personalisation survey 2012

7/31/2019 Personalisation Survey 2012

1/39

Personalisation Survey

Prepared by:Gurur Sarbanoglu, Reed Business Insight

On behalf of:UnisonThe College of Social Work

Reference: 5550June 2012


2/39

2

Contents

Background & Objectives 3

Sample & Methodology 4

Executive Summary 5

Respondent Profile 8

Main Findings

Knowledge of Personalisation 12

Implementation of Personalisation and Personal Budgets 15

Personalisation and Job Roles 23

Impact of Personalisation 27

Key Findings 33

Appendix: other findings 35


3/39

3

Background & Obj ect ives

Unison and The College of Social Work were looking to provide value for their

members by conducting research among social care professionals in England

about the impact of personalisation in association with Community Care.

More specifically, research was required to:

Evaluate the level of progress in the implementation of personalisation

Gauge attitudes towards personalisation among professionals, including on how it hasaffected working practices and job roles

Determine how successful social care professionals feel personalisation has been for theservice user

Establish trends or changes compared to similar research conducted on behalf of Unison in2011


4/39

4

Sample & Methodology

Research took the form of an online self-completionquestionnaire sent to our database of social care

professionals.

An email invitation was sent to around 6,700 peoplecontaining a link to the survey.

A 1,000 prize draw was used as a financialincentive to complete the survey.

Field work took place between 9 and 18 May 2012.

272 eligibleresponses to the survey were received.All respondents were employed by local authoritiesin England and three-quarters were registered social

workers.

Note:Results shown are based on those answering each question

Screenshot of email

Screenshot of survey


5/39

5

Execut ive Sum mary

Respondents overall seem more positive about personalisation this year than in 2011,

in terms of the impact that it has had on their jobs and the likely impact on service users.Half believe that personal budgets will be beneficial for service users in the medium to

long term.

However, as last year, most say bureaucracy and budget cuts are undermining the

impact of personalisation, and, if anything, these problems are getting worse. Two-thirds

say that the paperwork for assessments is too complicated for service users to completethemselves.

There is still a significant skills and knowledge gap between what professionals

perceive they need to deal with personalisation and what they possess.

Just a quarter believe that all service users will be on personal budgets by April 2013,

as the government intends.


6/39

6

Q. In your opinion, is the paperwork relating to assessments suitable for service users to complete themselves?

Base: all answering

Q. How far do you agree with the statement: Personalisation has resulted in more bureaucracy for me in my role?

I ncreasing impact of bureaucracy

Base: all answering

A greater proportion of respondents sayassessment paperwork is too complicated forservice users to complete than in 2011.

Respondents are more likely to say thatpersonalisation has resulted in more bureaucracyin their role than in 2011.


7/39

7

Q. In the medium to long term do you think that personal budgets will be of benefit to people in your locality?

More opt im ism about service user benef it

Base: all answering

Half of respondents believe personal budgets will

benefit service users over time, up from 41% lastyear.


8/39

8

Respondent Prof ile


9/39

9

Respondent Prof ile

Job Status (mentions of 6%+)

Social worker (or equiv.) 43% Senior social worker 14% Other manager 10% Senior practitioner 10% Dept head home/centre/unit 6%

Other: 7%

Other responses included: Commissioner,Project Manager, Review Officer etc.

Client Groups

Bases: all answering (Job status - 268, Client Groups - 272)

76% are registered social workers (base: 196)


10/39

10

Main aspect s of role

Q. What are the main aspects of your role?

Base: all answering (238)


11/39

11

Greater London18%

South East18%

South West7%

East Anglia7%

Midlands20%

Yorkshire &Humberside

14%

North East4%

North West13%


Region


12/39

12

Know ledge of Personalisat ion


13/39

13

Understanding personalisat ion t erm sRespondents feel most informed about direct payments, followed by managed personal budgets.Individual service funds is the least well-understood term, as last year.

Base

(239)

(239)

(236)

(238)

Q. How well do you understand the following terms in relation to personalisation?

(79%) (14%) (5%)

(20%) (29%) (24%) (27%)

Figures from 2011 in brackets.


14/39

14

Ski lls or know ledge required for personalisat ionThere are some skills and knowledge gaps when the perception of what is needed for personalisation iscompared to the actual abilities of the sample, but the gap is small (3%) for skills in helping service usersunderstand and manage risk. The largest gap is in brokerage skills (a trend that continues from last year), thoughmore than one-third of respondents do not believe they need these skills.

