Involving service users and carers in social work education ......Teaching and learning provision 36...

Involving service users and carers in social work

education

Involving service users and carers in social work education

Social Care Institute for Excellence1st Floor, Goldings House

2 Hay’s LaneLondon SE1 2HB

Tel: 020 7089 6840Fax: 020 7089 6841

www.scie.org.uk

SCIE GUIDE 4

Better knowledge for better practice


MARCH 2004

Better outcomes for service users and carers are fundamental to the recent reforms in social work education. The Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE) is supporting the new degree in social work by providing a series of reviews and guides on the best way of educating and training social workers.This Resource guide outlines ways of involving service

users and carers in all aspects of the design and delivery of the social work degree programmes. It focuses on how partnerships between higher education institutions (HEIs) and service user and carer organisations can be developed and sustained. It covers the values, principles and practicalities of participation, outlining a range of approaches to creating active and purposeful partnerships.

RG02 cover.indd 17/02/2004, 14:421

i

Involving service users and carersin social work education

Enid Levin

PPP R E S S

POLICY


ii

First published in Great Britain in March 2004 by the Social Care Institute for Excellence(SCIE)

Social Care Institute for Excellence1st FloorGoldings House2 Hay’s LaneLondon SE1 2HBUKwww.scie.org.uk

© Social Care Institute for Excellence 2004

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN 1 904812 07 4

Enid Levin is a Practice Development Manager at SCIE.

The right of Enid Levin to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted byher in accordance with the 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in anyform or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,or stored in any retrieval system of any nature, without prior permission of thepublisher.

Produced by The Policy PressUniversity of BristolFourth Floor, Beacon HouseQueen’s RoadBristol BS8 1QUUK

iii

Contents

Acknowledgements iv

1. What the guide is about 1

2. Key messages 22.1. For the future 2

3. Why the guide was developed 3

4. The content of the guide 5

5. Who the guide is for 6

6. How the guide was created 7

7. Changes in social work training 8

8. Preparing for participation: key messages 10

9. The values and principles of involvement 11

10. Getting started: the process and practicalities 1710.1. Securing resources 1710.2. Taking the lead and/or the day-to-day responsibility 1810.3. Defining service users and carers 1910.4. Thinking about the meaning and level of involvement 2110.5. Training and support 2210.6. Payments for involvement 25

10.6.1. Fees 2510.6.2. Travel expenses 2710.6.3. Allowance for personal assistants and replacement carers 2710.6.4. Other costs 2710.6.5. The timing and methods of payment 28

10.7. Identifying partners 2810.8. Approaching partners 3010.9. Bringing partners together 30

11. Moving forward 3311.1. Planning for involvement at strategic and management levels 3311.2. Selecting students 3511.3. Teaching and learning provision 3611.4. Practice learning opportunities 3811.5. Assessment of students 4111.6. Quality assurance 43

12. Next steps 44

References and source material 45

iv

The Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE)would like to thank all the organisations andindividuals who participated in the project onwhich this guide is based. We gratefullyacknowledge the generous contributions from:

• The Department of Health and nationalbodies that took forward the reform ofsocial work education and implementationof the degree, including the QualificationDevelopment Group for their advice.

• The heads of social work educationprogrammes and academic staff in theuniversities and colleges that responded toour survey, organised meetings with theirservice user and carer partners, and providedinformation, advice and examples of theirwork.

• The members of service user and carerorganisations that shared their experienceswith us in discussions, workshops andconferences, providing written materials,examples and advice.

• The Wiltshire and Swindon Users’ Networkand the National Organisation of PracticeTeaching that undertook specific pieces ofwork for the guide.

• The Shaping Our Lives National UserNetwork that led the consultation on thedraft guide.

Acknowledgements

1

What the guide is about

This guide focuses on how service users, carersand providers of social work education andtraining can work together on the degreeprogrammes. It covers the principles,practicalities and range of approaches tobuilding and sustaining these partnerships.The key messages of the guide apply also todeveloping service users’ and carers’involvement in all types of training for socialwork and social care staff and in the designand delivery of services.

1

2


2.1. For the future

• The involvement of service users and carersin the design and delivery of the socialwork degree offers a major opportunity fora new generation of social workers to gaina thorough grounding in service users’ andcarers’ experiences and expectations fromthe very start of their training and careers.

• Many universities and colleges that areoffering the degree programme in Englandin 2003, together with their allies in serviceuser and carer organisations, have made agood start at working together butprogress is uneven across the country andthe specific aspects of the programmes.

• In order that this initiative may fully realiseits potential to make a difference to socialwork training, priority should be attachedto building up the capacity of both serviceuser and carer organisations and thedegree programme providers so that theycan work together in constructive andpurposive partnerships. There is a call forcontinuing ring-fenced funding to facilitatethis development.

• Training for service user and carer trainers ishigh on the agenda of their organisations.Different types and levels of training shouldbe offered. There is scope for service userand carer organisations to develop theirown training and support systems, and fornational bodies to develop accreditedtraining leading to qualifications.

Key messages

• The payment of service users for their timeand expertise is proving to be a challengingand complicated area. The benefits rulesmay hinder the involvement of somegroups of service users. Practice is variableacross higher education and someguidance is required.

• Codes of practice on service user and carerparticipation have been suggested as oneof the means to promote consistency, fairtreatment, and good quality processes andoutcomes for everyone involved.

• As the arrangements for involvement arenot prescribed, a wide variety ofapproaches to the same activities areemerging. Each social work educationprogramme needs to have robust systemsin place for monitoring and evaluating theirarrangements for involvement.Comparative studies are required toevaluate their relative effectiveness in termsof processes and outcomes.

2

3

3

Involving service users and carers in theeducation and training of social workers ishigher on the policy and practice agenda thanever before. A three-year qualifying trainingfor social workers was introduced in England in2003. The successful completion of theprogramme leads to the award of a degree athonours level that is the new professionalqualification for social work. For the first time,Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) that runthese programmes are required by governmentto involve service users and carers asstakeholders in all parts of the design anddelivery of the programme.

Although the national Requirements for socialwork training1 specify that service users mustbe involved in all parts of the degree, they donot prescribe how the universities and collegesshould go about meeting this remit inpartnerships with them.

The opportunity to develop local arrangementswith service user and carer organisations isboth exciting and challenging. It has to beundertaken in parallel with all the other workinvolved in setting up and running theprogrammes.

The total number of service user and carerorganisations covering all ages and interests isnot known. In preparation for the degree,some universities and colleges have carried outlocal mapping exercises. National exercises arealso underway, including a Shaping Our LivesNational User Network project supported bySCIE. In making estimates, we have to takeaccount of the numbers of groups andorganisations that are led or controlled byservice users or carers and also of the localbranches and groups of national charities for

Why the guide was developed

service users, including children and youngpeople, and carers. Nationally, therefore, weare estimating in thousands rather than inhundreds of groups of different sizes andmembership interests. Some of theseorganisations are already involved in selectingand training social care workers and students,and they can build on their experiences, butfor others it is new territory.

Similarly, many universities already have someexperience in service user and carerinvolvement, typically in teaching sessions onthe Diploma in Social Work, the approvedsocial worker (ASW) and other post-qualifyingand advanced programmes. They, too, arewell placed to build on their existing links.However, in common with colleagues on allthe degree programmes, they are engaged forthe first time in developing strategies tointegrate the active involvement of serviceusers and carers systematically into all theirwork. This involves translating into practicethe statements of intention submitted to theGeneral Social Care Council (GSCC) during thedegree accreditation and the subsequentcourse validation and approval processes. Italso involves joint work to develop approachesthat are comprehensive and fit for purpose.

At the time of writing, 66 universities inEngland were accredited and approved to offerthe degree. Final figures on the number ofstudents enrolled on the courses that began in2003 are not yet available but a preliminaryfigure of about 2,300 students has beenquoted. In Wales, Northern Ireland andScotland, the degree programmes will beintroduced in 2004. The pace and progress ofwork on service user and carer participationvaries, with some starting their preparations in

4


2002 and others scheduling this work into thesix months before the start of theprogrammes.

As anticipated, a wide variety of approaches tothe same task of developing participation arealso evolving. These will be tried out andtested over the next three years.Encouragingly, the Department of Health PolicyResearch Programme is commissioningevaluative research on this initiative. Until thefirst intake of students graduate and begin topractise in 2006, we cannot make judgementsabout the relative effectiveness in terms ofprocesses and outcomes of the variousapproaches to involving service users andcarers. What we can and indeed have set outto do is describe the similarities and differencesin the emerging approaches, and bringtogether knowledge and resources to informcontinuous development and the debate onthe criteria for evaluating them.

5

4

The content of the guide

This guide focuses on how partnershipsbetween the degree programme providers onthe one hand, and service user and carerorganisations on the other, might be formedand sustained. It goes step by step throughthe stages and processes of planning andpreparing for active and purposefulpartnerships. The guide outlines the issuesthat have to be considered and some of theoptions for action at each point. Whereverpossible, it provides resources directly in theform of written material and examples frompractice or gives directions to documents,websites and contacts that the user of theguide may wish to follow up.

6


Who the guide is for

The guide is for everyone involved in educatingand training social workers, even though theymay be involved in different ways and fordifferent reasons. The guide may be ofparticular interest and relevance to individualsand groups most directly involved in thedegree. These are:

• service users and carers who are involved orinterested in becoming involved;

• academic staff with day-to-dayresponsibility for service user and carerparticipation in the programme and theircolleagues;

• staff in agencies that provide practicelearning opportunities and participate instudent assessments;

• students themselves;

• staff in the universities and the nationalbodies with management, qualityassurance, and monitoring responsibilitiesrelating to the degree.

The guide may also be of interest to groupsand individuals providing social work post-qualifying education and training ordeveloping service users’ and carers’participation in the training of otherprofessionals such as nurses and doctors or intraining social care workers. The principles andpracticalities that it sets out also apply morewidely to the involvement of service users andcarers in designing, commissioning, deliveringand monitoring services.

5

7

6

How the guide was created

The guide is based on a synthesis of thefollowing:

• The literature on service users and carers,including reviews, books and articles thatcover their views on and expectations ofsocial workers, practical guides and modelsand experiences of involvement in socialwork education and training.

• Reports of conferences and focus groupsthat have been run to promote service userand carer participation in social workeducation and prepare for the introductionof the degree programmes.

• The responses to a SCIE survey of the 72universities and colleges providing Diplomain Social Work programmes which askedfor information about their plans,approaches and progress towards serviceuser and carer involvement in the degreeprogrammes. This was sent in February2003 to all the HEIs accredited to providesocial work degree programmes by theGSCC in December 2002, and to potentialproviders applying for accreditation in 2003or providing social work education at thattime. The initial responses weresupplemented by additional informationfrom some universities and colleges oncetheir plans for involvement were firmed upor approved in the summer of 2003.

• Information and advice from nationalbodies and key stakeholders that steeredthe development of the new degree andwere represented on the Department ofHealth Reform of Social Work Educationand Training Qualification DevelopmentGroup.

• The results of meetings and discussionswith service user and carer groups and theirpartners in higher education about thechallenges and opportunities arising fromworking together, and their plans andapproaches to participation.

• The accounts and debates of service usersand social work education providers on thekey issues relating to involvement inworkshops run by SCIE at five Departmentof Health conferences on implementing thesocial work degree.

• Finally, and importantly, the Shaping OurLives National User Network led aconsultation on the guide. They invitedpeople from a range of service userorganisations with expertise in training tocomment on the draft guide. Theyarranged a meeting that was co-chaired bythe Chairman and Manager of theNetwork; at this meeting SCIE staffbenefited from the advice of the memberswho had read the guide on how its contentand format could be improved.

8


Changes in social work training

It may be helpful for everyone involved in thedegree programmes to be knowledgeableabout the background to its introduction and,above all, its main purpose.

A quality strategy for social care2 signalled theintroduction of the changes. It included themodernisation of qualifying training for socialworkers in its proposals to support quality andcontinuous improvements in social care. Theregistration of social workers by the GSCC inEngland and the equivalent Councils inNorthern Ireland, Scotland and Wales underthe 2000 Care Standards Act from 2003 is alsopart of this strategy. The thrust of all the newarrangements is that service users and carersget high quality social work services in terms ofboth processes and outcomes. Thus thechanges, including service user and carerparticipation in training, are the means to theends of improving experiences and outcomesrather than ends in themselves.

Issued under the 2000 Care Standards Act, theRequirements for social work training1 inEngland specify “what providers of social worktraining must do”, covering the entry,teaching, learning and assessmentrequirements for the degree programmes. Thenational occupational standards for socialwork3 and the Quality Assurance Agencysubject benchmark statement for social work(2000) form the basis for the assessment ofstudents at the end of the degree programme.Taken together, the requirements, standardsand benchmark statement comprise theprescribed curriculum for the degree. Theemphasis is on practice, with academiclearning to support it. To this end, studentswill spend at least 200 days gaining experienceand learning in practice settings.

