PB-14-03

How can the Disabled Children’s Services National

Indicator be used?

Tuesday 8th December

Overview

1. Introduction and Background

2. What the Indicator Tells Us: National Implications

3. Learning From The Indicator: Local Impact

4. Questions / Comments

Introduction and background

• The indicator looks at parental experiences of services for disabled children and young people aged 0 to 19 in every local authority and primary care trust (PCT) in England. 

• It measures health, education and care & family support services against the core offer standards.

• It is a key performance-measure aimed at improving the quality of services for disabled children.

• There have been two indicator surveys covering the periods of 2008-2009 and 2009-2010.

• It is calculated by a two-stage postal survey sent to parents of disabled children. The first stage is a screening survey, which is used to identify parents and carers of children to take part in the main survey.

Background

Survey TimelineJan 09

Feb 09Mar 09

Apr 09May 09

Jun 09Jul 09

Aug 09Sep 09

Oct 09Nov 09

Dec 09Feb 10

Year 1 screener survey fieldwork

Year 1 Main stage fieldwork

Year 1 Indicator scores published

Year 1 National report published

Year 2 screener survey fieldwork

Year 2 Main stage fieldwork

Year 2 Indicator scores published (TBC)

Year 2 National and local reports published

What the indicator tells us: National Implications

59

1st National score

Indicator scores – Overall 68

75

12

96

60

69

76

22

92

50

60

62

11

86

52

Information

Assessment

Feedback

Transparency

Participation

Health Education Care & Family Suppport

Headline findings from the national survey report 2008-09

• Core offer: Feedback has the lowest overall rating across all three service areas, with Information second lowest; Transparency has the highest rating

• Ethnicity/ Age: no clear pattern by ethnicity (slightly lower scores from mixed race parents); parents of younger children tend to more satisfied than parents of older children

• Service area: parents least satisfied with care & family support services compared to health and education

• More severely disabled: receipt of DLA (especially higher rate) or statement of SEN associated with higher satisfaction levels

• Health condition: depression is associated with lower than average scores; whereas scores were higher than average from parents of children with palliative care needs

Area in which child is affected:illness, disability or condition (%)

19

1

5

5

10

12

13

13

13

13

14

18

18

23

27

31

35

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Other condition

Palliative Care

Consciousness

Depression

Hearing

hand function

Autism

Incontinence

Medication

Vision

Eating & drinking

Mobility

NO ILLNESS OR CONDITION

Personal care

Communication

Behaviour

Learning

Understanding the data

One fifth reported no illness or condition

About half of this group being treated by medication

Illness / condition was reported at screener survey, therefore included in the sample

3 in 10 parents received DLA on behalf of their child

Exact overlap of SEN and disability is not known. 2011 School Census will provide more information.

Children with SEN were “over sampled”

SEN statements associated with higher levels of satisfaction

42% parents said their child had SEN

Sample sought from a full spectrum of disability

Some estimates suggest 37% of disabled children are DLA recipients; but the exact picture is not known

Receipt of DLA tended to be associated with higher levels of satisfaction (particularly higher rate)

Headlines from qualitative research

‘Lack of services’

‘Poor communication /

information’

Lack of service availability

Inaccessible / inappropriate services

Insufficient quality of services

Lack of awareness

Lack of information about entitlements affects perceived availability and transparency

Lack of communication between services and with families affects views of ‘appropriate services’

What constitutes a ‘good service’

INFORMATION / COMMUNICATION

ACCESSIBILITY

ATTITUDE OF PROFESSIONALS

CO-ORDINATION OF SERVICES

TRUST IN SYSTEM

GOOD SERVICE

Learning from the indicator : Local Impact

What the local reports provide

• An overall indicator score• Local score sub-indicator

scores against core offer and service area

• A detailed analysis of core offer areas

• Additional information – e.g. range of services accessed in health, education and care & family support

• Analysis of free text comments by service area

• Demographics e.g. age, ethnicity and SEN.

What the local reports provide

• An overall indicator score• Local score sub-indicator

scores against core offer and service area

• A detailed analysis of core offer areas

• Additional information – e.g. range of services accessed in health, education and care & family support

• Analysis of free text comments by service area

• Demographics e.g. age, ethnicity and SEN.

What the local reports provide

• An overall indicator score• Local score sub-indicator

scores against core offer and service area

• A detailed analysis of core offer areas

• Additional information – e.g. range of services accessed in health, education and care & family support

• Analysis of free text comments by service area

• Demographics e.g. age, ethnicity and SEN.

What the local reports provide

• An overall indicator score• Local score sub-indicator

scores against core offer and service area

• A detailed analysis of core offer areas

• Additional information – e.g. range of services accessed in health, education and care & family support

• Analysis of free text comments by service area

• Demographics e.g. age, ethnicity and SEN.

What the local reports provide

• An overall indicator score• Local score sub-indicator

scores against core offer and service area

• A detailed analysis of core offer areas

• Additional information – e.g. range of services accessed in health, education and care & family support

• Analysis of free text comments by service area

• Demographics e.g. age, ethnicity and SEN.

What the local reports provide

• An overall indicator score• Local score sub-indicator

scores against core offer and service area

• A detailed analysis of core offer areas

• Additional information – e.g. range of services accessed in health, education and care & family support

• Analysis of free text comments by service area

• Demographics e.g. age, ethnicity and SEN.

What additional information would be useful?

• We are working with the survey contractors to enhance the information provided through the local reports. Some example suggestions include:

Deeper flavour to the report –

include a “typical

comments” section.

Deeper flavour to the report –

include a “typical

comments” section.

Further details from the open

questions.

Further details from the open

questions.

Analysis of disability / condition

especially at top and bottom end of satisfaction.

Analysis of disability / condition

especially at top and bottom end of satisfaction.

Some statistical neighbour and

regional comparisons

statements

Some statistical neighbour and

regional comparisons

statements

Further graphical

presentation e.g. use spider

diagrams etc

Further graphical

presentation e.g. use spider

diagrams etc

How are local areas responding?

Setting up a feedback loop for social care service users

Using reports to lever change at highest strategic

partnership board.

More systematic approach to participation

through parent forums

Training to address

practioners attitudes and

understanding of participation and feedback

Measures to improve core offer

Analysing scores against other

sources of local information – e.g. parents forums,

Disabled Children’s Partnership

Boards, consultation on short breaks etc

Results are a signpost /

direction of travel

Understand scores by talking to

parents –the story behind the numbers

Set a local target – even if it’s not in your LAA

Strategic planning

Developing understanding

Benchmark your performance –

e.g. use of AHDC core offer

implementation tool

Leveraging improvement: Local area engagement

Local authorities and PCTs• Facilitated sessions with LAs and PCTs to draw out

effective practice in use of the indicator• Data for local authorities and PCTs to be published• Use within performance, planning and priority setting e.g.

through Govt Office and SHAs Parents participation as a driver for change:• Together for Disabled Children facilitating parent forums

use of local area scores• Leaflet and materials to support parent participation

produced

Questions / Comments