Accreditation System for Training & Trainers in ASD: a work in progress

1. Accreditation System for Training & Trainers in ASD: a work in progress Anna Robinson robinson@autism-in-scotland.org.uk Charlene Tait charlene.tait@strath.ac.uk

2. Background to Project • Funded for 2 years by Scottish Government: Why SSA & NCAS? • National training framework • Development of ASD awards - PDA in SVQ framework • Range of training on offer delivered by a range of providers

3. National training framework

5. Phases of the Project • Phase 1: Consultation & development of standards • Phase 2: Pilot groups “test out” standards • Phase 3: Translation of the levels; rework standards, indicators & evidence • Phase 4: Development of portfolio pathways & CPD; ATAS “goes live”

6. Why Accreditation? Our Hypothesis Proposal stage: • Security – for purchasers, providers, consumers • The potential impact on individuals with ASD-in terms of improved standards in service delivery • “Standardisation” – in terms of quality • Contributes to a common body of knowledge across a range of practitioners involved with people with ASD • Complimentary to and supportive of other forms of regulation

7. Key Strands • Accreditation of training providers – courses, materials etc • Accreditation of trainers • Accreditation of training/CPD portfolios

8. Pre-consultation thinking Perceived Issues: • Cost • Process • Content • Independence - accrediting body

9. The Consultation Process • Why Consultation? • 6 consultation events – 88 participants • Consultation by invitation • On line consultation questionnaire • Feedback informing development of accreditation system

10. Focused Consultation Key areas investigated: • Need for accreditation • Process of accreditation – rigour • What should be evaluated? – components • How should training be evaluated?

11. Consultation Event Methods: • Presentation – baseline of information • Small group discussion – scribe • Tasks related to key areas

12. Consultation Outcomes Explored the findings: • Feedback reviewed • Key themes identified • “Rogue” issues emerged

13. Consultation Themes • Perspectives • Quality assurance & Positive impact (12) • Costs (11) • Independent & who’s accrediting? (8) • Duplication (5) • Parent professional difference (2) • Professionalism / exclusivity (2) / Why specialism (1)

14. Consultation Themes The System: content • system’s remit (7) • ethical practice (4) • robust (3) • Training levels (3) structure • ongoing (reaccreditation) process (10) • Direct observation & assessment (9) • Trainers profile level (4) • A “merging” system (2) • Registration (2)

15. Consultation Themes The System: other issues • Visual branding (2) / Quality assurance (3) • intrinsic motivators (3) • Possible support process (3) • who’s monitoring & Lead role? (6)

16. Consultation Themes The Standards • Supporting evidence (11) • Trainers credentials & profile level (10) • Theory to practice (7) • Accessibility (5) • ASD specialism (4) • Practice guidelines (3) / Training resource transferability • Multi-agency / collaborative (1)

17. “Rogue Issues” • higher management commitment • Why bother? Assessment of charities • Geographical reach

18. Additional thoughts • Experiential involvement of people with an ASD & ethical practice (6)

19. Interested Parties

20. Training Providers Training Purchasers

21. Post-consultation thinking • Training & service user community receptive to the concept • Confirmation of issues and concerns- consistency of feedback across all 5 groups • Additional areas for final system identified • Initial components of project design affirmed • Standards easily identified- specific indicators more challenging

22. Next Steps • Pilot groups testing model • Development of all key strands • Research efficacy / impact of accredited training to test initial hypothesis