Appendix 2 of the Requirements for socialwork training sets out the roles of stakeholdersin programme design and delivery. The sevennamed groups of stakeholders are:

• employers• HEIs• students• service users• practice assessors• external examiners• GSCC.

Importantly, service users and HEIs are the onlystakeholder groups that have been assignedroles in all parts of programme design anddelivery.

Their roles are in:

• student selection• design of the degree• teaching and learning provision• preparation for practice learning• provision of placements• learning agreements• assessment of students• quality assurance.

This is an ambitious agenda in which the typeof knowledge that service users and carers canimpart is identified as a strong lever forimproving social care. It recognises that serviceusers and carers are themselves experts inwhat would make for more control, choiceand better quality in their everyday lives, and inexisting services. The purpose of the agenda isto ensure that newly qualified social workershave a thorough understanding of thestandards of practice, processes and outcomesthat service users and carers want. Thus, from

7

9

the very start of their professional career, theywill treat service users and carers as activeparticipants in service delivery rather than aspassive recipients.

In support of these developments, eachaccredited university was allocated a specialgrant of £6,200 (total for England: £400,000)through the GSCC to support service user andcarer involvement from January to December2003. An additional grant (total for England:£420,000) for the same purpose wassubsequently allocated for April 2003-March2004. At the time of writing, discussions areprogressing about the mechanisms and furtherfunding required in order that the capacity forinvolvement can be achieved.

Detailed information on the reform of socialwork education in England has been mainlyavailable in paper form and also electronicform through the websites of the Departmentof Health and the GSCC (www.doh.gov.uk/swqualification; www.gscc.org.uk). When thespecial Department of Health website closes,the main sources of information on the degreeand its further development will be the GSCC,with Department of Health publications stillavailable in paper and electronic forms.Information on related development work andmaterials to support implementation isavailable from Topss England(www.topssengland.net), the Practice LearningTaskforce (www.practicelearning.org) and SCIE(www.scie.org.uk).

Changes in social work training

10


Preparing for participation:key messages

The material collated during this projectsuggests some key points to consider at thevery start of the preparations for participation.These are covered in detail later andhighlighted here:

• Everyone involved benefits from workingout and signing up to the values andprinciples of involvement as early aspossible in the process of forgingpartnerships.

• If there is a comprehensive strategy foroverall involvement right from the start,then it will be easier to include those newroles for service users and carers whereprogress may be slower and morecomplicated.

• Effective service user and carer participationinvolves a lot of people working in newways. Service users, carers, lecturers, otheracademic staff, administrators, students,employers, providers of practice learningand assessors could see this as adevelopment exercise that they engage intogether.

• Everyone involved needs resources in termsof people, time, money, and propersupport to make this work. This appliesequally to service user and carerorganisations as to others. A budget topay for participants’ time, expenses and forother related costs can help to make this areality.

• Actively promoting and sustainingparticipation is a process and not a one-offevent. It takes time to build up respectfuland purposive relationships and to giveattention to the practicalities.

• A lot of enthusiasm and goodwill isrequired to make this work and has alreadybeen invested. There are many otherpressures and demands on everyoneinvolved. At the start, only a small numberof service users and carers per programmemay be available and willing to take thisinitiative forward. Widening participationis a key task.

8

11

9

The values and principles ofinvolvement

Because working out and signing up to thevalues and principles of involvement early inthe process of forging partnerships is veryimportant, we offer some suggestions here.

Taken together, the values of service userorganisations and of social work provide a firmfoundation on which to build a framework forparticipation that is respectful and meaningfulrather than tokenistic.

The service user movement emphasises theimportance of models of participation that arebased on human rights, equalities, inclusionand the social model of disability. Theirapproaches seek to empower people andcounter oppressive and discriminatory practice.There is overlap between the values of serviceuser-controlled organisations and those ofsocial work and social care. Thus the values ofsocial work and social care include the right torespect, privacy and confidentiality, the right tochoose, the promotion of independence andtreating each person as an individual. TheCode of practice for social care workersprovides the most recent and clear statementof these values, setting out in detail theconduct that is expected of these workers4. Ina recent paper on getting closer to otherpeople’s direct experiences, Beresford5 includesa list of approaches, emphasising that theyshould not be seen as mechanistic ‘techniques’but rather as a set of value-based principles.

For over 10 years, pioneering individuals andorganisations in the service user movementhave been developing the principles forputting their values into practice. They arespelt out in the many publications, includingreports of projects, conferences and focus

groups that are referenced here and elsewherein the guide6-12. Across service user-controlledorganisations, there is strong agreement aboutwhat these principles are and what they cover.

Each university and college should work withtheir partners to develop a written protocol ofvalues, principles and practices that is thenowned and signed up to by all parties. Someexamples on which to build are summarisedhere. The overlaps in their content emphasisethe consensus about the core set of principlesand issues. These examples might be used tocheck whether local agreements arecomprehensive but their content should not beimported wholesale or imposed withoutthorough discussion and agreement.Developing a local protocol is part of theprocess of building up trust, respect, andpurposeful working relationships. When thedegree programme is running, the localprotocol can be used to monitor and evaluateprogress.

12


Example

Michael Turner and Shaping Our Lives National User Network, 20029

Guidelines for involving service users in social work education

These guidelines are presented in four sections that are summarised here.

Section 1 covers the key concerns of service users on current practice that wereraised at a Shaping Our Lives National User Network seminar in 2000. The issues,based on the direct experience of service users, including poor practice, “pointedthe way to the positive principles that should underlie best practice userinvolvement”.

Section 2 sets out four principles of best practice involvement. Only extracts fromthe text on each principle are included here. The principles are:

Involvement should be planned and structured: it must be based on a truepartnership between academics and service users and other stakeholders. It needsto be a key part of the overall planning of a course and curriculum. [continues….]

Involvement should be based on work with organisations that are controlled andrun by service users: user involvement is too often based on the participation ofan individual or individuals…. Working through organisations provides the basisfor broader involvement that is facilitated by people who are better placed torepresent a range of service users’ perspectives…. Another issue to consider whencontacting organisations is that service users stress the importance of users’concerns being distinct from those of carers.

Fees and expenses: the expertise of service users involved in training should befully recognised…. The payment of fees is a means of recognising the value andimportance of users’ contributions and as supporting the parity of users’ inputwith that of paid staff. Rates of payment should reflect the skills and experiencesof people involved and should be comparable to those paid to other consultants.

Access to training: good practice also needs to address making all education andtraining opportunities accessible to all service users as both students and teachers/trainers. Having social work students who are service users should not be seen orused as a means of service user involvement…. Their presence should be seen as abonus and they should not be exploited or relied upon (for achievinginvolvement).

Section 3 focuses on putting service user involvement into practice. It coversgetting started, planning, ensuring access, and resources. Section 4 gives examplesof good practice, including the work of the Wiltshire and Swindon Users’ Networkwith the University of Bath on the Diploma in Social Work course.

13

The values and principles of involvement

Example

Peter Beresford et al, 199410

Changing the culture: Involving service users in social work education

This example from 10 years ago is included because it raises a lot of key, enduringissues about developing meaningful involvement that still have to be tackled. Thesummary guidelines in the report cover overcoming the barriers to involvement(Section 1), and a coherent approach to involvement (Section 2). Therecommendations in Section 1 include the following:

• The service user experience and perspective should have equal standing withother expert perspectives.

• Educational environments have to be made fully accessible. This includes thebuildings, facilities, the languages used and the provision for information andcommunication in a range of accessible formats.

• Educators and students may also be service users. This experience should bevalidated and supported.

• Service user trainers should be paid at the same rate as other trainers. Paymentshould be in an appropriate form and cover all support required.

• A range of supports should be provided to help service user trainers make themost effective contribution. These include the chance to train in pairs and groups,information about the context of their contribution and about access andfacilities, and flexibility in training arrangements.

• Social work educators need support to ensure that they respond positively ratherthan defensively to service user trainers’ increased contribution.

• Both service user trainers and educators need training to ensure the effectivenessof service user involvement in training.

Some of the recommendations in Section 2, such as the need for a systematic,coherent and comprehensive approach to involvement developed in partnershipworking, have now been firmly embedded in the national Requirements for thenew degree. Those that deal with processes include the following:

• Appropriate forums will need to be developed to ensure that effective service userinvolvement runs the whole way through training.

• Full use should be made of the growing body of training and related materialproduced by disabled people and other service users themselves. Service usertrainers should be supported to use a wide range of teaching methods, includingworkshops, videos and group exercises.

• New participatory and emancipatory approaches to research should be included inresearch teaching on social work courses. Service user trainers have a key role inteaching them.

• The theories and critiques of service users should be fully represented and givenproper weight on the courses.

contd .../

14


• Service user participation is one aspect of addressing involvement, which shouldalso be included as a major subject of study and a key theme in training.

• Service user trainers should be sought from all groups, including, for example,people affected by HIV/AIDS, homeless people and people with ‘hiddenimpairments’.

• Service user involvement should be seen as part of broader anti-discriminationand anti-oppression teaching. Service user trainers should be offered guidanceand support on anti-discrimination.

• Educators should ensure that Black and other minority ethnic trainers have equalaccess, support and opportunities to provide training.

• Service user trainers should not be restricted to discussion about being a serviceuser or user involvement.

• The issue of representatives is highly contentious. It is frequently raised as anobstacle. Local organisations offer a starting point. ‘Representativeness’ shouldbe addressed in training, and a wide range of service users’ views included.

• Social work can be concerned with restricting people’s rights. Service user trainershave a particularly important contribution to make in teaching about this area.

Example

Young Independent People Presenting Educational Entertainment (YIPPEE)and Citizens as Trainers (CATS), 200211

How to consult with people who use services (or anyone else, for that matter)

This is a two-page locally prepared brief that was the result of a day workshopattended by 15 members of the YIPPEE and CATS groups. In summary, it states:

• Treat us as you would any other expert consultants!• Don’t use isolated individual service users and pretend they are ‘representatives’.• We are much more powerful in groups. Invite 2 or 3 of us so we can support each

other.• Give us good notice, so we can support each other and plan/explain everything

fully to our members, put things in our diaries.• Ensure that the groups you choose are not just white, English speaking, non-

disabled … convenience groups.• Be aware of our transport difficulties.• Timing of meetings is really important. 9 am or 10 am is too early. How about pm

with food?• Access to buildings: give clear directions, large maps, ensure access for all.• Let us know, if it is a formal meeting, what the rules are, how long it will be, what

the agenda is, when we can have a break.• Let go of power/all those professional barriers. We are your equals and you are

asking for our advice.• Start off with a Blank Sheet. Let us be alongside you from the start.• Access to discussion/presentation. If we are deaf, visually impaired etc.• Don’t assume anything about us, we will try hard not to make assumptions about

you.

contd .../

15

• Offer payment in cash on the day. This should be for our time and expenses.Some of us may need to bring personal assistants and they will need payment too.Don’t forget to offer/pay for child/dependant care so those of us with caringresponsibilities can participate.

• Ask us what our needs are … do not be frightened of getting it wrong.• Use plain language, not jargon…. This excludes us.• Remember, not everyone is able to read, have different formats, methods.• Some of us like poetry, drama, drawings.

· • Listen to what we say; make it fun, not formal or intimidating; value our views; beopen minded; see us as individuals; don’t judge us; don’t get annoyed with usbecause we seem too ‘cocky’.

• Keep in mind that we may take a while to formulate opinions; this does notdenote lack of intelligence, but if we have never been asked before, it’s hard, ormaybe we lack confidence.

• Have someone take clear, concise notes of our meeting. Some of us might wantan audio-tape or someone to ring us with a summary.

• Remember, we are all on the same side. We want to improve services.

CATS and YIPPEE emphasise that:

Access is the first principle of participation.

The values and principles of involvement

Example

Shaping our Lives National User Network, 200312

Guidelines for making events accessible

These guidelines emphasise that “access is about providing people with equalopportunity to participate fully in whatever is being offered”, and this should bedone in a positive and affirmative way. This reminds us that each disabled personwill have their own access needs that may change over time and that they may eachmanage the same impairment/condition quite differently.

