June 07
Supporting People – Outcomes Monitoring Framework
Pre-Pilot Workshop
Page 2
Presentation Structure
Finding a sustainable model Background to the research Methodology Existing models – distance travelled Existing models – hard outcomes Conclusions Issues influencing model design
Matrix Model – How it works Outcomes matrix Monitoring data Assessment and scoring Reporting
Page 3
Background to research
Research aim:“To find a model that can be introduced consistently at local authority level, to capture useful information locally, that can then be used as a means of public and ministerial reporting nationally.”
Research objectives:
To recommend and outcomes model that: could be introduced consistently at local level provides useful info for national public and ministerial reporting measures outcomes for individual clients measures impacts of the programme across LAs does not place excessive data collection burdens sets out responsibilities of stakeholders – e.g LAs, providers, clients
Page 4
Methodology
Literature and document review
Consultation: Angus Edinburgh Dumfries & Galloway East Ayrshire South Ayrshire
Follow-up of leads: Scottish Executive – Joint Futures,
Justice, Local Government, Education & SW, GIRFEC Evaluation
DCLG English models – Yorkshire &
Humberside, Greater Manchester NHS
Images from Supporting People website
Page 5
Existing Models – Distance travelledStrengthsAssesses quality of outcome for individual
Client’s endorsement of the assessment
Shows progress over time on individual basis
Client centred approach
Can be linked to individual client review process / needs assessment
Operational tool for service providers
Good practice needs assessment tool
Potentially relatively straightforward to record
WeaknessesSubjective judgement at local and national level
Given above, issue of comparability of results across Scotland
Impact of distance travelled lost by averages
Time consuming if over and above any existing assessment process
How integrate with a cross-government initiative
If paper systems used will be cumbersome and does not allow for sharing of information across agencies
Page 6
Existing Models – Hard outcomesStrengthsProvides count of hard outcome
If clear about definition of individual outcome should avoid subjectivity
Consistency at local and national level
Therefore can compare benefit of SP across Scotland
Snapshot indicator of performance at service and LA level to trigger discussions
IT systems – opportunity for comprehensive database and sharing client information
May be easier to integrate cross-government initiative
WeaknessesMay or may not require client endorsement
Does not provide evidence of quality of experience for individual
Provides a snapshot rather than tracking gradual progress over time
Temptation to move into measuring process and ‘busy-ness’ of services
Time consuming if over and above any existing assessment process
IT systems – if comprehensive database approach taken will mean considerable lead in and buy-in process - therefore time and cost
Page 7
Summary and Conclusions
Summary Relative infancy of outcomes measurement across central/local govnt Plethora of outcome agenda discussions underway Two routes – distance travelled and hard outcomes
Conclusions Distance travelled model preferred DTZ asked to develop model based on CEC model Modified to allow measurement of change over time Need to allow for reporting at the national level
Page 8
Issues Influencing Design
Lack of baseline
Lack of counterfactual
Variations in outcomes
Consistency in assessment
Attribution to Supporting People
Images from Supporting People website
Page 9
Demonstration of Model
Outcomes matrix
Monitoring data
Assessment and scoring
Reporting
Images from Supporting People website
Top Related