Title: The role of support in promoting the social inclusion of persons with intellectual disabilities
Author (s): McConkey R & Collins S
Log: Journal of intellectual disability research, 54, 8, 691-700
Purpose research question (a declared/inferred):
To describe the range of tasks that support staff undertake towards social inclusion of the people they support; to determine the extent to which staff considered these tasks as being applicable to their role and the priority given to the workload and to identify changes in the perception of their role in all three settings for different services staff
Methods:
245 staff recruited day or support residential services across managed by statutory sector, voluntary and private Ireland North sector organization.
40% of employees worked in residential housing or shared; 24% 36% recruitment centres in six days and life support systems.
79% of women 56% aged less than 40 participants.
70% of the full-time contracts with 59% after it was posted less than 5 years.
17% of respondents were in managerial or executive positions.
Developed based on the responses of 44 volunteer staff who attended the discussion groups where they discussed their job tasks and support their perception of the role self-completion questionnaire.
Thematic analysis identified 32 tasks commonly performed by staff-16 which related to the activities of social inclusion.
Personal note: each of the 32 tasks in terms of priority, where 1 = high - must be carried out; 2 = Medium priority - especially gets done and 3 low priority - sometimes gets fact. A fourth option ' does not apply to my job role "has been added with two issues pending improvement of social inclusion of the users of the services."
Conclusions:
Three tasks have been noted as having priority high by 50% or more staff - increase of choice among the activities of the day. help clients become familiar with the local facilities and facilitating clients to maintain contact with their families.
14 of 16 care tasks relate does not social inclusion were recorded by more than 50% of staff as having high priority. The authors found a large variation among their rating, even within the same type of service personnel.
The only significant predictors of staff giving more high median scores on social inclusion that staff in supported living environments were more likely to assess more social inclusion tasks tasks as a priority and those centres were less likely to assess these tasks as a priority day.
Answers to the question open on the ways in which staff assists people they contend with social inclusion on proposed six themes:
• Encourage and accompany the people to take part in social and community activities
• Risk management. assessing health and safety audit accessibility concerns
• Supporting choice. encourage independence and advocating for person
• Promote communication and social skills of persons taken in charge
• Collecting information about the available activities and community liaison
• Providing or help with transport
Interviewed on which would help the staff to do more to allow people argue to join activities and meet people from the community, most responded increases the availability of staff and providing more opportunities for one-to-one support.
Conclusions:
The authors point out some limitations in their study, e.g. personal chose to participate and services had a prior engagement with a project social inclusion. the level of dependency of persons taken in charge has not been evaluated directly.
Staff working in the life support systems appears more likely to give priority to tasks of social inclusion that other media that the authors emphasize staff is online focus on individuals, it is does not clear leaving studies how inclusion social made Beaver known to support life tenant is a product of the attention of the staff to support these results or increased opportunities that provides this kind of service model.
Staff more inclined to tasks such as social inclusion is not applicable to their job was who work day, women's personal care centres and those working on the front rather than officials line.
The authors also found variation among the staff of the same type of service to their ratings on the priority tasks of social inclusion that suggests staff interpret their roles and their priorities differently in the absence of explicit direction and advice service leaders and managers. The authors suggest and social marginalisation of people with learning disabilities may be a systemic aspect of current models of service by relying on qualified and poorly paid staff than their primary supporters.
A result of the study was the development and evaluation of a "-Toolkit" front line to provide resources and strategies to promote greater social inclusion, for example the person engaging in social and community; activities support staff research opportunities for social inclusion, work, recreation and learning opportunities and to recruit new members to their social networks. (The Toolkit is (available on CD-Rom for induction /refresher http://www.trianglehousing.org.uk staff training).)
Summary prepared by NHS evidence of learning specialist collection August 2010
No comments:
Post a Comment