The guidelines cover in detail: before a meeting event, getting there, getting in, theplace, and during the meeting /event. For example:

• Before a meeting/event: this sets out in detail the wide range of access needs thatshould be covered and the sort of questions that could be asked. These includethe format of printed material, requirements for lip speakers, British SignLanguage (BSL) interpreters, hearing loops, palantypists, information in otherlanguages, special chairs, parking places and dietary needs. It also asks about theneeds of any accompanying personal assistant/support worker or assistance dog.It also specifies the need for the agenda in advance with a clear explanation ofeach item.

contd .../

16


• During the meeting/event: this covers how to conduct the ‘housekeeping’ in aninclusive manner, the importance of sticking to the agenda, of timing and ofagreeing break times. It has a paragraph on agreeing the ground rules for themeeting, suggesting that these could include:◗ respect each other’s access needs;◗ only one person to speak at a time;◗ person speaking to say their name and to raise their hand or whatever means is

accessible to them to let others know they are the speaker;◗ do not interrupt the speaker;◗ use plain and simple English;◗ if you don’t understand what someone is saying, please ask them to repeat it or

explain it. You are probably not the only person who doesn’t understand;◗ be aware that covering your mouth when speaking might make it difficult for

people to read your lips or hear what you say;◗ try to avoid using jargon like SOL for ‘Shaping Our Lives’;◗ in any reports or discussions after the event do not use people’s names; talk

about the issue not the person;◗ turn off mobile phones;◗ when reading out speak slowly.

[End of text from the Shaping Our Lives National User Network]

Note from SCIE: the Network ground rules above relate mainly to access issues for allparticipants. They will have to be repeatedly agreed at each meeting and eventthroughout the process of planning and delivering the courses. It is helpful if theyalso cover a commitment to:

• respecting each other’s contributions;• agreeing how to handle differences of opinion;• ensuring that the session is a safe and secure space for everyone present;• maintaining confidentiality;• avoiding discriminatory comments;• not asking personal questions;• sticking to the issues.

Finally, the Principles of partnershiparrangements for the social work degree13 alsoapply to the development of local protocols onservice user and carer involvement as theycover all the stakeholder groups. The sevenprinciples are:

• fitness for purpose;• valuing diversity both within and between

stakeholder groups;• flexibility and adaptability with defined

review standards;

• clear lines of accountability, whichrecognise the contributions differentstakeholders will make;

• transparency of decision making andfunding allocation;

• value for money;• overt acknowledgement of the benefits

and costs of maintaining partnershiparrangements.

17

10

Getting started: the process andpracticalities

This part of the guide covers the main issuesthat need to be considered in preparing forinvolvement in the social work degree. It isbased on the responses of social workacademic staff to our initial request forinformation, on discussions and workshopsthat included service users and carers, and onfurther information that was provided asplanning work gathered momentum in thesummer of 2003. About half those contacted(36) responded quickly to our request by e-mail, post or telephone. Most of this groupprovided full and enthusiastic accounts of theirplans and achievements, albeit at differentstages. Others were unable to share theirplans immediately but contributed once theywere in a position to do so.

The scope of information spans the numberand type of organisations, service users andcarers directly involved; their work together onselecting students and designing the degree;their plans for developing service user andcarer roles in all aspects of the degree; andtheir arrangements for paying participants. Italso covers the gaps in their arrangements andviews on the most challenging aspects of thedevelopment and the levers for promoting andsustaining effective participation. Someexamples from this self-reported material areincluded here.

Many of the activities described here takeplace in parallel with each other and theirtime-scales overlap.

The first steps towards service user and carerinvolvement include: securing resources;deciding who will take the initiative forward;defining service users and carers; thinking

about the meaning and level of involvement;planning training and support; addressing thepayment issues; identifying, approaching, andbringing together potential partners.

10.1. Securing resources

Before the work with service user and carerorganisations begins, each HEI has to decideabout resources in terms of staff, time andbudget that can be allocated to thisdevelopment. These decisions requirenegotiation within the schools and faculties ofthe universities and colleges, between heads ofsocial work departments and lecturers, withprogramme planning, management andcurriculum development boards,administration and finance divisions.

This exercise is more complex than it mayappear on the surface. The special grantthrough the GSCC of £6,200 to eachprogramme in 2002/03 (total grant forEngland: £400,000) made a welcomecontribution towards the expenses ofdeveloping service user and carer involvementin the first instance. A further grant (total forEngland: £420,000) has been provided for2003/04. Both the programme providers andtheir partners in service user and carerorganisations attach importance to thecontinuation of ring-fenced funding in futureyears. At the time of writing, discussions areprogressing about the mechanisms andfunding that are required in order to achievethe capacity for service user and carerinvolvement.

18


The respondents to the SCIE survey havecommented that the issue of longer-termfunding concerns them. While they are keenand, indeed, required to involve service usersand carers, discussions with colleagues raisethe issue of the proportion of resources thatshould be allocated to this element of theprogramme.

These debates arise because inputs into thecourses are often subject to assessment interms of how they assist students to meet theirlearning outcomes. Thus the courses have tobe ‘fit for the purpose’ of equipping studentsto meet the competencies, standards andacademic requirements for the award of thedegree and registration to practise. Resourcesassigned to one aspect of the programmeaffect the amounts that can be invested inother core aspects. A budget for service userand carer participation is regarded as essential,given that it is a core activity for programmeproviders.

As well as making decisions about how muchof the total budget could be spent on serviceuser and carer involvement, programme teamshave sought to secure additional specialfunding. Sources of ring-fenced moneyinclude:

• Special funds within the universities forcollaboration and development work.These funds have been influential insupporting early initiatives on service userand carer involvement in social workeducation and have provided seed cornmoney for the new degree (eg OpenUniversity, University of Portsmouth,University of Salford).

• The grants received by all potential degreeproviders through the GSCC. This moneyhas been used in a variety of ways. Theseinclude funding development workers andoutreach work to build up alliances withservice user and carer organisations, payingmeeting costs, travel expenses and fees,and supporting service user and carer-ledwork.

• The grants from the Practice LearningTaskforce for short-term regional projects.Some of these projects have covered thebroad issues of service user and carerinvolvement or have focused on buildinglinks with more service user organisationsto increase the pool of practice learningopportunities (eg East Midlands and NorthEast Regions).

• The grants following bids to the SocialPolicy and Social Work Learning andTeaching Support Network (SWAPltsn), andto other organisations and funding bodies.For example, these are contributing to thedevelopment of course modules withorganisations for families and to increasingthe participation of children and youngpeople (Royal Holloway College, Universityof London).

• Contributions from allied national and localtraining and workforce developmentbodies obtained by active approaches(Topss England and the WorkforceDevelopment Confederations).

• Creating or planning a joint fund in oneregion or town with contributions fromneighbouring HEIs and others to worktogether with local groups and financedevelopment work (eg Brighton andSussex, North East, East Midlands).

Importantly, the essential but ‘hidden’contribution of many service user and carerorganisations, individuals and programmeproviders must be recognised. Staff andmembers have already made a substantialinvestment in terms of time, money andexpertise to the development of the degree.Time devoted to this initiative means less timefor other core tasks.

10.2. Taking the lead and/or theday-to-day responsibility

All staff should be involved with service usersand carers in the delivery of the degree.

19

However, setting up the arrangements in thefirst instance requires a lot of time, skill,determination and effort, as does sustainingthem. While heads of departments takeoverall responsibility, the approaches include:

• Assigning the task to an existing memberof staff with dedicated time and supportfrom others. This approach is widespread.

• Sharing the task out among severalmembers of staff. This approach is alsocommon. For example, different membersof staff may lead on involving service usersand carers in student selection, designingcourse modules and developing practicelearning opportunities with service user andcarer organisations.

• Recruiting a new member of staff or aconsultant on a short-term contract todevelop participation. Several universitieshave adopted this approach (eg Bristol,Brunel, Coventry, Middlesex, AngliaPolytechnic University and City CollegeNorwich). Some of these posts are part-time or time-limited. The job titles includeservice user and carer coordinator,facilitator or development worker, andpartnership manager. A person withexperience as a service user or carer couldbe recruited for this post but this has notbeen standard practice.

• Getting together with other universitiesand colleges in a region to secure fundingand jointly appoint a local coordinator orliaison worker (eg Brighton and Sussex,Liverpool and John Moores, and North EastRegion Programme Providers).

10.3. Defining service users andcarers

In the last 10 years the terms ‘service user’ and‘carer’ have become part of the vocabulary ofsocial work and social care. Beforeapproaching potential partners, staff teams insome universities have worked towards

developing a shared understanding of thegroups and individuals identified by theseterms.

Traditional definitions have sometimes focusedonly on people who are current or past serviceusers, and hence have direct experiences toimpart. Now, broader, more inclusivedefinitions are preferred. For example, inintroducing a literature review for theDepartment of Health that was undertaken inpreparation for the degree, Swift14 states:

We have adopted both anadministrative definition of ‘serviceusers’ – those who are eligible to accesssocial work services – but also includethose who define themselves aspotential users of social work services,either because they anticipate a futureneed, or because they choose not touse the services that are currentlyavailable to them.

Service user organisations give their owndefinitions. In 2003, Shaping Our LivesNational User Network suggested thedefinitions and meanings that are set out inthe following example overleaf.

As shown, service user organisations reject anyuse of the term ‘service user’ to imply that aperson’s most defining characteristic is that ofa passive recipient of services. Instead, theyadvocate that a service user should always beself-identifying and seen as a person first andforemost. They do not see themselves asfitting neatly into the various service divisionsor client groups. Rather, they emphasise theiractive engagement in services as in other partsof their lives, and the experiences of servicesthat they hold in common with each other.

Getting started

20


Example

Shaping Our Lives National User Network definitions and meanings

‘Service user’: what people sometimes mean by this termThe term ‘service user’ can be used to restrict your identity as if all you are is apassive recipient of health and welfare services. That is to say, a service user can beseen as someone who has things ‘done to them’ or who quietly accepts and receivesa service. This makes it seem that the most important thing about you is that youuse or have used services. It ignores all the other things you do and which make upwho you are as a person.

What do we mean when we say ‘service user’?This is not what Shaping Our Lives National User Network means when we talk of‘service users’. We see ‘service user’ as an active and positive term, which meansmore than one thing. It is important that ‘service user’ should always be based onself-identification. But here are some of the things we think it means:

• It means that we are in an unequal and oppressive relationship with the state andsociety.

• It is about entitlement to receive welfare services. This includes the past when wemight have received them and the present. Some people still need to receiveservices but are no longer entitled to for many different reasons.

• It may mean having to use services for a long time which separate us from otherpeople and which make people think we are inferior and that there is somethingwrong with us.

• Being a service user means that we can identify and recognise that we share a lotof experiences with a wide range of other people who use services. This mightinclude, for example, young people with experience of being looked after in care,people with learning difficulties, mental health service users, older people,physically and/or sensory impaired people, people using palliative care servicesand people with drug and alcohol problems.

This last point about recognising our shared experiences of using services, whoeverwe are, makes us powerful and gives us a strong voice to improve the services weare given and to give us more control and say over what kind of service we want.

‘User-controlled’: what do we mean when we say ‘user-controlled’?There is a range of meanings of ‘user-controlled’. Here are some of the thingsShaping Our Lives National User Network thinks ‘user-controlled’ could include:

• Service users decide what and how they want things done.• The majority of the controlling group (usually the management committee) of the

organisation are users of the organisation or members of the group for whom itwas set up.

• The group or organisation strives to work from an equalities approach to serviceusers.

21

Getting started

Carers’ organisations also favour inclusivedefinitions. For example, a Carers UKdefinition states:

Carers look after family members,partners or friends in need of helpbecause they are ill, frail or have adisability.

The leaflet, A commitment to carers15 definesa carer of a person with a mental healthproblem as:

Someone who provides or intends toprovide practical or emotional supportto someone with a mental healthproblem. You may or may not live withthe person you care for. You may be arelative, partner, friend or neighbour.You may be a young person but younow find yourself in the position ofneeding to support an unwell person.

In practice, once the meanings of the terms‘service user’ and ‘carer’ have been discussed,many universities opt for broad definitions thatinclude as many potential participants aspossible and enable organisations andindividuals themselves to decide whether theyshould get involved.

10.4. Thinking about the meaningand level of involvement

Participants in the SCIE project haveemphasised that programme providers andtheir partners need to be very clear from thestart about the principles, aims and intendedoutcomes of service user and carerinvolvement. There is a link between decisionsin this area and budgetary considerations. Onthe one hand, the budget available may putlimits on the amount, type and extent ofparticipation and preparation for it. On theother hand, the level of involvement soughtmay affect the size of the budget that isneeded.

There is a long-standing debate about themeaning of ‘partnership’, ‘participation’,‘involvement’ and ‘working together’16-19.These terms are often used interchangeably,are ambiguous and may have differentmeanings for different people. The challengeis how to put into practice the ideasunderpinning these terms.

Taylor20 offers a framework for the discussionof service user participation in social workeducation. She suggests that our thinkingshould cover: culture and values; roles andresponsibilities; and the ‘value added’ toprofessional education by the partnership. Sheemphasises the importance of negotiating andagreeing the nature of the partnership withservice users.

