A model system for the construction and evaluation of general service plans

Cummins, Robert A.; Jauernig, Roland; Baxter, Christine; Hudson, Alan R.

doi:10.1080/07263869400035251

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The assertion that plans ‘fail’ is supported by evidence from five published and one unpublished study. Of the five published studies, three were undertaken in Australia (Shaddock & Bramston 1991; Cummins et al 1994; Cummins et al 1996), the other two in North America (Miner & Bates 1997; Stancliffe et al . 1999).…”

Section: Pcp: Direct and Indirect Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

PlanningandAction: Comments on Mansell & Beadle‐Brown

Emerson

Stancliffe

2004

Research Intellect Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mansell & Beadle-Brown (2004) raise a number of concerns about the possible impact of the systematic introduction of person-centred planning (PCP) across services for people with intellectual disabilities in the UK. We too foresee a danger that system-wide adoption of PCP will be characterised over zealous`selling' of the purported bene®ts without suf®cient attention to the dif®culties and without the necessary changes to system architecture to ensure that those involved in PCP have the authority or resources to achieve the plan's goals. If so, PCP will become another fad, and service users, and their families will become even more discouraged, disheartened and alienated by a system characterised by rhetoric rather than meaningful action. Where we differ, is in the interpretation of the existing evidence regarding the impact of individual planning systems in general and, perhaps, in the way forward.

show abstract

Section: Pcp: Direct and Indirect Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

PlanningandAction: Comments on Mansell & Beadle‐Brown

Emerson

Stancliffe

2004

Research Intellect Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Under the terms of the MCA , following these plans enables care staff to have ‘reasonable grounds’ for believing that they are acting in the ‘best interests’ of adults who lack capacity when providing support to them ( MCA Code of Practice , para . 6.25; 6.33), despite research suggesting that person‐centred planning might not be effective in improving user outcomes (Cummins et al. 1994; Rudkin & Rowe 1999; Stancliffe et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Living ‘a life like ours’: support workers' accounts of substitute decision‐making in residential care homes for adults with intellectual disabilities

Dunn

Clare

Holland

2010

J intellect Disabil Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In England and Wales, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a new legal framework to regulate substitute decision-making relating to the welfare of adults who lack the capacity to make one or more autonomous decisions about their care and support. Any substitute decision made on behalf of an adult lacking capacity must be in his/her 'best interests'. However, the value of adopting established principles and procedures for substitute decision-making in practice is uncertain, and little is known about the legal or ethical dynamics of social care support, including the day-to-day residential support provided to adults with intellectual disabilities (ID). Methods This paper reports a qualitative, grounded theory analysis of 21 interviews with support workers working in residential care homes for adults with ID, and observations of care practices. Results In contrast to the narrow legal responsibilities placed upon them, it is argued that support workers interpret substitute decision-making within a broad moral account of their care role, orientating their support towards helping residents to live 'a life like ours'. In so doing, support workers describe how they draw on their own values and life experiences to shape the substitute decisions that they make on behalf of residents. Conclusions Support workers' accounts reveal clear discrepancies between the legal regulation of substitute decision-making and the ways that these support workers make sense of their work. Such discrepancies have implications both for the implementation of the MCA, and for the role of support workers' values in the conceptualisation and delivery of 'good' care.

show abstract

“…Typically, goals and objectives were not written in specific measurable terms, criteria were not stated and the conditions under which the behaviour should occur were omitted. Cummins et al. (1994) found that 19% of plans for 199 people had no review date and 30% of meetings were not attended by any family, friends or advocates of the individual service user.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Person‐Centred Planning or Person‐Centred Action? Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disability Services

Mansell

Beadle‐Brown

2004

Research Intellect Disabil

168

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This critical review considers the nature and importance of person-centred planning in the context of current British policy and service development in intellectual disability. The difference between person-centred planning and other kinds of individual planning is discussed. Materials and method The scale of the task of implementing person-centred planning as a national policy initiative is considered. The limited evidence base for person-centred planning is reviewed and the reasons for the failure of previous attempts at individual planning are analysed.The assumption that person-centred services will be produced by a new kind of individual planning is questioned. Conclusions Consideration is given to what would be necessary to make services more person-centred, including changes in power relations, funding arrangements and staff training and supervision.

show abstract

A model system for the construction and evaluation of general service plans

Cited by 6 publications

References 2 publications

PlanningandAction: Comments on Mansell & Beadle‐Brown

PlanningandAction: Comments on Mansell & Beadle‐Brown

Living ‘a life like ours’: support workers' accounts of substitute decision‐making in residential care homes for adults with intellectual disabilities

Person‐Centred Planning or Person‐Centred Action? Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disability Services

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About