Search results for ‘Subject term:"learning disabilities"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 5 of 5
Quality checking health checks for people with learning disabilities: a way of finding out what is happening locally
- Author:
- PUBLIC HEALTH ENGLAND
- Publisher:
- Public Health England
- Publication year:
- 2017
- Pagination:
- 30
- Place of publication:
- London
This audit tool consists of 6 questions and is designed to support GP practices and those supporting them to improve the uptake and quality of annual health checks, and reduce the health inequalities experienced by people with learning disabilities. It aims to help GP practices to identify good practice and encourage services to improve their practice further, establish whether health checks and primary care services are provided consistently across a geographical area, monitor progress and embed key ‘reasonable adjustments’ within primary care. (Edited publisher abstract)
Learning disabilities and CQC inspection reports
- Author:
- PUBLIC HEALTH ENGLAND
- Publisher:
- Public Health England
- Publication year:
- 2018
- Place of publication:
- London
Investigates the extent to which health care for people with learning disabilities is mentioned within Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection reports of 30 general acute hospitals trusts conducted using the specific questions regarding the care and treatment of people with learning disabilities. The specific questions were introduced by the CQC n 2015. The report examines what issues and reasonable adjustments are reported and whether there are any relationships between comments made in the inspection reports and CQC ratings of the Trusts. It also looks at the extent to which CQC inspection reports mentioned mental capacity or the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) in relation to any group of patients. The findings show that 29 of the 30 trust-wide inspection reports (97 per cent) and 58 of the 61 specific site reports (95 per cent) included at least one mention of people with a learning disability/learning disabilities. Reasonable adjustments commonly mentioned included: flagging or alerts systems, health passports, acute liaison nurses, auditing practice for people with learning disabilities, quiet rooms, easy read information, staff training, and understanding/managing pain. It makes recommendations to the CQC regarding labelling reasonable adjustments, audits, needs of people with autism (with and without learning disabilities), alerts and flagging systems and mental capacity. (Edited publisher abstract)
Learning disabilities health charter for social care providers: self-assessment tool
- Author:
- PUBLIC HEALTH ENGLAND
- Publisher:
- Public Health England
- Publication year:
- 2017
- Pagination:
- 12
- Place of publication:
- London
This self-assessment tool has been developed to enable organisations signed up to the Health Charter for Social Care Providers to measure progress and develop an action plan for improvements in helping people with learning disabilities get better access to health care services to improve their health. The tool has been produced by a working group including members of the Voluntary Organisations Disability Group (VODG). It lists the 10 charter statements from the Health Charter for Social Care Providers, with a list of ‘things to think about’ to stimulate discussion and help organisations assess their current performance for each statement. Organisations can then score their progress using the following categories: We always do this; We sometimes do this; We rarely/never do this. Included in the tool is space to record the evidence used to support your score and the actions needed. (Edited publisher abstract)
Joint health and care social care self-assessment framework 2013: detailed report on number questions
- Author:
- PUBLIC HEALTH ENGLAND
- Publisher:
- Public Health England
- Publication year:
- 2014
- Pagination:
- 87
- Place of publication:
- London
The Joint Health and Social Care Learning Disability Self-Assessment Framework is an annual local self-review process for Learning Disability Partnership Boards, originating in the commitments set out in ‘Transforming Care: a national response to Winterbourne View Hospital’ (2012). It includes a check on key local numbers about health and social care for people with learning disabilities, locally assigned Red / Amber / Green ratings against national quality standards, and a chance to contribute personal accounts of the experiences of people with learning disabilities using services. This report covers the numerical section of the Framework. The questions cover the following areas: healthcare; assessment and provision of social care (including complaints, Safeguarding and the Mental Capacity Act); Inclusion and where I live; Quality; and Transitions. This report presents the detailed findings from the responses to these questions. It also highlights the limitations of the exercise. (Edited publisher abstract)
Joint health and social care self-assessment framework 2013: detailed report and thematic analysis
- Author:
- PUBLIC HEALTH ENGLAND
- Publisher:
- Public Health England
- Publication year:
- 2014
- Pagination:
- 92
- Place of publication:
- London
The Joint Health and Social Care Learning Disability Self-Assessment Framework is a new annual local self-review process, originating in the commitments set out in ‘Transforming Care: a national response to Winterbourne View Hospital’ (2012). It included a check on key local numbers about health and social care for people with learning disabilities and a chance to contribute personal accounts of the experiences of people with learning disabilities using services. This report presents the findings of self-assessment ratings (Green, Amber, Red) made by Partnership Board areas against 27 indicators, with nine indicators each in three domains, including staying healthy, being safe and living well. Overall, self-assessment ratings for the nine staying healthy indicators suggest that high standards are possible to achieve (ten per cent - 56 per cent of Boards rated themselves as Green across indicators). For all these nine indicators there was substantial variation within and across regions. For most being safe indicators, Boards most commonly rated themselves to be some way towards achieving high standards but with more work to do (38 per cent - 67 per cent of Boards rated themselves as Amber across indicators). Self-assessment ratings for the nine living well indicators suggest that substantial numbers of Boards rated themselves as meeting high standards (25 per cent - 58 per cent of Boards rated themselves as Green across indicators). (Edited publisher abstract)