In relation to roles, Manthorpe21 identifiesthree models for incorporating the experienceof carers into social work training: personaltestimony; carers as co-trainers; and the use ofthe programme participants’ experience ofproviding and receiving care. Although adistinction should be made between carers andservice users, this model may also apply toservice users’ contributions. In a recent paper,Beresford5 makes a case for the directtransmission of people’s ‘experientialknowledge’ in research and training, usingways that empower them. He offers fordiscussion the theory that: “The greater thedistance between direct experience and itsinterpretation, then the more likely resultingknowledge is to be inaccurate, unreliable anddistorted”.

Barnes and colleagues22 trace the evolution ofparticipation from a ‘consumerist’ to an‘empowerment’ approach and, most recently,a ‘stakeholding’ and ‘partnership’ approach.They “consider partnership a more realisticapproach because it acknowledges differentialsin power without demanding equality”.However, they point out that “empowermentmay be an outcome of partnership with serviceusers even if it is not the primary aim”.

22


Some service user organisations such as theWiltshire and Swindon Users’ Network preferto define themselves as allies rather than aspartners, arguing that the term ‘allies’ moreaccurately reflects their relationship with theprogramme providers. Given these issues, itwill be necessary to discuss and clarify theapproach on each programme. Empowermentmay be the value underpinning the trainingand the outcome of work with service usersand carers16-18. Also, it may be a condition ofengagement laid down by potential serviceuser and carer partners23,24.

The providers of social work education havestated that they have to be clear from the startabout the levels of participation that they hopeto achieve in the first instance. These maychange over time, as experience builds up, andwhen more funding becomes available. Aclear, shared understanding on all sides aboutthe aims, and scope of the partnership shouldfacilitate working together. This includes theinfluence and power that service users, carersand other stakeholders will have in decisionmaking, for example, in the student selectionprocess.

Partners may want to use a rating scale toassess the degree or level of service user andcarer involvement in the degree programmeoverall and in various elements of it. Theladder of citizen participation created byArnstein25, with its eight steps ascending fromcitizen manipulation at the bottom to citizencontrol at the top, has strongly influenced thedevelopment of tools for evaluating serviceuser involvement.

These scales usually cover a continuum ofinvolvement ranging from ‘none’ at one end to‘full involvement’ and ‘integration’ at theother. The scale developed by Goss andMiller19 to evaluate user- and carer-centredcommunity care has been adapted and appliedto service user involvement in nursing, socialwork and mental health education26-9.

The latest version of this scale is included in theNational continuous quality improvement toolfor mental health education published by theNorthern Centre for Mental Health29

(www.ncmh.org.uk). This very useful tool aimsto help the Workforce DevelopmentConfederations in their commissioning of post-qualification mental health educationprogrammes but surely has wider applicability,including to the social work degree.

The tool must be used in conjunction with theaccompanying guidance notes. Sections 2 and3 cover mental health service user and carerinvolvement in programme planning, deliveryand evaluation. Following the completion ofopen-ended questions and discussions, groupsof service users and carers use a five-pointscale to award a score for involvement. This isthen weighted and contributes to one overallpercentage score for the programme.Different scores are attached to the five levels,ranging from ‘no involvement’ to ‘partnership’.Partnership is achieved when “educationalistsand users work together systematically,strategically, with full support, reimbursementstructures and with education and trainingopportunities available. Users are involved atall stages of the planning, delivery andmanagement processes. Decisions are madejointly. Users are involved in the assessment ofstudents in the practice area. Users areworking as lecturers”.

While such scales aid thinking about the levelof involvement, they do not fully cover theequally important issue of the quality of thisinvolvement. Separate mechanisms will berequired to set quality standards and worktowards achieving them.

10.5. Training and support

The importance of training and support forservice user and carer participation is a clearmessage from contributors to this project. Wesuggest that the implementation strategy forthe degree programmes should accord priorityto the development of training. Written and

23

Getting started

agreed protocols should also be in placespecifying the arrangements for supportingservice users and carers in all their day-to-daywork on the degree programmes. Theseshould cover preparation, delivery and de-briefing, and set out what support will beavailable, how it will be provided and bywhom.

The need for proper induction, training andsupport is not confined to service user andcarer organisations and individual trainers. Itapplies also to academic and administrativestaff, students, and staff in the agenciesproviding practice learning opportunities. Theamount and type of preparation and trainingmay vary between these groups and individualswithin them, but the case for includingeveryone rests on the reasons that follow.

First, it should not be assumed that all staffand the new intake of students understand theprinciples and practicalities of working withservice users and carers. This includes what toexpect, how to behave, and the questions thatshould and should not be asked in discussionsessions.

Second, service users and carers should not beexpected to participate without access totraining and support to develop their skills andconfidence if they require it. Only a very smallminority of service users and carers areinterested in training social workers. The poolof potential trainers is unlikely to increase ifthey are not offered the tools to do the job.

Finally, training and support have beenidentified as levers for making service user andcarer participation work. The responsibility formaking it a positive experience for all theparties involved cannot lie with any singlegroup: rather, it has to be shared out.Students want high quality education and theirteachers share this interest. Service users andcarers want to make their best possiblecontribution to teaching and learning. Theyvalue training, support and constructivefeedback as mechanisms to improve theirinputs. Service users have also pointed out

that involvement in student training can beenergising and rewarding. Properly organised,it can increase personal confidence, skills andknowledge, and open doors to furthereducation, paid work and public service.

There are a variety of approaches to ‘trainingthe trainers’, and it is unlikely that one courseor method will suit everyone. This is becauseservice users and carers are a very mixed groupwith diverse backgrounds, life experiences,education, motivation and commitments. It isalso because the type and level of theirinvolvement in social work training will vary.Service users who are designing and deliveringa course module over a term may havedifferent training and support needs fromservice users who are contributing to a singlesession on the course.

Some training programmes are already triedand tested but others require a substantialinvestment of resources to develop them. Themental health survivors and service usermovement has a long track record in providingtraining courses and packages for service usertrainers30-3. Their methods and materials areadaptable for use in the training of otherservice user groups. More recently, many otherorganisations for children and young people,adults with disabilities and carers havedeveloped ‘training for trainers’. The CentralEngland People First National User TrainingDevelopment Project for people with learningdifficulties described here is an example of onesuch initiative34.

In addition to training developed and deliveredby service user and carer organisationsthemselves, other sources of access to trainingfor trainers should also be explored. Theoptions include:

• Enabling service users and carers to take uptraining courses that lead to a recognisedteaching qualification. For example, someservice users with relevant qualifications orwork experience would like to do one ofthe generic ‘training to teach adults’courses accredited by the City & Guilds

24


Group. Others would like access to thesame training opportunities that theuniversity offers to the academic staff withwhom they work.

• Developing learning opportunities andqualifications especially for service user andcarer trainers. City and Guilds Affinity, forexample, specialises in designing courses tosupport health and community provision.There may also be scope for developingnew training through the workforcedevelopment bodies for social care thatmake up the Topss UK Partnership recentlyapproved to develop the social care SectorSkills Council to be called ‘Skills for Care’.Topss England (www.topssengland.net)

Example

Central England People First National User Training Development ProjectCentral England People First is a user-led organisation for people with learningdifficulties with over 10 years’ experience in service provision, advocacy, research,consultancy and training. It carried out this project to help other people withlearning difficulties to learn how to be trainers with funding from the Departmentof Health.

The project team was made up of four members of Central England People Firstwith experience in training and partnership working. They developed the two-daytraining programme and materials, with help from the project support person andexternal advisor. They took care to design a programme that the four teammembers with learning difficulties could deliver themselves, calling on additionalsupport only when needed. They also ensured that the courses were delivered in anempowering way with plenty of opportunities for everyone to actively participateand gain skills and knowledge that they could use to provide training.

Eight organisations across the country tried out the programme and 80 people withlearning difficulties and supporters attended the training. Over the two days therewere opportunities to practise ‘role plays’, speaking in public, using a videorecorder, and to attend workshops on how people could use their own experienceas a basis for training activities that they could lead.

The participants’ evaluation forms completed at the end of the course containedpositive comments about each of its components. The training programme wasestablished and made available for adaptation and wider use. The project showsnot only that some people with learning difficulties can and want to participate instaff training but also that they themselves can take the lead in training potentialtrainers.

already has the task of developing learningmaterials to support an induction processfor organisations new to practice learningfor the degree. Along with others, serviceuser and carer organisations providingstudent placements will have access tocontributory funding and learning supportmaterials on work-based learning andassessment. Participants can gainrecognition of their competence throughthe National Vocational Qualifications(NVQ) assessment process.

The case for offering training to service usersand carers involved in the degree isemphasised here. However, there is adistinction to be made between offering

25

Getting started

training and requiring it. Some people arecautious about creating a pool of specialtrainers in case it makes service users’ andcarers’ contributions ‘too professional’, anddilutes their impact on student learning. Thereis no evidence that this will happen but everyeffort should be made to include a wide arange of service users and carers and offer thetype of training and support that they require.

10.6. Payments for involvement

”The issue of payment is exercising usall.” (senior lecturer in social work)

The principle of paying for service users’ andcarers’ time and expertise, travel and otherexpenses is widely accepted. It is one of theconditions of partnership that service userorganisations have clearly spelt out, as shownby the examples earlier in this guide.

There is a lot of variation across service userand carer groups and individuals in what theyexpect and, indeed, charge. In addition, thereare no nationally agreed rates of payment fortheir work in higher education. Rather, eachHEI has to develop and negotiate its ownpolicy and procedures within the organisationand with potential and current partners. As aresult, there are a range of differingapproaches to the amount and practicalities ofpayment. Service users and carers workingwith more than one university or college maybe paid at different rates and in different waysfor the same activity.

The SCIE project shows that payments arewidely regarded as a very complicated area.Both the programme providers and some oftheir potential service user and carer partnersidentify payment as a key implementationissue. A common and realistic concern, basedon early experiences, is that meaningfulinvolvement throughout the degree hassubstantial resource implications. This anxietyarises in the context of difficulties of providingthe course within the current budgets, andlimited development funds. Estimates of

additional costs vary but figures in the regionof £15,000 have been quoted.

Before discussion with potential partnersbegins, some agreement has to be reachedabout payment within the university. Theissues for consideration are the payments thatwill be offered, what they will cover, andwhen, how and to whom they will be paid.

10.6.1. Fees

The options for remuneration include:

• Payment at visiting lecturer rates: manynew programme providers have opted foroffering service users and carers the samefee for their teaching inputs that they offerto external lecturers, guest speakers andconsultants on existing social work courses.These vary and may be based on hourly,half-day or full-day rate or be a flat fee tocover contact and preparation time. Feesoften quoted are £20 per hour, £25 for ahalf-day and £50 for a full day forcontributions to teaching sessions. Someorganisations pay different fees fordifferent activities, for example from £5 to£10 per hour for planning meetings, thehigher rates for teaching, and in the regionof £240 per day for written work orconsultation. They may offer this fee toindividuals or to organisations. Forexample, the Wiltshire and Swindon Users’Network have agreed to be paid theexternal lecturer rate for the delivery ofteaching sessions and £5 an hour for otherwork such as preparation and attendanceat meetings. In addition, there is verbalagreement for some work to be paid atconsultancy rate.

• Payment at rates charged by participants’organisations: some service user and carergroups have worked out what they want tocharge and negotiate a price for specificpieces of work on that basis. Some chargeflat rates such as £175 to £250 per half-day and £500 for a full day, irrespective of

26


how many members are involved, or £50-£100 per person for an event. Otherssuggest between £5 to £25 an hour paidto the participants or to the group. Yetothers have negotiable terms or slidingscales for different activities and partners.Their charges typically cover overheads foradministration, training, preparation andsupport, and claims from their membersthat they take responsibility for settling.The contributions from the university orcollege in the form of meeting rooms,office space and administrative supportmay be taken into account in agreeing theactual fee. Some organisations prefer anannual grant or lump sum, including amanagement fee to cover most of theircontributions. Estimates vary but sums of£5,000 and over for a pool of 8-10 serviceuser or carer trainers have been quoted.Payments to organisations for practicelearning opportunities, including studentplacements, are separately arranged.

• Limited payments: in order to allow for thefinancial circumstances and preferences ofsome service users and carers, limited ‘ex-gratia’ payments and allowances may beoffered35. These may be seen as themiddle point on the continuum from ‘nopayment’ at one end, to ‘full payment’ atthe other end. Such payments may bemade annually or spread out over the year.Advice on this option should be obtainedfrom a reliable source.

• Payments ‘in kind’: instead of cashpayments, some organisations arrangeactivities for participants and their families,including children and young people, oroffer gift vouchers or assistance withequipment that helps an individual tocontribute to the courses. Opinions aredivided about the appropriateness of thisapproach with adults. However, there isagreement that children should not be paidin cash and other ways without permissionfrom their parents or guardians. Again,reliable advice on these options should beobtained.

In practice, a combination of arrangementsand some flexibility will be required, especiallywhere several organisations and individuals areinvolved. This approach raises dilemmas aboutconsistency and equity. A single or simplesolution seems unlikely for the followingreasons.

