1 / 31

“Agreeing the Challenge” LA Champions Workshop 13 th June 2013

Improving the Quality and Take-Up of Personal Budgets and Direct Payments: ADASS West Midlands Personalisation Project. “Agreeing the Challenge” LA Champions Workshop 13 th June 2013. Workshop Objectives. Develop a common understanding Validate the baseline, issues & barriers

keely
Download Presentation

“Agreeing the Challenge” LA Champions Workshop 13 th June 2013

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. Improving the Quality and Take-Up of Personal Budgets and Direct Payments: ADASS West Midlands Personalisation Project “Agreeing the Challenge” LA Champions Workshop 13thJune 2013

  2. Workshop Objectives • Develop a common understanding • Validate the baseline, issues & barriers • Prioritise the work of the Project • Develop the project’s Performance Model

  3. Workshop Plan • Objectives for today • About the Project • Performance Baseline • Issues, Barriers & Improvement Priorities • Making it Real Plans • Measuring Performance • What Next?

  4. About the Project

  5. Context • Perceived under-performance against national benchmarks – PB uptake • Determination to ensure that PBs and DPs have a positive impact on people (quality of life) • Low level of commitment to Making it Real • Need to demonstrate that the sector is able to fix its own problems (Sector led improvement)

  6. Project Approach • Performance Baseline – uptake & quality • Performance measurement approaches • Issues & Barriers • Good Practice • Making it Real sign-up status & plans • Priorities for Improvement • Turning the priorities into actions • Research • Twinning & Peer Support Networks • Local Improvement Pilots • MIR Support • Evaluation • Benefits Management arrangements • Operational Ownership to embed Pilots • Ongoing peer support • Sector Led Improvement

  7. Your Role? Project Support local improvements Operational Teams in LAs Make changes Deliver local improvements Enable better outcomes

  8. Your Role Project Support local improvements Champions Understand Inform Liaise Influence Shape Test Assure Promote Share Operational Teams in LAs Make changes Deliver local improvements Enable better outcomes

  9. Performance baseline

  10. Issues • Is it bad numbers or poor practice? • How do we compare with others? • “Helped to Live at Home” legacy • Counting and DefinitionsDifferent interpretations across the region • What’s included? What’s not? • Original 100% PB target • Revised target of 70%

  11. What should be “in”??? • “Only services provided as the result of a Community Care Assessment (carried out under section 47 of the NHS and Community Care Act 1990) should be included in RAP” • Excludes: • Services at point of contact (e.g. equipment) • Reablement (pre CCA) • Self-funded signposted services e.g. meals

  12. Performance Baseline

  13. ZBR will make it clearer • Changes in 2014-15 • Differentiates between Short and Long-Term Services • Clearer what would be eligible for PB

  14. Performance Baseline

  15. Issues, barriers & improvement priorities

  16. Issues & Barriers

  17. Improvement Priorities

  18. Making it real

  19. Making it Real • Progress since Project Launch: • 3 more LAs have signed up to MIR and 1 has completed its Shared Learning • Key Considerations: • Does your LA understand what’s involved? • What would help move your LA from its current position?

  20. Measuring performance

  21. How should we Measure “Performance”? • ASCOF measure is not telling the proper story • Too much ‘noise’ from non-eligible services • Local indicator is nearer to the truth (?) • Based on eligible services • Still wide variation – counting or practice? • Some councils at/near 100%

  22. What does “Good” look like? • What is a Personal Budget? • Statement of value of care package? • RAS allocation? • When is a PB not a PB? • Not self-directed? • “Council-managed” • What is the ‘added value’ for service users? • How can we measure “Success”?

  23. “Making it Real” Self-Assessment TASC Domains

  24. Comparison of TLAP strengths

  25. MIR self-assessment • Strengths: • Consistent: comparison to earlier baseline exercise • Recognised (and promoted) by TLAP • Can be used selectively (2 or 3 domains) • Weaknesses • Subjective – based on opinion • No ‘hard’ numbers • Where is the Service User voice?

  26. How? • What is the best way to represent achievement? • Are there better measures that we can capture effectively? • Do we need case-level research? • Your ideas, please!

  27. what’s next?

  28. Workshop Objectives • Develop a common understanding • Validate the baseline, issues & barriers • Prioritise the work of the Project • Develop the project’s Performance Model

  29. What’s Next? • Present priorities list and performance model to project board for approval • Confirm and mobilise agreed improvement projects • Follow-up event in Autumn (Sept / Oct) to discuss progress & share learning • Slides & outputs from today will be posted to: www.marketshaping.co.uk/personalisation

More Related