Q. Which of the following skills or knowledge do you believe you need to deal with personalisation? /Which of the following skills or knowledge do you feel you have?

Base: all answering (234 / 215)

(64%)

(33%)



15/39

15

I mplementat ion of Personalisat ion and PersonalBudgets


16/39

16

Progress tow ards personalisat ionThe belief that personal budgets will be in place for all eligible service users by April 2013, as thegovernment intends, is lower than last years figure (26% vs. 37% who believed personal budgets would beavailable to all by 2013). Service users are perceived as being less involved in making personalisationhappen this year than last.

Q. Do you believe that all service users in your areawill be on personal budgets by April 2013?

Q. How involved would you say the service users and theirfamilies have been in making personalisation happen?

Dontknow22%

Base: all answering (218) Base: all answering (216)

(13%)

(35%)

(36%)

(4%)

(12%)



17/39

17

Personal budgets as beneficial

There is some uncertainty over whether personalbudgets will benefit users, but half believe that

they will over the medium to long term, up from41% in 2011.

Q. In the medium to long term do you think that personal budgets will be of benefit to people in your locality?


The most prevalent method of receiving personalbudgets is via local authority managed budgets.

However, more than a third (35%) say there has

been a policy change to make direct payments thedefault option. (please see appendix)

Q. In your area, is the most prevalent method of receiving personal budgets direct payments or local authority managed budgets?


Dontknow,23%

Receiving personal budgets


18/39

18

Access to personal budgetsRespondents are split on whether councils are doing enough to help groups whose take-up of personalbudgets has traditionally been low to access them. For instance, while 44% think their councils aredoing enough to support older people, 37% disagreed.

Base

(210)

(208)

(207)

(208)

Q. In your opinion, is your council doing enough to support the following groups to access personal budgets?

(208)

(207)

(205)

(42%) (33%) (25%)

(29%) (37%) (34%)

(22%) (32%) (46%)

(6%) (30%) (63%)



19/39

19

View s on progress of personalisat ionRespondents were asked about how far they agreed with a set of statements to gauge their views on the levelof progress with personalisation.

This year, 86% agreed that cuts to budgets will impede progress with personalisation,

up from 83% in 2011.

There was a rise from 73% to 82% in the proportion who agreed that personalisation

had led to more bureaucracy in their role.

There was a bigger jump in the proportion who agreed services such as day centres

were closing down under the impact of personal budgets (57% to 69%).

A greater proportion of respondents this year disagreed that money was allocated to

people effectively in line with their needs compared with last year (62% up from 47%).

Most respondents also disagreed that resource allocation systems were easy for users

and carers or professionals to understand.


20/39

Q. Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements

20

View s on progress w it h personalisat ionAggregateagreement

86%

82%

76%

69%

61%

54%

46%

46%

33%

28%

23%

16%

Base: all answering (various)


21/39

21

Review ing personal budgets

Q. How often are the needs of people on personal budgets generally reviewed in your area?


In your area how are the majority of reviews carried out?

Face-to-face 76%

By direct telephone 12%

By call centre 1%

Other 11%


Nearly three quarters said personal budgets werereviewed at least annually.


22/39

22

I mpact s of reviews t o personal budgets

Q. What has happened to the value of personal budgets for most clients in your area following reviews / re-assessments inthe past 12 months?


More respondents said reviews had led to a decrease in the value of personal budgets than said theyhad increased, but the biggest group of respondents didnt know about the impact of reviews (38%).


23/39

23

Personalisat ion and Job Roles


24/39

24

Initial assessment

Face-to-face is the most common method with

which initial assessments are carried out.However, this method is used less now comparedto last year, while telephone and call centreassessments have increased.

Who carries out initial assessments

38% of respondents say social workers carry outinitial assessments, down from last year.

Q. And who usually carries out these initial assessments?

Q. In your area, how are the majority of initial assessments carried out?

Base: all respondents (229)


(64%)

(18%)

(12%)

(6%)

(17%)

(46%)

(4%)

(11%)



25/39

25

Who leads t he suppor t planning process

Q. Is the support planning process in your area mainly led by:


For two-thirds of respondents, support planning is mainly led by council-employed social workers or caremanagers, while just 3% said it was mainly led by service users and their families.