First, although paying fees for time andexpertise is widely regarded as best practice byboth the service user movement and publicbodies, there are many views on payment andon their importance. Some people want to bepaid in full to emphasise their equal standingwith other partners, and cannot afford or donot wish to participate without payment.Others would like limited payments andallowances in recognition of their contribution.Yet others will work as unpaid volunteers inthe spirit of public service and inclusion,emphasising the non-financial gains it maybring to them and to the quality of social carein the long run.

Second, service users’ and carers’ financialcircumstances are varied. Some are self-employed service user or mental healthsurvivor consultants and trainers who rely onthe taxable income from this activity. Othersare living on retirement pensions or claimingother benefits. Those on disability,employment and other benefits are subject tothe national earnings limits and volunteeringrules that specify how much additional incomecan be earned per week without affectingincome support, housing and other benefits.

The earnings rules are regularly reviewed andrevised, and organisations and individuals canfind it difficult to keep abreast of their contentand how to interpret them. A project at King’sCollege London tackled this issue by producingtwo separate guides on the payments andbenefits issues, one for service users andsurvivors, and the other for managers payingthose involved, and adding updates36. TheMental Health Foundation37 has published Afair day’s pay: A guide to benefits, service userinvolvement and payments. This offersguidance for organisations before starting user

27

Getting started

involvement, advice to service users who areconsidering becoming involved in improvingmental health services, and outlines thepermitted work rules. Its appendices giveadditional information for employers, sourcesof information for service users on benefitsrules, and information on who’s who indealing with benefits. The Mental HealthFoundation emphasises that the relevantlegislation is constantly changing, that wherethe details are important you should obtainconfirmation from a reliable source, and thatorganisations should always seek independentlegal advice in this complex area ofemployment and other relevant law.

The need identified for such guides underlinesthe uncertainty and anxiety about paymentissues across service provider, user and carerorganisations and among individuals.

The view that the benefits rules hinderinvolvement has been drawn to the attentionof government by service users and byorganisations with a remit to develop it. This isa national issue that is wider than payment forparticipation in social work education. It cutsacross government departments, including theDepartment of Health, the Department forWork and Pensions and the Benefits Agency,and requires attention at the highest level ifthe issues are to be resolved equitably. At therequest of the Parliamentary Under Secretaryof State for Community Care, Shaping OurLives National User Network is producing aSCIE-funded report on why benefits rulesmake it hard for service users to have a say insocial care services.

10.6.2. Travel expenses

It is standard practice to cover all travelexpenses incurred by the participants and bypersonal assistants accompanying them. Publictransport costs, taxi fares and car mileageallowances at the HEI or participants’organisations’ rates are paid. The problemscentre on the need to produce receipts and thetiming of payments. As many participants may

travel long distances and need taxis there andback, the transport costs alone for onemeeting may be substantial, varying with thecomposition and size of the group. Forexample, transport costs for a meeting with8-10 people may be between £100 and £200.

10.6.3. Allowances for personalassistants and replacement carers

Offers of payments to cover childcare,substitute carers and personal assistance arerequired and accepted practice. The costsdepend on the individual’s own arrangements,where they live and the employment situation.For example, payments to personal assistantsof £7 an hour have been quoted. The cost of acarer or helper through a private agency variesbetween £10 and £20 and a typical charge inLondon is £14.50 an hour.

10.6.4. Other costs

Service users and carers also incur otherexpenses in preparing their inputs into thecourses. These include the costs of telephonecalls, postage, faxes and photocopying. Mostorganisations offer to cover these expenses.

The above list may help to illustrate thereasons why universities are concerned aboutthe adequacy of resources for full service userand carer involvement. If service users’ andcarers’ fees, travel and other expenses arepaid, then a planning meeting with 8-10people may cost at least £300 in directpayments to participants. The costs ofaccessible venues, equipment, andrefreshments must also be calculated. Inaddition, service user and carer organisationsneed a budget for preparing contributionswith their members and for supporting andtraining their trainers. As the report preparedfor the Department of Health by Carers UKand City & Guilds Affinity38 points out, thesecosts should be balanced with the benefits ofservice user and carer involvement.

28


10.6.5. The timing and methods ofpayment

Many service users and carers are benefitsclaimants or live on small incomes. They donot have the reserves to pay for taxis and railfares, claim them back and then wait a monthor more for reimbursement. Some do nothave bank accounts and need cash payments.Many participants need their travel and otherexpenses there and back paid in cash on theday of the event and therefore do not have thereceipts for the return journey. Some need thetaxi fare paid on arrival. Claim forms are notalways user-friendly and they are time-consuming to complete and send off.Understanding and meeting these practicalneeds is essential if trusting relationships are tobe built up and sustained.

Paying service users and carers promptly andflexibly is at odds with the arrangements forpaying fees and expenses in universities andcolleges. Almost all the responses to the SCIEsurvey commented on the difficulties that theyhave encountered in this area. A lot of timehas been spent on seeking and findingsolutions, and on meetings at senior level withfinance sections. Universities and colleges haveto exercise tight control over expenditure andthey apply the same procedures to manydepartments. They may require receipts forevery item, and pay one month or more inarrears. Some universities pay externallecturers only through the payroll and requestsfrom service users for a different arrangementhave been refused. They must be sure thattheir payment arrangements do notcontravene the benefits and tax rules. Tacklingthese rigidities is testing the ingenuity ofeveryone involved. Solutions take a long timeto achieve. One approach is that service userand carer groups have their own accounts anddraw the money in advance so that they canpay expenses on the day. This arrangementmay be combined with the payment of anannual, quarterly or monthly fee to cut downon invoicing and avoid delayed payment.Other approaches include special budgets and

accounts within departments. One of theresponses to SCIE stated:

“There has been no difficulty about theprinciple of paying people forinvolvement in development activitiesetc. However, cash payments havetested the flexibility of institutionalarrangements but a resolution to this isemerging – it may involve installing asafe!”

We have emphasised that getting the practicalaspects and details of service user and carerinvolvement right is an essential part of theprocess of building up trust and robustrelationships. Mistakes may be made alongthe way and have to be rectified. As with easeof access, prompt and acceptable paymentarrangements are key to the success ofrecruiting service user and carer trainers andretaining them.

10.7. Identifying partners

The universities and colleges start this processfrom different positions, as do their potentialpartners. Whereas some universities and localgroups have started almost from scratch,others already have tried and testedarrangements with local groups.

The alliance between the Wiltshire andSwindon Users’ Network and the University ofBath over almost 10 years is one of the mostlong-standing and often quoted examples.Members of this Network are already engagedin many aspects of current social work coursesover and above delivering teaching sessions.They also have links with other HEIs, includingWiltshire College, Trowbridge.

The University of Salford partnership withCATS and later YIPPEE has been developedover five years. Their approach to joint work isbased on citizen empowerment andparticipation built up through self-directedgroup work. They estimate that it took 18

29

Getting started

months to build up their skills, confidence, andunderstanding of the social model of disabilityto a point where they could contribute fully intwos or threes to social work training. CATSand YIPPEE meet fortnightly and now have anoffice at the university, shared with somelecturers. They presented their model at theInternational Schools of Social WorkConference in 200239. Since the new degreewas announced, both the Wiltshire andSwindon Users’ Network and CATS are beingasked to advise other universities on theirstrategies for service user involvement.

Mental health survivors have contributed insome way to teaching on many social workeducation and ASW programmes and also tonursing education27,30, 40-2. The University ofBirmingham supports Suresearch, which is anetwork of service users in research andeducation who have experienced mentaldistress, and their allies. The group meets bi-monthly at the university.

More recently, young people have begun tobecome involved, using a range of methods,including drama, poetry and videos. Forexample, the young people from theLancashire Children’s Rights Service useddrama to convey their expectations of socialworkers to a large group of lecturers andpractice teachers at Lancaster University’s firstplanning event for the degree.

However, the major shift to the systematicinvolvement required on the new degree hasmade it necessary for programme providers toreview their arrangements. In doing so, thequestions that they are posing themselvesinclude:

• Which organisations are already workingwith us and how?

• Are there other local and national groupsthat should be involved?

• Where are the gaps?

• How will we include groups for childrenand young people, mental health survivors,homeless people, older people, people withlearning disabilities, and people from blackand minority ethnic groups?

• Shall we work with one or two service userand/or carer groups of trainers or with arange of local groups?

• How many people and organisations do weneed to involve?

• What level of involvement, and fromwhom, do we need to meet all the newrequirements?

The changes also give the service user andcarer organisations, once informed aboutthem, the chance to consider:

• How well is our involvement working andwhat needs to change?

• Is training social work students an area inwhich we want to be involved?

• What would be our terms and conditionsfor taking part?

• What training and support would ourmembers need?

Many universities have carried out mappingexercises to draw up lists of potential localpartners, sometimes working withneighbouring course providers to do so. Insuch exercises, there is scope for consideringwhether national organisations might act as aresource. For example:

• The Shaping Our Lives National UserNetwork may provide advice and otherinputs.

• Carers UK with City & Guilds Affinity haveassessed the feasibility and costs ofdeveloping local teams of 8-10 trained andsupported carer members to work witheach HEI offering the degree.

30


If national initiatives similar to the onedescribed above are funded, they shouldsubstantially increase the capacity of serviceuser and carer-controlled organisations towork with the degree providers.

Mapping local resources is a big task andinformation may be sought from coalitions ofdisabled people, centres for independentliving, religious bodies, the many otherorganisations with specific interests, andCouncils for Voluntary Services.

Universities and colleges that have limitedexperience of service user and carerparticipation and few links with local groupshave to opt for ‘starting somewhere’ byworking initially with one or two groups andbuilding up a longer-term strategy togetherwith them. Service user and carerorganisations can contribute a lot to therecruitment of new groups. Some groups haveput a lot of work into developing accessibleleaflets and information about how theycontribute to training and reproduce thefeedback given by students, staff and theservice user or carer trainers. For example,members of the group called ‘Folk.us’ in Exetercarried out their own research on users astrainers. They have produced four lively anduseful information sheets that quote the viewsof those involved, giving detailed advice on theprocess, including where to find users43. Theseleaflets were incorporated into the Universityof Plymouth 10 October 2002 conferencereport with permission to copy them subject toacknowledgement44.

10.8. Approaching partners

This outreach work takes time and requirescareful preparation. It involves telephone calls,e-mails and meetings to explain the initiativeto the different organisations, to learn whatthey do, who else they are involved with, whatthey might offer and what their terms andconditions are for engagement.

Experiences to date suggest that the lecturersand development workers have to be flexiblein their approach and not set out withpreconceived ideas about how the involvementprocess will work. Many service users andcarers do not want and are not able to travellong distances to attend meetings atuniversities. They would like to be includedbut prefer the staff to visit them in their ownhomes or local centres or to arrange a centralvenue. Information leaflets in accessibleformats about the degree and about thepractical arrangements we have discussedmake this stage smoother. Following the initialcontact, the lecturer needs to be available toanswer any queries and to provide furtherinformation.

Some social services departments andvoluntary organisations have service user andcarer, and children and young people’sparticipation units and workers. They arepotentially key allies, acting as a conduitbetween the universities and individuals andgroups, and facilitating direct and indirectinputs to the courses.

10.9. Bringing partners together

Recognising that the lead-in time is long, someuniversities began the process of bringingpotential partners together soon after theyhad applied to the GSCC for accreditation togrant degrees in social work. The events wereeither organised by one university with localsocial work employers (eg University ofLancaster, University of Plymouth, 2002), or byregional groups.

In other regions also, neighbouring universitieshave formed partnerships either to develop ajoint degree or to coordinate their work onservice user and carer participation (egLiverpool and John Moores, Brighton andSussex, Warwick and Coventry). Thesearrangements have the advantages of avoidingmultiple approaches to the same organisationsand employers, and maximising the use ofresources. For example, by working closely

31

Example

North East Region Conference: ‘Listening to people’s experiences – Modelsof practice and the future of social work education and training’

In September 2002 a conference was organised by the North East Regional LiaisonGroup (Diploma in Social Work and Practice Teacher Programmes) and the NorthEast Regional Topss Forum, in partnership with people who use services, parents andcarers in the centre of Newcastle upon Tyne. The HEIs that came together wereDurham, Northumbria, Teeside, and Sunderland with New College Durham. Theorganisations represented were the social services departments across the region,local mental health trusts and centres, and service user and carer organisations.These included NCH Children’s Rights Services and ALPS project, Barnardo’s, ServiceUsers and Carers as Trainers (SUCAT), and Citizens as Trainers in South Tyneside(Catalist).

