1 single assessment procedure promoting the independence of vulnerable older people (pivop) steve...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Single Assessment Procedure Promoting the Independence of Vulnerable Older People (PIVOP)
Steve Batley
Project Director PIVOP
Wirral, Woking and Surrey
2
What is the FAME Programme?
• Generic framework for information sharing
• National initiative to improve the provision of services to citizens
• Funded by ODPM
• Information Sharing
– Relevant, timely
– Quality, Not duplicated
– Protocol
• Flexible
• Scalable
• Cost effective
• Technology independent
• Multiple vendors involved
What is PIVOP?• Promoting Independence
of Vulnerable Older People
• One of the seven fame strands or workstreams
• Development of a Single Assessment Process
3
Who are our partners?
FAMEPIVOP
-Woking BC-SHAW PCT-N Surrey PCT-ASP Hospital-SCC NW ACC-GP ‘s W Byfleet HC-CIBER UK
-Older people 65+-Adults complex needs
ProgrammeOffice
ODPMNewcastleUniversity
Strategic Health Authorities
-Wirral MBC-Wallasey/Birkenhead PCT-Bebington/W.Wirral PCT-Wirral Hospital Trust-Cheshire/Wirral P/shipMental Health Trust-Age Concern-Liquid Logic
4
WIRRAL MBC
WOKING BC
Unitary
Two Tier
EASY CARELIQUID LOGIC
FACECIBER UK
Vendor NeutralDifferent Political
Structures
5
How is the project governed?
Wirral FAMEPIVOP
WokingFAMEPIVOP
Programme Board
Joint ProjectBoard
LocalSteeringGroup
Local SteeringGroup
7
What is our vision?
More joined up
More person centred More
responsive
Continue to improve the services we provide to older people
Germane to other service areas
8
What did we need to do?
PARTNERS AGREED WE
SHOULD HAVE
A shared and morecomprehensive
multi agency viewof the
older person and their needs
A faster and more secureway for the partnersto access and share
each others information
9
How were we doing?
A shared and morecomprehensive multi agency
viewof the older person
and their needs Information
collected, recorded and storedseparately
Older personfrequently asked
for the sameinformation
Service providers have single view of the older person
Service uncoordinated
and ‘silo’ based
10
How were we doing?
A faster and more secureway to access
and share information
Information shared by fax
telephone or snail mail Information
sharingnot secure and often
incomplete
Information cantake some timeto reach other
partners
11
What are we doing about it?
A shared and morecomprehensive view
of the older person’s needs
Information collected, recorded
and storedin the same way
Older personless likely to
be askedfor the sameinformation
Service providers have a shared view of the older person
Service providersare more informed
about needs
Developing and implementing
Single Assessment Process
12
What are we doing about it?
A faster and more secureway to access
and share information
Electronically Securely Timely
Providing a technology solution that enables information about older
people to be stored, accessed and shared: -
13
Information Sharing Protocol
• Based on premise that consent is given• Telephone or written consent ok• ISP agreed by partners and is specific to the
project• Compliant with DPA/FOI• Staff given guidance during training• Will form part of the evaluation and learning
14
Rational for electronic SAP
• Generic to provision of both health and social care services
• Provides a shared view of the service user• Supports the generic framework for
information sharing• Improves business processes and workflow• Supports the achievement of NSF target• Addresses one of the e-gov key priority areas• Principles could be used in other service
areas• Benefits all health, social care and housing
partners • Benefits service users
15
Development and Implementation
• Followed the 12 steps of SAP implementation• Involved service practitioners• Use of DoH accredited SAP tool agreed• Processes to define ‘as is’ and ‘to be’ processes• Governance overseen by Steering Group• Need to be aware of national SAP developments• Need to be aware and take account of NPfIT• Project led – Prince 2• Information sharing protocol agreed• Technical architecture and levels of security agreed
16
Lessons Learnt
• Engage technical partners early• Engaging practitioners secured ‘buy in’ and
commitment• Identify key influences• Do not underestimate impact of national
developments• There is no one single agenda• Private sector skills are vital• Project managers need new skills beyond project
management• Define and agree outcomes early – will help to
identify what success looks like?• Identify ‘champions’
17
What other considerations did we make ?
• Work with legacy systems and processes• Changes to internal processes and
procedures was a matter for individual partners
• Good practice, e.g. retaining telephone contact was recognised
• Use of DoH accredited SAP tool agreed
18
What is the overall effect?
ElectronicSAP
Consent given
Shared view
Co-ordinateservice
Help informcare Plan
Improveworkflow
Potential forother services
EfficientEffective
Improveservice
delivery and outcomes
Secureimmediateelectronic
19
What are the next steps?
• Evaluate pilot• Promote wider roll out• Documented products for wider dissemination and
adoption: -– Process definition
– Business requirements
– Business Case
– Process maps/workflows
– Technical specification and framework
– Road map and case studies
– Implementation plan
– Local evaluation