % of initial assessments for children’s social care carried out within 10 working days % of core assessments for children’s social care that are carried out within 35 working days of commencement % of child protection plans lasting 2 years or more % of child protection cases which were reviewed within required timescale % of referrals to children’s social care going on to initial assessment % of applications for care proceedings which have been assessed as incomplete Children’s social worker vacancy rate Children’s social worker turnover rate Numbers of CAF Number of referrals Did it make a difference? Population: % increase of children and young people who have suffered unintentional/deliberate injuries or preventable deaths % children who report they feel safer Performance: % children becoming the subject of child protection plan for a second or subsequent time

  13. Possible Additions to National Indicator Set on Safeguarding How well did we do it? How much did we do? % of initial assessments within 10 working days % of core assessments for children’s social care carried out within 35 working days of commencement % of child protection plans lasting 2 years or more % of child protection plans reviewed within time scales % of applications for care proceedings deemed as incomplete by the courts service % social worker vacancy rate %social worker turnover rate % complaints % surveyed families saying service was delivered in a respectful and timely manner Number of children with children’s plans Did it make a difference? Population % of children who report that they feel safer % reduction in children referred for physical, emotional and sexual abuse and neglect % increase of children who have suffered unintentional/deliberate injuries or preventable deaths Performance of agencies: % of children subject to CP Plan for a second or subsequent time % of children’s plans whose recommendations have been successfully implemented % reduction of children with CP Plans % children receiving CP services reporting they feel safer as a result of services % parents who say as a result of intervention that their parenting has improved % of children whose risks are reduced as a result of intervention and are removed from children’s plans within 6 months

  14. Measuring OSCB Performanceusing Results Based Accountability

  15. Proposal • Needs to be a combination of: • Population (welfare of children in a defined area ie neglect strategy, dv strategy, parental misuse strategy) • Performance (improving agency performance) ie Subgroups and OSCB agencies

  16. Suggested Desired Results • Safer Today - focussing on child protection work and things that affect immediate child safety • Better Tomorrow – Wider safeguarding issues ie bullying e safety – accidents • gangs

  17. OSCB Results Accountability Model TSG QA&A Procedures LSCB Children and YP are ‘Safer Today’ CSC Neglect Sub misuse Health DV TVP Subgroup Performance Agency Performance Population

  18. OSCB Results Accountability Model Early Years CDOP Children and YP are ‘Better Tomorrow’ CSC Bullying E safety Health Safe workforce TVP Subgroup Performance Agency Performance Population

  19. Possible Local Performance Measures for LSCBs How well did we do it? How much did we do? % of Members attending regularly % of Members stating their satisfaction with meetings % serious case reviews considered % recommendations in training plan implemented % recommendations in Reports agreed Identifiable progress achieved on business plan % agreed recommendations reviewed on a regular basis Number of meetings Numbers attending LSCBs Numbers of items considered Frequency of meetings Numbers of sub committees established Progress on business plan Did it make a difference? Population: % of children who report that they feel safer % reduction in children referred for physical, emotional and sexual abuse and neglect % hospital admissions caused by unintentional or deliberate injuries Performance: % of children whose risks have been reduced and who are taken off their children’s plan within 6 month % of children receiving child protection services reporting that they feel safer % reduction of children with Child Protection Plans % Children's Plans which have been successfully implemented % of parents who report that services have improved the parenting of their children % children becoming the subject of Child Protection Plans for second or subsequent time

  20. Safeguarding: Keeping Children Safe from Neglect How much did we do? (Quantity) How well did we do it? (Quality) • Number of agencies using neglect checklist • Number of agencies that use CAF • Number of children receiving early intervention • Number of children subject to protection plans for neglect • Assessments completed within timescale, e.g. 10 days for initial assessment etc • % of families saying they have been well treated • % of production of definitions and guidance on neglect • % of production of multi-agency training procedures relating to neglect • % of multi agency staff expressing satisfaction with the provision of staff training • % of recommendations implemented from serious case reviews Is anyone better off? • Population: • % reduction of children referred for neglect • % of children who say they feel well cared for • Performance: • % of homes that are clean and safe, including child’s bed • % of child that are clean and dressed appropriately for the weather • % of generally healthy children • % of children with good language development • % of children that do not run away • % of children engaging positively with care giver • % of children and young people saying they feel safer

More Related