Forty people attended. The programme consisted of a guest speaker from theGSCC, followed by a choice of four workshops, lunch, then a guest speaker fromSCIE, again followed by four workshops, three of which were repeated from themorning. The workshop themes were based around the various aspects of thedegree, namely recruitment and selection, the curriculum, research and qualityassurance and management. The workshops had been planned with service usersand carers. The specific topics were: social work skills to support carers; involvingservice users and carers in the ASW programme; users and carers in recruitment andselection; service users and students’ assessments; and community developmentinvolving people with mental health problems. The issues addressed were: howservice users and carers can be involved in each stage; what information, supportand resources they need; how can people really work in partnership; and any othersuggestions about the ways of involving service users and carers.

In introducing the conference, the regional chair made it clear that everyone viewedthe conference ‘as the start of the process and not a one-off event’, and that thenext step was to develop a detailed strategy together. A conference feedbackreport has been produced and distributed45. The members of the group havecontinued to pool some resources and work together at regional and sub-regionallevel. They held a series of workshops in the spring of 2003, secured resources for apartnership manager, and at the same time developed their own approaches andlocal contacts through in-depth work.

Getting started

together, the Universities of Warwick andCoventry have been able to harmonise manyof their procedures and dovetail theirplacements.

Our project provides information on thenumbers of groups and individuals who haveexpressed an interest in or become involved,after several months of preparatory work. Thesize of the pool of partners varies and is still

building up, especially in relation to practicelearning opportunities. Typically, a programmeprovider seems to be working with betweenfour and ten groups. The number ofindividuals who are actively involved rangesfrom four to 20, and is usually around 8-10.This means that involving service users andcarers directly in all aspects of the degree willremain a challenging task unless and untilmore people can be recruited. It also

32


emphasises that willing participants are avaluable and scarce resource. Policies andpractices must recognise and encourage theircommitment so that individuals drop out fortheir own reasons rather than because ofnegative experiences.

In contrast, some universities and colleges havepointed out that there are many local serviceuser and carer groups, individuals andvoluntary organisations that they couldapproach. Therefore, they have to have somemethod of deciding either on their own orwith their allies which ones to include. Theypoint out that they do not want to createcompetition or other problems for the groups.For example, it would be regrettable ifresources largely affected decisions in thesense that they selected partners who did notrequire fees.

33

11

This next and often overlapping stage involvesa lot of preparation and negotiation workwithin the internal university structures andsystems, at the same time as keeping up themomentum with service user and carerpartners. It is a lengthy process that includesbriefing everyone about the degreerequirements, proposal writing, committeework at all levels, and course validation.Securing the support of the most senioruniversity staff and the School Directorate, andgetting all academic colleagues, courseadministrators and finance officers on boardare integral and essential parts of the process.

Plans and decisions have to be made about thearrangements for service user and carerinvolvement in the overall planning andmanagement of the degree. They also have tocover the roles of service users and carers in:student selection; the design of the degree;teaching and learning provision; preparationfor practice learning; provision of placements;learning agreements; the assessment ofstudents; and quality assurance.

At this stage too, the often complicated andcomplex issues faced in the preparatory stageshave to be re-visited. Issues such asconfidentiality and accountability assumeincreasing importance and have to benegotiated with all parties.

11.1. Planning for involvement atstrategic and management levels

This is the area, along with the selection ofstudents, in which some HEIs can report theirachievements in the academic year 2002-2003, rather than their plans. A range of

Moving forward

approaches are being tried and tested. Theyseem to be working well, suggesting thatthere are many ways, rather than one way, toapproach service user involvement. A fewuniversities report that it is more difficult toraise service users’ and carers’ enthusiasm fortaking part in planning and managementboards than for other activities such asteaching. This seems to stem from a dislike offormal committee meetings and paperwork,and a preference for consultation on theirhome ground.

Some degree programme providers regardservice users’ and carers’ participation in theprogramme management and partnershipboards as the central plank of theirinvolvement strategy. This approach meansthat service users and carers, together with theother stakeholder groups, have an overview ofthe degree programme and can influence thedecisions about all its aspects, from designthrough to quality assurance. In relation toservice user participation, the issues that ariseinclude: who should decide about thecomposition of the committee; and how toinclude both service user stakeholders whohave direct involvement in the running of thecourse, and also independent service uservoices (University of Central England inBirmingham).

The level and nature of participation in theprogrammes varies from ‘limited’ to‘integrated’. Some universities and collegeshave opted for the attendance of service userand carer representatives at all relevantmeetings so that they are part of the body thatdrives forward the programme and oversees it.Others have opted for meetings with serviceuser and carer representatives about twice a

34


Example

The University of Warwick and Coventry University have worked together on theirarrangements for involvement across their postgraduate and undergraduate socialwork education programmes. They decided that it was in everyone’s interests toharmonise on a sub-regional basis. In their joint enterprise, they have used thenotion of guardianship to underpin the work of their new Stakeholder Board.There is a lot of enthusiasm within the universities about this initiative.

The guardians take some responsibility for certain areas of the whole operation interms of the content and quality of the curriculum. Thus some groups of partners haveownership and responsibility for the issues relating to service user and carerparticipation, the voluntary sector, and employers. The two organisations that haveagreed to be the guardians for service user and carer interests are Disability WestMidlands, a federation of organisations of disabled people, and Carers UK.

The Stakeholder Board serves both universities. Its membership covers the threelocal authority partners, the two service user and carer guardianship groups, onevoluntary sector guardian, and university staff. The Board has one large meetingper year and a smaller one half way through the year. At the large meeting, sometime is reserved for the stakeholders to meet separately with each university. Inaddition, the stakeholders discharge their duties in ways that fit in with thedifferent needs and structures of the courses, including their slightly differentarrangements for interviewing and admissions.

Example

The School of Health and Social Welfare at the Open University reports that it set upits Service User Panel following a workshop with a range of organisations in 2000.This is a largely autonomous body currently consisting of members that come from adiverse field of service user expertise. A person specification for new members andinduction and training has been proposed.

The Panel meets formally four times a year and is funded by the School. Membersare paid at similar rates to day lecturers and consultants. At each meeting, the Paneland the School staff hold separate sessions and then the groups come together foran integrated session.

The tasks of the Panel have been identified as monitoring the School’s activities toachieve internal consistency and integrity, advising on issues relating to service userinvolvement in all the School’s activities, and participating in activities to furthersuch involvement. User members also attend School committees as full participants.

In relation to the social work degree programme that begins in 2005, it is proposedthat a nominated sub-group of the Panel will participate directly in the plans andprocesses, and is currently developing a Code of Practice for Service UserInvolvement. Service users will be represented initially on all the practice courseteams.

contd .../

35

year. Participants may be elected, invited,persuaded, or join because they are the onlyvolunteers.

Some universities are considering or havedeveloped their participation strategy on aschool-wide basis so that it covers all teachingand learning programmes including socialwork and nursing (eg Northumbria Universityand the Open University). This approach isimportant as opportunities forinterprofessional learning expand and serviceusers and carers become increasingly involvedin training on different professionalprogrammes46.

11.2. Selecting students

The recruitment and selection of students isthe first area of delivering the degree, ratherthan planning it, in which service users andcarers have actively participated in 2003.

There is consistent evidence from research andconsultations that service users and carersacross different groups agree about thepersonal qualities, skills, knowledge andabilities that social workers need14,38,47-8. Theseviews are set out in the Department of Healthpublication47, Focus on the future keymessages from focus groups about the futureof social work training. Their views cover thehelp and outcomes they want and also thequalities and standards of behaviour theyexpect. In summary, service users want socialworkers to be: physically and emotionallyavailable; supportive, encouraging andreassuring; respectful; patient and attentive;committed to the independence of theindividual; punctual; trustworthy; reliable;friendly but not frightened to tell people howthey see things; and empathic and warm47.

Moving forward

Service users and carers also attach greatimportance to the quality of their relationshipwith individual social workers, to time todevelop such a relationship and to consistencyand continuity in their contacts14.

The above knowledge supports the case forservice user and carer involvement in selectingsocial work students. The universities thatstarted the degree in 2003 had only a shorttime to make arrangements to include serviceusers and carers and will be reviewing them inthe light of their experiences. The majorchallenges relate to the availability of serviceusers and carers, their preparation along withother members of the panel, the substantialtime demands that direct involvement placeson them, the issues of consistency and equityin the process for students, and the resourceimplications, including fee payment. Thus, ifservice users and carers are to be present ateach individual interview, and there are threeapplicants for each place, 90 interviews may beconducted for 30 places and these may takeplace once a week over six months.

The approaches that have been adoptedinclude:

• Agreeing with service user and carerpartners the questions that they would likeapplicants to be asked, based on work toestablish the skills, knowledge and personalattributes that people want in socialworkers.

• Arranging for all applicants to attend agroup session or interview as part of theselection process and including serviceusers and carers on the panel. This mayinvolve asking questions, observing ormaking a brief presentation in the sameway as other stakeholder groups.

Although the guardians have a brief to advise on service user and carer interests andto identify specific issues, including the range of groups and individuals that need tobe represented, other stakeholders in the university have responsibility for theseinterests as well. A written schema about how service user and carer interests arerepresented has been developed to shape and check out the programmes.

36


• Arranging for service users and carers to beinvolved in each candidate’s interview. Ifthe same people do not take part in eachinterview, there may be issues relating tothe equitable treatment of candidates, andrepercussions if a rejected applicant appealsagainst the Panel’s decision.

• For the future, several universities proposeto have places for service users and carerson their admission panels or teams. Thisarrangement gives service users and carersa role in overseeing the whole process fromdesign through to monitoring, review andquality assurance even if they do notparticipate in the individual or groupinterviews of the candidates. Thoseinvolved may be members of a widerservice user and carer forum or individualsthat report to them or to the programmemanagement board.

The admissions teams have also paid attentionto the preparation process for studentselection. Some teams have held joint trainingor briefing sessions for everyone involved ininterviewing and gone through each stage indetail. They have also made staff timeavailable to meet the different requirements ofindividual service users and carers andarranged to provide training in interviewingskills, information, support and feedback.

Whatever the specific arrangement, the degreeproviders will have to be clear about the partthat service users and carers will play in makingthe decision to accept or reject applicants. Theuniversity awarding the degree has theultimate responsibility for this decision and sothere is a power differential inherent in thesystem. Within this limit, however, there isscope for different levels of influence rangingfrom giving advice that may or may not betaken, to playing the same part in the decisionmaking as other members of the panel.

11.3. Teaching and learningprovision

There is more experience of service user andcarer involvement in this aspect of runningsocial work programmes than in any other.However, this experience is unevenly spreadacross universities and also across coursemodules within one university. Although manyprogrammes arrange for service users andcarers to run disability, equalities and carerawareness sessions or to give accounts of theirpersonal experiences of services, few haveservice user and carer-led inputs firmlyembedded throughout the course. The degreeprogrammes provide an opportunity to try outand test new more systematic arrangements.At the start, it seems advisable to keep anopen mind about the value of the variousapproaches. Thus, it should not be assumedthat what worked before will work now or,indeed, that what worked before will not worknow.

A lot of flexibility is needed to meet thelearning needs of the students, the academicand practice requirements for the award of thedegree and to accommodate the preferencesof service users and carers. For example, manygroups of trainers follow the social model ofdisability and focus on the barriers to fullparticipation. They have agreed together whatthey will teach, and so a person with alearning disability or physical disability will givethe same input, focusing on part of the socialwork role such as assessment or reviewwithout reference to how they have beenlabelled by diagnosis or client group.

Other service users want to specialise in aparticular area such as mental health, lookingafter a child with a disability or the experienceof being a looked-after child. In addition,some groups want to design their ownmodules or inputs whereas others want todevelop them in joint work with teaching staff.

Many programme providers have selectedspecific modules for development inpartnership with service users and carers. For

37

Moving forward

example, the University of Central England inBirmingham has built on previous experienceto involve service users and carers in the designand delivery of the modules on Expectations ofProfessional Practice, Issues for Different UserGroups and Specialist Practice. As theExpectations of Professional Practice module isdelivered early in the course, priority was givento establishing a strong user presence in itscore team and a large number of service usershave become involved. Whereas some moduleteams such as the Specialist Practice moduleon Mental Health quickly achieved strongservice user involvement, others such as the

Example

Involving families living in poverty in training social workers: A jointFamily Rights Group, ATD Fourth World, Royal Holloway, University ofLondon, and Families Living in Poverty project

This group has come together for a one-year project that will work with familiesliving in poverty who have experience as users of services in order to develop andpilot a poverty and exclusion training programme. They are focusing on this issuebecause families living in persistent poverty are particularly likely to experiencesocial exclusion and social work interventions. The project is funded by theDepartment of Health, the Gulbenkian Foundation, SCIE and the Social Work andSocial Policy Learning and Teaching Support Network (SWAPltsn).