26/39


27/39

27

I mpact of Personalisat ion


28/39

28

I mpact of personalisat ion on j ob

Evaluation of impact

A high proportion of respondents report at least some impact on their job from personalisation. Of these,40% (up from 36% in 2011) say the impact was positive, while 30% say it was negative, down from 35% in2011. One-third of respondents say personalisation has resulted in decreased status for social workers,though half say status has remained the same.

Impact on current job

Q. How much impact do you think personalisation hashad on your job?


Q. How much impact do you think personalisation hashad on your job?



29/39

29

I mpact of personalisation on t he st at us of socialworkers

Q. How has personalisation affected the status of social workers in your area?



30/39

30

How roles have changed(negat ive responses)

Q. How have your roles and duties changed in the past two years under the impact of personalisation?

Increasing focus and attention to process and procedure creating the impression of working on aproduction line. This has left very little space for case working or imaginative / creative working.

Expected to do more, tick box type forms - less personal in myopinion, cannot make decisions due to budgetary constraints.

The volume of paperwork has increased. The assessment processis now much longer.

Much more paperwork to be completed even to

implement a small care package. Very time consumingand clients do not understand why they have to gothrough such a process.

Many report increased paperwork and bureaucracy, which is caused by more complex and longerassessment processes. This, in turn, has led to social workers feeling deskilled and made workloads less

manageable.


31/39

31

How roles have changed(negat ive responses)


Massively more time spent in front of computer, so less time working with service users. Feelings ofdisempowerment and of becoming deskilled due to the complexity of and constant changes to thecomputer system.

As a social worker, I feel that I regularly perform moreadministration tasks than actually having face to face contact with

service users and families.

Complicated systems and increased paperwork anddepersonalised relationships with clients.

Work has become harder as the budgets given do not

cover the costs of care, this leads to angry clients andcarers and the social worker get the blame.

Some respondents report spending less time with clients as a result of increased bureaucracy, whileothers say that this and financial pressures have made relationships with clients more difficult.


32/39

32

How roles have changed(positive responses)


Role has expanded, so we are not just completing reviews but doing more through casemanagement work to ensure that we can provide the best possible care packages for service users.

Increased the flexibility and responsiveness of how financialresources are used to achieve outcomes. This has enhanced lifefor people receiving an individual budget and has acted to drive upstandards of response from independent sector providers.

Some respondents feel personalisation has led to support being tailored to peoples individual needs.


33/39

33

Key Findings


34/39

34

Key FindingsKnowledge

Direct payments and managed personal budgets are the two concepts that respondents are most informed about.

On the other end of the spectrum, individual service funds is the least understood concept, which was also the case

last year. The skills and knowledge gap between what is perceived as needed and what is possessed by respondents

remains high, with the exception of skills needed to help users understand and manage risks.

Implementation

The full implementation of personal budgets for all service users by April 2013 is not deemed realistic by more than

half of respondents. Among the factors impeding the full implementation of personalisation appear to be cuts made to

adult care budgets and increased bureaucracy.

Social workers

Initial assessments are mostly carried out face-to-face, and the group that carries them out more often than others is

social workers. However, most are not able to sign off personal budgets up to a certain level. They also feel burdened

by paperwork.

Impact

Personalisation has had a major impact on respondents, with over a third claiming it to be a positive one, an increaseon last year. Yet, half of respondents do not feel personalisation has changed the status of social workers, while one-

third feel status has declined.


35/39

35

Appendix : other findings


36/39

36

Policy change to make direct payments default opt ion

Q. Has there been a policy change to make direct payments the default option over local authority managed budgets?


(34%)

(32%)

(34%)


37/39

37

Personal budgets for people w it h degenerat iveconditions

Q. Are personal budgets for people with degenerative conditions or increasing dependency uprated in line with their increasingneeds in your area?



38/39

38

Whether personal budget s are uprated


Q. Are personal budgets in your area uprated each year in line with rises in the cost of living?
http://www.communitycare.co.uk/http://www.communitycare.co.uk/


39/39

Reed Business InsightProviding innovative research & user experience solutions in the UK social care market
http://www.communitycare.co.uk/http://www.communitycare.co.uk/

personalisation survey 2012

Documents