Search results

This review reflects on current progress with person‐centred planning from the perspective of the Valuing People Support Team, and raises some of the challenges being faced. It reminds us that planning is not a panacea and must be used as part of broader strategies to bring about person‐centred services and supports which can help people get the lives they want. Finally, suggested priorities for key groups are proposed and linked to future assistance from the Valuing People Support Team.

Person‐centred planning is central to Valuing People. This has resulted in lots of planning activity, but implementing plans in services is deeply challenging. Developing person‐centred teams is a key to implementing plans. This article presents a model for developing person‐centred teams based on research. Examples of how teams worked to implement plans are shown to illustrate this process and clarify why it requires a change in thinking as well as a change in practice.

Recent research (Robertson et al, 2005) has demonstrated that person‐centred planning (PCP) leads to positive changes for people. This research shows how PCP is associated with benefits in the areas of community involvement, contact with friends, contact with family and choice. This paper briefly describes this research and its recommendations. In addition it explores the implications for managers and professionals supporting people with learning disabilities.

This article considers some of the issues raised by an evaluation of facilitated person‐centred planning (PCP) for six people with severe and complex learning disabilities residing in a long‐stay hospital. The hospital is earmarked for closure, and all six are to be resettled. Using a realist approach, evaluators explored such questions as whether the views of people with severe learning disabilities had been accessed, what makes PCP person‐centred and who should participate in a plan. These questions raised awareness of the effect of timescales and a selective training programme in relation to PCP, and the impact this has had on effective person‐centred planning.

This chapter reports on a hybrid sector of disability provision in Australia and the changes to the sector due to the shift to person-centred care in Australia. It explains the significant changes to the way the sector will respond to government and to client demands and how the organisations are responding to this by re-structuring and building new performance measurement systems including Social Return on Investment.

The first part of the chapter is descriptive of the change to person-centred care in the Australian disability sector using public reports. The second part of the chapter looks at the change at a micro level using an analysis of the literature.

Findings illustrate how the National Disability Insurance Scheme has brought about significant change between sectors of government and between providers, both government and non-government. Organisations have had to make significant changes to adapt to the government’s policy and especially funding change. This includes setting new governance and leadership models, changed human resource management practices and performance measurement systems.

The paper is a report relatively early in the transition phases, and therefore, more evidence is needed as the system change progresses. Still, the Australian disability sector provides a powerful example of significant hybridisation changes as a result of a shift to person-centred care.

This is a dramatic change from the Australian government to impose person-centred care. The adaptations of Australian organisations provide an interesting insight for the international community.

This mainly conceptual paper summarises the current conceptualisation of personalisation as it applies to people with learning disabilities. It goes on to map out how the drive towards the personalisation of services, its most recent iterations of person‐centred planning, person‐centred funding and person‐centred action, contributes to a better quality of life for people with intellectual disabilities, using the domains and indicators of quality of life set out in the Schalock et al (2002) international consensus. In doing so it describes what you would see in services where person‐centred approaches were being successfully implemented.

Capture, consumption and use of person-centred information presents challenges for hospitals when operating within the scope of limited resources and the push for organisational routines and efficiencies. This paper explores these challenges for patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) and the examination of information that supports successful hospital discharge. It aims to determine how the likelihood of readmission may be prevented through the capturing of rich, person-specific information during in-patient care to improve the process for discharge to home.

The authors combine four research data collection and analysis techniques: one, an analysis of the patient record; two, semi-structured longitudinal interviews; three, an analysis of the patient's journey using process mining to provide analytics about the discharge process, and four, a focus group with nurses to validate and confirm our findings.

The authors’ contribution is to show that information systems which support discharge need to consider models focused on individual patient stressors. The authors find that current discharge information capture does not provide the required person-centred information to support a successful discharge. Data indicate that rich, detailed information about the person acquired through additional nursing assessments are required to complement data provided about the patient's journey in order to support the patients’ post-discharge recovery at home.

Prior research has focused on information collection constrained by pre-determined limitations and barriers of system design. This work has not considered the information provided by multiple sources during the whole patient journey as a mechanism to reshape the discharge process to become more person-centred. Using a novel combination of research techniques and theory, the authors have shown that patient information collected through multiple channels across the patient care journey may significantly extend the quality of patient care beyond hospital discharge. Although not assessed in this study, rich, person-centred discharge information may also decrease the likelihood of patient readmission.

Valuing People (DoH, 2001) proposes person‐centred planning (PCP) as a way for service users to exercise more power and control. Active support (AS) is also an approach designed to improve the quality of life of people with severe disabilities by enabling them to participate as fully as possible in daily activities. PCP and some of the components of AS are complementary rather than mutually exclusive. While PCP can generate ideas, AS can help implement them, and used together PCP and AS can provide a way to facilitate user participation and improve users' quality of life. This paper uses a case history to illustrate this potential, and describes how a particular form of PCP, essential lifestyle planning (ELP), was used in conjunction with some of the planning and programming components of AS.

This response agrees with Stuart Cumella that it is reasonable to challenge the priority accorded by government to people with learning disabilities and to question the power of the mechanisms for implementation of Valuing People. At the same time, however, it argues for a mature political approach, encouraging the taking of opportunities that are available and the shaping of structures and initiatives which are part of the implementation arrangements. Finally, it challenges Cumella's interpretation of person‐centred planning and seeks to offer some clarity on best use of person‐centred approaches.

This article describes a project that explored the views, experiences and aspirations of young people with Down's Syndrome and their family carers. Each young person had gone or was going through the transition to adulthood. Following a scoping study, young people who were leading the lives of their choice, for example through use of person‐centred planning or direct payments, were interviewed, and their stories were published in a booklet. The next phase brought other young people and their families together in workshops to support them in planning for their future, based on the information from the booklet. Interviews with the young people and their families dispelled the myth that parents are obstacles to progress and change. All families actively supported their son or daughter to achieve their aspirations and had high expectations for them.