The Family Rights Group works with families, practitioners, researchers and policymakers to improve services for families whose children are involved with socialservices. ATD Fourth World is a human rights organisation that believes that only byworking in partnership with families experiencing poverty and social exclusion canreal and effective change come about in the lives of those most disadvantaged.Most of the families they work alongside with have experience of social servicesintervention and the care system. A wide group of family members who do notwish or initially lack the confidence to engage in direct teaching or policy forumsparticipate in family workshops so that their voices may be heard. Royal Holloway,University of London Department of Health and Social Care provides both qualifyingand post-qualifying social work courses and undertakes childcare research.

The project aims to produce:

• A model for involving families in the training of social workers that has beendeveloped by families in partnership with some providers and users of training.

comparable modules on children and familiesand on adults are building up wider coregroups through consultation and networkingbefore the courses are delivered in 2005.

Some programme providers and their partnershave secured external funding to support thejoint development of new course modules.The project being undertaken by the FamilyRights Group, ATD Fourth World and RoyalHolloway, University of London is an exampleof this approach.

contd .../

38


• A training module on social work, poverty and social exclusion to be delivered byfamilies living in poverty and academics that can be used in qualifying and post-qualifying training programmes, including practice teachers programmes, forchildren and families’ social workers.

• Training for family members on increasing their own training and presentationskills.

• A model training programme for families who may become involved in trainingsocial workers.

• Increased confidence, skills and self-esteem for families attending the group.

The project’s activities include:

• Establishing a working group made up of 8-10 family members from varied ethnicgroups, four academics, two practitioners, a social services manager, ATD FourthWorld, Family Rights Group, and at least one representative from the nationalbodies involved in developing social work education.

• Holding meetings of the working group on six days over the course of the year.Family members meet with ATD Fourth World and the Family Rights Group in themorning and are joined by the rest of the group in the afternoon.

• Holding six separate meetings of the family members with ATD Fourth World toprepare for the working group meetings, provide support, and undertaketraining on presentation and training skills.

• Preparing a literature review and drafting the academic component of thetraining programme (Royal Holloway staff).

• Piloting the training programme in Royal Holloway’s qualifying and post-qualifying courses.

• Producing a report of its work and recommendations that will be relevant toother institutions and organisations considering the same challenges.

On completion of the project, the training programme will be tested further on thequalifying and post-qualifying social work courses at Royal Holloway and at leasttwo other universities.

The findings of the project will be disseminated widely and the family members willbe involved in all these activities. The final report will be available on the SCIEwebsite (www.scie.org.uk) and the training module will be available on the SocialPolicy and Social Work Learning and Teaching Support Network (SWAPltsn) website.

As the Royal Holloway example shows,designing training programmes from scratchwith the active and ongoing participation ofservice users and their organisations requires asubstantial investment of resources. This isdistinct from sustaining service userparticipation in delivering training that is alonger-term activity.

11.4. Practice learningopportunities

The development work undertaken by nationalbodies and the degree programme providersshows that service user and carer organisationswant to play a more active part in providing arange of practice learning opportunities47,49.

The capacity of service user and carerorganisations to offer practice learning needs

39

Moving forward

to be built up in the next three years, as manyhave not been previously involved. As part ofthis process, they may access the funding andtraining materials to support the induction towork-based learning and assessment fororganisations new to practice learning beingdeveloped through Topss England. They couldbenefit also from working closely with socialcare employers that are experienced in practicelearning and have a pool of practice teachersthat could provide mentoring and support.

The Wiltshire and Swindon Users’ Network hasprovided SCIE with a commentary on the waysthat social work students benefit fromplacements within user-controlledorganisations:

”User-controlled organisations such asthe Wiltshire and Swindon Users’Network already offer placements tostudents, and those at the Networkhave been very successful. User-controlled organisations demand of thestudents a willingness to question theirvalue base and attitude in a way that isnot possible within other placements.Issues of empowerment, rights, andresponsibilities, and choice and controlare perceived differently in user-controlled organisations, and thestudent acquires much learning towardsmaking a more balanced judgement inassessment. With the inception of thenew degree, it is important that user-controlled organisations continue tooffer placements, and that thequalifications relating to the role ofpractice teacher are not so restrictingthat they exclude experienced practiceteachers from continuing in this rolewithin user-controlled organisations.”

The Practice Learning Taskforce, set up by theDepartment of Health and hosted by TopssEngland, began a two-year project in January2003 that aims to improve the quantity, qualityand diversity of practice learning opportunitiesin partnership with all stakeholders in the

degree programmes. In its first year itsupported 72 regional development projectswith funding from the Department of Health.Three of these projects focused specifically oninvolving service users and carers (University ofDerby and Derbyshire Social Services, Universityof Plymouth, and Swindon PracticeDevelopment Centre). Working with serviceuser and carer organisations was also includedin the project themes on preparing for andgenerating new practice learning opportunities(eg University of Sunderland and New CollegeDurham). The paper Practice learning‘Everybody’s business’ summarises the keymessages from these projects, and givessignposts to the agencies/universities andproject contact details49. Further informationis available from the Taskforce(www.practicelearning.org).

The regional projects, the SCIE survey, and thepreparatory focus groups47 show consistentlythat service user and carer organisations couldcontribute to practice learning at each levelover the three-year degree programme,provided that they are properly supported andpaid. This includes the time students spend onpreparation for practice, observation ofpractice, and their 200 assessed social workpractice days.

Different levels of resources, commitment andmethods apply to the range of practicelearning opportunities. Initially, the activitieswill centre on preparation for practice, duringwhich the student’s capacity to actappropriately and safely in a practiceenvironment is assessed. This will contributeto the HEI’s statement of fitness to undertakeformal practice learning. At this stage, serviceusers and carers may make direct inputs intoseminars or prepare materials, including videosof interviews or role plays, for use in individualstudy, skills laboratories and group work. Also,staff and individuals in service user and carerorganisations may offer their own practice andcircumstances for shadowing or observation bystudents, providing commentary andexplanation50.

40


Although many organisations do not have thecapacity to offer an entire second or third yearstudent practice opportunity, they may be ableto contribute along with other agencies,provided that there is external support fromexperienced practice teachers and assessors.

The range of practice learning opportunitiessuggested by both service user and carerorganisations includes the following:

• Students ‘shadow’ or follow service users,carers and their families for substantialperiods of time. From observation andexplanation, they learn directly aboutservice users’ and carers’ daily lives andissues. Also, they learn about problemsolving and resourcefulness.

• Students observe staff and members ofservice user and carer organisations atwork. Through involvement in advocacy,helplines, support groups, and other directservices, they learn listening, assessmentand communication skills. Opportunitieswith black and minority ethnic groupscould increase both cultural awareness andunderstanding of the service user and carerperspective.

• Students interview service users, carers andstaff in their organisations who in turnprovide a commentary on theirperformance that can be fed into theassessment of their fitness for formalpractice learning.

Example

University of Nottingham: Service user assessment of students

In this approach, service users take the lead in the Users’ and Carers’ Perspectives inCommunity Care module aimed at second year students on the MA route as part ofthe ‘adults’ pathway.

What is distinctive about this module is that it is planned, delivered and assessed byservice users and carers, who are paid for their services. The module therebyoperates in partnership with a local organisation, Advocacy in Action, which has along and trusted relationship with the university.

The aim of the module is that “students will be able to grasp the significance of theperspectives of service users and carers within community care. It is argued thatsocial workers have historically not understood that users and carers are first andforemost people, with unique experiences and narratives. Through a process ofexperiential learning, the module will demonstrate that an understanding of theseusers and carers as people is an essential prerequisite for successful social workpractice. The common theme of the module will be the shared humanity of socialworkers, service users and carers”. The module raises the issues relating to thepower dynamics of communication with service users, hence the importance ofservice user and carer-directed assessments.

The course is delivered in six one-day workshops. Eight or nine service usersparticipate in each module, sharing their personal experiences. The last twoworkshops are assessment days. Students give a presentation of their life history,bearing in mind the communication skills they use. Some assessors may have

contd .../

41

Moving forward

learning difficulties or other disabilities. Students must take account of these issuesin their presentations.

The grading is a percentage mark, based on the service users’ judgement on howwell the students have been able to engage in the themes of the module throughtheir presentations. There is also a proportion of the mark awarded in recognitionof the overall contributions of students to the module, judged by service users overthe entire module. In 2001 and 2002, the coordinating tutor moderated the finalmark awarded. For 2003, this tutor has been part of the teaching team and willtherefore be part of the assessment process itself, with no consequent need formoderation of the marks.

• Students learn and practise the roles andtasks of managers, staff and members ofthe organisations, under supervision and aspart of formal practice learning.

• Students are allocated discrete newprojects that they can design and carry outthemselves with supervision. They learnresearch, development, practice andpartnership working skills. The projects arepart of their assessed days of practice.

11.5. Assessment of students

Service users and carers want to be involved inassessing students as well as in teaching themand providing practice learning opportunities.Some Diploma in Social Work and post-qualifying programmes already havearrangements in place but the start of thedegree programmes has prompted more jointwork on systematic, explicit and formalisedprocesses. Much of the activity has centred onthe preparation for practice modules that willbe delivered in the first year of theprogramme. There are plans to involve serviceusers and carers fully in the second and thirdyear and to ensure that they participate in thepractice assessment panels.

As the student assessment process moves upthe agenda and service users and carers areincreasingly involved in its development, thereare a lot of practicalities to be addressed.These include who makes the assessment,when, how and to whom? For example, is

feedback given directly to the student by theservice user, is it collated by the lecturer, thepractice assessor or an independent person?Moreover, what weight will be attached toservice users’ and carers’ assessments ofstudent portfolios, especially when theiropinions differ from those of tutors andpractice assessors?

There is also scope for developing morecreative methods for service user and carerparticipation in assessment. For example,several years ago Parsloe and Swift at theUniversity of Bristol piloted and field-tested amethod whereby service users, students, tutorsand practice teachers independently assessedvideos of student interviews with service users.The assessors rated their performance on 15items and the researchers compared theratings to see how far the different groups ofassessors agreed about what is a good piece ofwork14,51,52.

As part of the SCIE project, the NationalOrganisation of Practice Teaching (NOPT)generously included a questionnaire in theirMarch 2003 Newsletter, asking for members’experiences of service user and carerinvolvement in student assessment onplacement. Twenty responses were receivedinitially and the results were analysed andsummarised by academic staff at ManchesterMetropolitan University and Salford University.In order to take this further, a workshop wasplanned for the national conference to givepractice teachers the opportunity to devise aformat for service user/carer feedback. The

42


National Organisation of Practice Teaching, March 2003Survey of practice teachers’ experiences of service user/carer involvement in studentassessment on placement

A range of responses were received from across England with the majority ofpractice teachers/work-based assessors having some experience of service userinvolvement in the assessment of students and around a third with ‘considerable’experience. The majority of practice teachers received this feedback verbally,although some used a written, structured format to elicit these responses. Onerespondent asked the student to devise their own form for feedback, another usingspontaneous comments from the service user at the end of the direct observation –after the student had left.

Key findings included:

• The most useful method would be a semi-structured format that could beadministered by the practice teacher, student or work-based supervisor.

• The service user could complete this in writing or the practice teacher, student orwork-based supervisor could ask verbal questions and record the service user’sreplies.

• One format can be devised to apply flexibly to all settings.• Where particular communication issues present themselves, the practice teacher

and student should devise appropriate methods of eliciting information.• Sensitivity to service user needs and experience is important in the administration

of any feedback process.• Clear, understandable language should be used.• Service user feedback is essential to give service users an authentic voice and to

provide varied and balanced feedback for assessment.• Feedback needs to be used by the practice teacher as a learning experience for

the student.• Service user feedback should be a requirement in making an assessment for all

students in any setting.• It is important for the practice teacher and the student to select the service user

together, rather than the student alone.• Careful preparation of the service user for involvement in this process is important

and must include the right to refuse.• Trigger questions linked to core competencies are not the aspects of student

performance of most concern to service users – start from the service userperspective.

• The practice teacher has the task of translating feedback into evidence for thecore competencies/national occupational standards.

• Service users should not be expected to identify aspects of the student’sperformance that need to be developed; that again is the practice teacher’s task.

43

Moving forward

need to construct guidelines for good practicein this area was also identified. The report forthe NOPT newsletter is summarised here.

Several of the Practice Learning Taskforceregional development projects considered howservice users and carers could participate inassessment (www.practicelearning.org):

• The University of Plymouth held practicelearning workshops at which service usersand carers made invaluable contributions.Students on this programme will interviewone or more service users as part of theirassessment as being ready for practicelearning experience. The service users willbe asked to give feedback on theirperformance and verify that the student’sreport is accurate. Service users and carersare playing a vital part in devising theassessment method and draft guidelines,Initial assessment of ‘Readiness for practicelearning, have been produced. Serviceuser, carer, and student involvement hasbeen instrumental in keepingdocumentation and discussion jargon-free.

