Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary on the issues raised in the article “Learning disability market position statements (MPS), are they fit for purpose?”

The commentary draws on the literature and the author’s experience in developing commissioning.

Published documents such as MPS and joint strategic needs assessments do not give an encouraging picture of progress in commissioning with and for people with learning disabilities. Actual commissioning practice may or may not be stronger than the documents suggest; however, more robust planning may help to sustain progress through times of organisational and social change.

The commentary sets MPS in the context of other guidance on commissioning and development of services. It addresses questions about the need for published statements and the factors that help or hinder development of commissioning.

This article has been withdrawn as it was published elsewhere and accidentally duplicated. The original article can be seen here: 10.1108/13619322200600025. When citing the article, please cite: Jill Davies, Alison Giraud-Saunders, (2006), “Support and Services for Young People with Learning Disabilities and Mental Health Problems”, Mental Health Review Journal, Vol. 11 Iss: 3, pp. 8 - 15.

This article addresses the need for health checks for people with learning disabilities as a proven route to identifying and tackling health inequalities, what health checks should look like (covering physical and mental health) and how they should be followed up, and how practices and primary care trusts (PCTs) can implement health checks, involving people with learning disabilities and family carers and drawing on the expertise of community learning disability teams. Experience from Wales and England of offering health checks is described, and some key learning points are drawn out. In particular we recommend the appointment of a strategic health facilitator to lead the introduction of health checks and to ensure that the results are used to improve the health and health care of the population of people with learning disabilities.

This paper affirms the importance of making connections between learning disability services and primary care groups/trusts, while acknowledging the challenges. Ideas for local action indicate the need for clarity about the roles of learning disability specialists and for determination to continue moving forward during organisational change.

Findings and good practice are reported from a project promoting engagement of PCTs with the health experiences of people with learning disabilities. Project work was most successful where it linked into mainstream NHS priorities, using good information and specialists' expertise to support mainstream practitioners.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary on the themes of the paper by Lingard et al. on personalisation for people whose behaviour is described as challenging.

This paper draws on recent reports and the author's experience to describe the context within which development projects are operating and the range of development that is required to support personalised solutions.

There are plenty of resources available to support change; these have limited effect unless the local partners (councils, NHS bodies and others) work together to provide the conditions for success.

Evidence is drawn together from a number of current sources.

The purpose of this paper is to describe a project reporting the evaluation of an adapted form of the thinking skills programme (TSP) with prisoners with intellectual disabilities. In particular, the utility of realistic evaluation is explored as a response to the difficulties in applying research-based interventions in practice and rolling out pilot projects that have been evaluated under specific conditions.

Realistic evaluation involves the identification of context, mechanism and outcome as a structure for programme evaluation and this was applied to the development and implementation of adapted TSP (ATSP) in three English prisons.

Findings are reported in respect of the three aspects of context, mechanism and outcome to demonstrate the utility of realistic evaluation. Contextual findings suggested that ATSP is effective with male prisoners representing a range of intellectual disabilities, who would otherwise be excluded from mainstream programmes. The programme did not establish effectiveness with women or in community settings. The prisons involved were of different levels of security, but all three prisons were actively involved in positive approaches to difference and diversity and support for people with intellectual disabilities. For mechanism it was noted that all involved in the pilot sites were highly motivated to participate in the project and they were also achieving high scores for general quality in programme delivery. The realistic evaluation framework suggests that, where these factors are not present, some caution about possible effectiveness should be exercised. The evaluation approach proved to be helpful in identifying relevant factors to be considered in the wider implementation of ATSP.

This is a novel approach to programme evaluation in psychological therapies that was shown to be of value in identifying conditions under which pilot schemes can be extended to other parts of a service, and research on interventions for offenders with intellectual disabilities applied in practice.