PB How can the Disabled Children’s Services National Indicator be used? Tuesday 8 th 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 and 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 Timeline Jan 09 Feb 09 Mar 09 Apr 09 May 09 Jun 09 Jul 09 Aug 09 Sep 09 Oct 09 Nov 09 Dec 09 Feb 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 1 st National score

Indicator scores – Overall

Headline findings from the national survey report 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 (%)

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 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. Further details from the open questions. Analysis of disability / condition especially at top and bottom end of satisfaction. Some statistical neighbour and regional comparisons statements 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