• The Swindon Practice Development Centrefocused attention, through consultationswith voluntary sector projects, on serviceuser feedback in the assessment ofstudents in Years 1 and 2. They agreedseven headings for feedback that will beincorporated into the assessments.

• The University of East Anglia developedtools for monitoring practice learning.These are a placement assessment form, amonitoring form, and a student and serviceuser feedback form.

• Finally, service user, carer and otherorganisations that work on more than oneprogramme have pointed out theprocedures and processes, including thosefor assessment, are usually different. TheWest Midlands, and the University of Hulland University of Lincoln regional projectssought to develop more similar orintegrated approaches.

11.6. Quality assurance

As part of their comprehensive strategy,programmes have set up partnership ormanagement boards to oversee all stages ofdesign and delivery of the degree, includingquality assurance. The service user and carermembers participate along with others indeveloping these mechanisms. Only at the endof the first year of the degree programme, willit be possible to compare emergingapproaches, and assess how they work. In2006, when the first social work degrees areawarded, fuller information will becomeavailable on how service user and carerinvolvement in quality assurance works and thevalue that it adds to the processes and theiroutcomes.

44


Many universities and colleges offering thedegree programmes in England in 2003 andtheir allies in service user and carerorganisations have made a good start atworking together, but progress is unevenacross the country and the specific aspects ofthe programmes. In November 2003, theGSCC and SCIE held a joint conference entitled‘Living and Learning Together’, to promote andshare different approaches to service user andcarer involvement. Ten workshops wereplanned and delivered by social work lecturersand their service user and carer partners. Thereport of the conference proceedings that willbe published shortly after this guide showsthat imaginative ways of involving service usersand carers have been achieved. These includepartnerships with children and young people,asylum seekers, people with learningdifficulties, parents and carers, and the use ofdrama and poetry.

In the move towards active and systematicservice user and carer participation in socialwork education, the areas for attentioninclude:

• Building and sustaining capacity: in orderthat the initiative may realise its potential,priority should be attached to building upthe capacity of both service user and carerorganisations and degree programmeproviders for joint working. Ring-fencedfunding is one of the levers to facilitate thisdevelopment.

• Training and support: training for serviceuser and carer trainers is high on theagenda of their organisations. Thisincludes support for these organisations todevelop their own training and support

Next steps

systems and the development at a nationallevel of accredited training leading toqualifications.

• Payment of service users and carers is acomplicated area. Practice varies across thecountry and some guidance is required.

• Codes of practice may help to promote andmonitor fair treatment and good qualityprocesses and outcomes.

• Evaluation: a wide variety of differentapproaches to service user and carerparticipation are emerging. Programmeproviders and their partners need to haverobust systems for tracking, monitoring,reviewing and revising their approaches.Research is required to assess theeffectiveness of these approaches in termsof processes and outcomes.

The first three years of service user and carerparticipation in the degree afford everyoneinvolved the opportunity to experiment in theirapproaches, build up a body of knowledge andexperience, and assess how it makes adifference to social work education, practiceand, above all, its outcomes for service usersand carers. Arrangements for sharingexperiences and learning from each other maymove these developments forward creativelyand sustain them. Further developments inservice user and carer involvement must surelybe based on the values and principles ofservice user organisations and seek to widenparticipation.

12

45

1 DH (Department of Health) (2002)Requirements for social work training,London: DH.

2 DH (Department of Health) (2000) A qualitystrategy for social care, London: DH.

3 Topss (Training organisation for the personalsocial services) England (2002) The nationaloccupational standards for social work,Leeds: Topss.

4 GSCC (General Social Care Council) (2002)Codes of practice for social care workersand employers, London: GSCC.

5 Beresford, P. (2003) It’s our lives: A shorttheory of knowledge, distance andexperience, London: OSP for Citizen Press.

6 Croft, S. and Beresford, P. (1993) Gettinginvolved: A practical manual, London: OpenServices Project and Joseph RowntreeFoundation.

7 Harding, T. and Oldham, H. (1996) Involvingservice users and carers in local services:Guidelines for social services departmentsand others, London: NISW.

8 Turner, M. and Shaping Our Lives (1998) It’sour day: A national user conference,London: NISW.

9 Turner. M. and Shaping Our Lives NationalUser Network (2002) Guidelines forinvolving service users in social workeducation, Southampton: Social Policy andSocial Work Learning and Teaching SupportNetworK (swapltsn) (www.swap.ac.uk).

References and source material

10 Beresford, P. with Page, L. and Stevens, A.(1994) Changing the culture: Involvingservice users in social work education,CCETSW Paper 32.2, London: CentralCouncil for Education and Training in SocialWork.

11 YIPPEE (Young Independent PeoplePresenting Educational Entertainment) andCATS (Citizens as Trainers) (2002) How toconsult with people who use services (oranyone else, for that matter), University ofSalford: YIPPEE and CATS.

12 Shaping Our Lives National User Network(2003) Guidelines for making eventsaccessible, London: Shaping Our LivesNational User Network.

13 DH (Department of Health) (2002) Reform ofsocial work education and training:Principles of partnership arrangements forthe social work degree, London: DH.

14 Swift, P. (2002) Service users’ views of socialworkers: A review of the literatureundertaken on behalf of the Departmentof Health, London: Institute for AppliedHealth and Social Policy, King’s CollegeLondon.

15 NSF Rethink (2003) A commitment to carers:Help for relatives, partners and friends ofpeople with a mental health problem,London: DH and NSF Rethink.

16 Braye, S. (2000) ‘Participation andinvolvement in social care’, in H. Kemshalland R. Littlechild (eds) User involvementand participation in social care: Researchinforming practice, London: Jessica KingsleyPublishers.

46


17 Braye, S. and Preston-Shoot, M. (1995)Empowering practice in community care,Buckingham: Open University Press.

18 Kemshall, H. and Littlechild, R. (2000) Userinvolvement in social care: Researchinforming practice, London: Jessica KingsleyPublishers.

19 Goss, S. and Miller, C. (1995) From marginto mainstream: Developing user- and carer-centred community care, York: JosephRowntree Foundation.

20 Taylor, I. (1997) Developing learning inprofessional education: Partnerships forpractice, Buckingham: Open UniversityPress.

21 Manthorpe, J. (2000) ‘Developing carers’contributions to social work training’,Social Work Education, vol 19, no 1, pp 19-27.

22 Barnes, D., Carpenter, J. and Bailey, D.(2000) ‘Partnerships with service users ininterprofessional education for communitymental health: a case study’, Journal ofInterprofessional Care, vol 14, no 2, pp189-200.

23 ATD Fourth World (2003a) ParticipationWorks: Involving people in poverty in policymaking, London: ATD Fourth World.

24 ATD Fourth World (2003b) “Talk with us notat us”: How to develop partnershipsbetween families in poverty andprofessionals, London: ATD Fourth World.

25 Arnstein, S. (1969) ‘A ladder of citizenparticipation’, Journal of the AmericanInstitute of Planners, vol 35, no 4, pp 216-44.

26 Forrest, S., Risk, I., Masters, H. and Brown,N. (2000) ‘Mental health service userinvolvement in nurse education: exploringthe issues’, Journal of Psychiatric andMental Health Nursing, vol 7, pp 151-7.

27 Molyneux, J. (2001) Report on service users’and carers’ involvement in the ASWProgramme, Newcastle: NorthumbriaUniversity.

28 Molyneux, J. and Irvine, J. (2004:forthcoming) ‘Service user and carerinvolvement in social work training: a longand winding road?’, Social WorkEducation.

29 Brooker, C., James, A. and Readhead, E.(2003) National continuous qualityimprovement tool for mental healtheducation, Durham and York: NorthernCentre for Mental Health.

30 Crepaz-Keay, D., Binns, C. and Wilson, E.(1997) Dancing with angels: Involvingsurvivors in mental health training, London:CCETSW.

31 Gell, C. and Seebohm, P. (ed.) (2001)Valuing experience, London: Institute forApplied Health and Social Policy, King’sCollege London.

32 NSF (National Schizophrenia Fellowship)(1997) How to involve users and carers inplanning, running and monitoring careservices and curriculum development,Kingston-upon-Thames: NSF.

33 NIMHE (National Institute for Mental Healthin England) (2003) Cases for change: Userinvolvement, London: DH.

34 CEPF (Central England People First) andSmith, R. (2003) Learning from the experts:people with learning difficulties as trainers,Northampton: CEPF/University of Leicester.

35 NCC (National Consumer Council) (2002)Consumer representation: Making it work:Good practice guide, London: NCC.

47

36 Scott, J. and Seebohm, P. (2001) Paymentsand the benefits system: A guide forsurvivors and service users involved inimproving mental health services, London:Institute for Applied Health and SocialPolicy, King’s College London.

37 Scott, J. (2003) A fair day’s pay: A guide tobenefits, service user involvement andpayments, London: Mental HealthFoundation.

38 Anfilogoff, S. with Starr, M. and Mathias, P.(2002) Carer and Carer Trainers FocusGroups Report to DH from Carers UK andCity & Guilds Affinity.

39 CATS (Citizens as Trainers), YIPPEE (YoungIndependent People Presenting EducationalEntertainment), Rimmer, A. and Harwood,K. (2004: forthcoming) ‘Citizenparticipation in the education and trainingof social workers’, Social Work Education.

40 Hastings, M. (2000) ‘User involvement ineducation and training’, in R. Pierce and J.Weinstein (eds) Innovative education andtraining for care professionals: A provider’sguide, London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

41 Reynolds, R. and Read, J. (1999) ‘Openingminds: user involvement in the productionof learning materials on mental health anddistress’, Social Work Education, vol 18, no4, pp 417-31.

42 Simpson, A. (1999) ‘Creating alliances: theviews of users and carers on the educationand training needs of community mentalhealth nurses’, Journal of Psychiatric andMental Health Nursing, vol 6, pp 347-56.

43 Downs. S. and Folk.us (2003) ‘Users astrainers in Promoting good practice: serviceuser and carer involvement in the trainingof the caring professions’, 10 October2002 conference proceedings, Plymouth:Department of Social Policy and SocialWork, University of Plymouth.

44 University of Plymouth (2003) 4thInnovations Conference ‘Promoting GoodPractice’: Service user and carerinvolvement in the training of the caringprofessions, 10 October 2002, Plymouth:Department of Social Policy and SocialWork, University of Plymouth.

45 North East Regional Liaison Group and NorthEast Regional Topss Forum (2002) Listeningto people’s experiences: Models of practiceand the future of social work educationand training: 25 September 2002Conference feedback report, Teesside:North East Regional Liaison Group andNorth East Regional Topss Forum.

46 O’Neill, F. (2002) Leeds Fitness for PracticeImplementation Group: Developing astrategic approach to user and carerinvolvement in pre-registration nursing andmidwifery education in Leeds, Leeds:School of Healthcare Studies, University ofLeeds.

47 DH (Department of Health) (2002) Focus onthe future: Key messages from focusgroups about the future of social worktraining, London: DH.

48 Shaping Our Lives National User Network,Black User Group (West London), EthnicDisabled Group Emerged (Manchester),Footprints and Waltham Forest BlackMental Health Service User Group (NorthLondon) and Service Users’ Action Forum(Wakefield) (2003) Shaping Our Lives: Fromoutset to outcome: What people think ofthe services they use, York: JosephRowntree Foundation.

References and source material

48


49 Practice Learning Taskforce and Departmentof Health (2003) Practice learning‘Everybody’s business’: Summary of theRegional Development Projects, Leeds:Practice Learning Taskforce.

50 Kearney, P. (2003) A framework forsupporting and assessing practice learning,London: SCIE.

51 CCETSW (Central Council for Education andTraining in Social Work) (1997) Workingwith service users in social work educationand training in social work and social care:Report of a CCETSW project Conference 21November 1997, London: CCETSW.

52 CCETSW (Central Council for Education andTraining in Social Work) and University ofLincolnshire and Humberside (1998)Listening to experience: Promoting theinvolvement of service users in educationand training for social work, 11 November1998 Conference Report, London:CCETSW.

Involving service users and carers in social work

education


Social Care Institute for Excellence1st Floor, Goldings House

2 Hay’s LaneLondon SE1 2HB

Tel: 020 7089 6840Fax: 020 7089 6841

www.scie.org.uk

RESOURCE GUIDE No 2



MARCH 2004

Better outcomes for service users and carers are fundamental to the recent reforms in social work education. The Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE) is supporting the new degree in social work by providing a series of reviews and guides on the best way of educating and training social workers.This Resource guide outlines ways of involving service

users and carers in all aspects of the design and delivery of the social work degree programmes. It focuses on how partnerships between higher education institutions (HEIs) and service user and carer organisations can be developed and sustained. It covers the values, principles and practicalities of participation, outlining a range of approaches to creating active and purposeful partnerships.

RG02 cover.indd 17/02/2004, 14:421

Date post:	01-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

Involving service users and carers in social work education ......Teaching and learning provision 36...

Documents