Staff Professor Richard C.
D A little bit about myself first. Whilst not completely informal, this blog will be less academic than a written essay as a way of appealing to readers. This work is original, and any sources I have used are referenced.
This well overdue way of working has only in recent years been highlighted as a crucial expectation in the support of individuals. Can everybody within a partnership still work in a way which permits their own expertise and unique identity to be recognised?
I think the answer is yes…. However this can only be achieved if each stakeholder in the collaboration is working to their full potential. There are no shortage of examples — we see and hear about poor care in the news and in the media all the time. Illustrated below are some examples of how this may occurbut this list is by no means exhaustive.
Conflicting personalities within the team. The Duplication of tasks. Lack of accountability from professionals.
The individual has many complex issues which have not been clearly defined. Prejudice or discrimination from members of the team. Members of the partnership have different perspectives on how outcomes should be achieved.
Poor understanding of job responsibilities Lack of information sharing. This might be considered problematic in itself given that partnerships have assumed a central role in many areas of public policy.
Partnerships are difficult to evaluate effectively and evaluations involve a series of trade-offs regarding what sort of coverage is gained, whose perspectives to involve and the main focus of the study.
Models of Partnership Working Partnership working is mentioned in almost every policy and piece of legislation surrounding health and social care. To achieve this, Partnership Boards should review the role and function of community learning disability teams in order to ensure that: The newer models of collaborative work appear to have a more succinct definition with clearer guidelines and expectations.
The Hybrid Model Hybrid organisations are seen as blurring the boundaries among the private, public and third sectors; they are businesses with primarily social objectives whose surpluses are reinvested to address a social or environmental need Kelly Hall, An example of this hybridity could be an individual who, due to changes in the law or out of personal choice receives some of their care package funded via the county council, and pays a personal contribution to cover the outstanding cost of their support or care.
The Bill gives clear descriptors of who is responsible for what and states that: Any extra care costs, for example if they choose a more expensive care option Support not covered in the care and support package gardeners, cleaners a contribution to general living costs if they are in a care home, if they can afford it.
General living costs reflect the costs that people would have to meet if they were living in their own home — such as for food, energy bills and accommodation. The Government is responsible for: The choice between having a clean and dirty home?
The Care Bill goes on to say: There are of course huge benefits to being able to choose a private care provider.
The individual is able to exercise their autonomy and choose a setting which they feel is perfectly suited to them.
There is less likely to be dissatisfaction if provision has been chosen by the individual and often a faster and more convenient transfer process. Professionals from different agencies assess separately the needs of the individual, but meet together to discuss their findings and set goals.
The focus of service delivery will be multi-agency and coordination of services across agencies is achieved by a multi-agency panel or task group. A good outcome for the individual is almost entirely dependent upon good communication taking place.
This becomes more complex within a partnership as each stakeholder is required to convey their own strategy, and take into account those of the other team members.
The Codes of Practice for Social Care Workers advise that members of a partnership should recognise and respect the roles of other agencies working alongside them and that communication should be open, appropriate, accurate and straightforward General Social Care Council, This equates to good relationships and effective communication.Outcome 2 Be able to maximise the rights and choices of individuals with dementia The learner can: 1.
demonstrate that the best interests of an individual with dementia are considered when planning and delivering care and support.
The Anthony Toby Homes Trust. The Anthony Toby Homes Trust was founded in by a group of people working in the learning disability field, together with family members. 2 Be able to maximise the rights and choices of individuals with dementia Considering the best interests of an individual with dementia when and agreed ways of working that support the fulfilment of rights and choices of individuals with dementia while minimising risk of harm.
What is a Coordinated Model? “Services work together in a planned and systematic manner towards shared and agreed goals” (Rose, )”. “Individuals remain in separate organisations and locations but develop formal ways of working across boundaries” (Leathard, ). CP/PL BRAIN AND SPINAL INJURY CENTRE The Brain And Spinal Injury Centre (BASIC) is a specialist resource for people and their families following a traumatic brain injury or neurological diagnosis.
This includes people recovering from severe head injury, brain haemorrhage, brain tumour and other brain-related conditions such as stroke and brain cancer. People and ideas systems As outlined by Andrew Roberts of Middlesex University, London.
Introductory sketches of the ideas of theorists, linked to Andrew Roberts' book Social Science History and the Society and Science History caninariojana.comped from a course document "Outline of the theorists we could cover" (February ), the web page was created offline before