Transcript Document
Emma Miller JIT/University of Strathclyde ESRC project funded one year from November 2013 • Edinburgh, Strathclyde and Swansea Universities • Eight practice partners – Angus, Bridgend, East Ren CHCP, Edinburgh, Penumbra, Moray, Stirling and Clacks, VOCAL • Alliance, CCBN, JIT, SSIA Action research, mentoring, data retreats Why focus on qualitative data on outcomes? • People using services and carers can’t tell their story by ticking boxes – Outcomes more meaningful than satisfaction – Semi structured approach inclusive • Organisations need to understand what works, for whom, when and why • Organisations need to evidence the outcomes of complex interventions • Qual or quant? Richer picture obtained by combining • A key challenge is performance frameworks dominated by easier to measure PFIs and targets • Allowing statistical system based requirements to drive the agenda, distorts practice Risks of managerialism • OBPM distorts the behaviour of frontline staff, to the detriment of the people they are supposed to serve. Keevers et al. (2012) looked at the ‘before and after’ of how the introduction of a results-based accountability (RBA) approach affected the practices of frontline staff within social support organizations. Following the introduction of an RBA reporting system, staff were found to spend time collecting and analysing data about young people, rather than spend time developing and maintaining the quality of relationships with young people. Lowe (2013) The paradox of outcomes: the more we measure, the less we understand Benefits Although qualitative data cannot solve problems of causal connections, it is helpful where there is ambiguity (Silverman, 2010) and can improve understanding of different contributions towards outcomes, with several advantages: = • The individual’s contribution to their outcomes can be recognised and acknowledged, supporting a more enabling service culture • The role that practitioners play, including the value of listening and supporting, can be recognised and acknowledged, reinforcing good practice • There is also potential to improve understanding of how different agencies contribute towards different outcomes, and to the same outcome for an individual, with potential to encourage a more collaborative approach. IRISS guide (2013) PERSON CENTRED PRACTICE TO DELIVER OUTCOMES (Adapted from model by Slasberg 2013) INCREASING CONTRIBUTION OF THE PERSON The person is able to articulate their thinking Support the person with process issues The person has communication support needs Supports the person to communicate outcomes The person has cognitive support needs Supports the person to communicate outcomes, supplemented by other sources The person has limited capacity Creates assessment and support plan based on other sources with maximum use of observations INCREASING CONTRIBUTION OF THE PRACTITIONER, INCL OBSERVATIONS JIT qualitative data workshop: Aims of the day • Provide practical introduction to qualitative analysis of data on outcomes • Opportunity to work through the analysis process • Provide framework of skills and understanding to move forward from • To be pragmatic! • With analysis, trying to ‘really listen’ and set aside usual assumptions and service lens, even temporarily Learning Outcomes By the end of the session participants will: • Develop basic understanding of the theory and practice of qualitative research • Organise qualitative data using a simple outcomes coding framework • Identify themes emerging from qualitative data on outcomes • Think about how to report qualitative data, based on an outline reporting framework Feedback from participants • 14 / 18 understanding much improved • 10 / 18 confidence much improved • Key messages = just do it! Keep writing • Most useful = groupwork, taking reasonable leaps, working through to reporting, coding, coding to theory • Running again early 2014