Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the characteristics of the highest cost residential placements provided for adults with learning disabilities in the South East of England, comparing findings with a previous survey.

Lead commissioners for NHS and Local Authority teams in the South-East of England were asked to provide information on the five highest cost placements that they currently commissioned.

The average placement cost was £200,000 per annum with a range from £81,000 to £430,000 per annum. Individual characteristics of people placed were broadly similar to those identified in previous studies.

Significant resources are used to support relatively few individuals. These individuals’ needs and characteristics suggest areas for research and practice development.

It is widely known that a relatively small number of very expensive, often out‐of‐area, placements consume a relatively large proportion of the social care budget. Valuing People Now (DH, 2009) acknowledged that too often people are sent to expensive out‐of‐area placements. There is, however, little research in this area and no routinely collected information. In this collaborative piece of work between the Valuing People Now Team, the Challenging Behaviour National Strategy Group and the Tizard Centre we aimed to identify the characteristics of the highest‐cost placements in the South‐East of England.

Four routes or pathways have now been identified by which individuals may come within the scope of PSA 16 National Indicator 149, which is concerned with monitoring efforts to achieve settled accommodation for individuals with significant mental health problems. This article focuses on their needs and the identification of those with mental health needs as seen through these four principal routes. An understanding of these four possible pathways can help to identify areas for priority action, local delivery chains and partnerships, and also highlight some of the challenges and risks in and for delivery.

This paper reports on the development and service delivery of the Supported Living Outreach Team for people with severe psychiatric, behavioural and forensic needs in a city with a population of 1.1 million. The authors discuss the reasons why the team was formed, and the partnerships it has formed with local housing and care providers in order to enable people with very complex needs to lead ordinary lives in their local communities. The pathway of team involvement is described, starting with the initial assessment, setting up and monitoring of new schemes, through to discharge. Also described are the measures the team uses to monitor its effectiveness, the benefits the team has brought to the service, and the hurdles and barriers it has had to overcome on its journey to support people with complex needs to live safely in their local communities.

There are major pressures on social care funding for people with learning disabilities. It is unsustainable to continue working in the same way. The need to promote independence and prevent the need for social care for people with a learning disability is urgent. The purpose of this paper is to highlight key issues, stimulate debate and strengthen the evidence base.

The paper takes evidence from research, literature reviews, statistics and policy debates. It illustrates key points with case studies. The argument for change has been developed in discussion with key stakeholders including the chief executive of a leading self-advocacy organisation.

Demand is increasing whilst funding is reducing. Policy, practice and evidence on prevention of the need for social care for people with a learning disability are underdeveloped. Nevertheless, there are many examples of good practice, and of emerging opportunities for local partnerships to work together to build a new approach.

Research on the benefits and costs of prevention of social care for people with a learning disability is underdeveloped. There is a need to extend the evidence base on the range of interventions and their effectiveness.

The paper argues for a step change in culture, practice and the focus of research.

Multisystemic therapy (MST) is described and contrasted with practice in traditional services for young people who have committed crime, behaved anti‐socially, abused substances or suffered family conflict. The challenges to traditional services posed by MST are examined, including consideration of the process of engagement in therapy, the intensive individualised therapy delivered in the young person's own home or local community, and the quality assurance systems.

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.

Elucidating where antisocial or violent behaviour arises within the life course of individuals with intellectual disability (ID) could improve outcomes within this population, through informing services and interventions which prevent behaviours reaching a forensic threshold. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

The Historical Clinical Risk Management-20, Version 3 assessments of a cohort of 84 inpatients within a forensic ID service were analysed for this study, with a particular emphasis on items concerned with the age at which antisocial or violence first emerged.

For most participants, violent or antisocial behaviour was first observed in childhood or adolescence. The study also highlighted a smaller subgroup, whose problems with violence or antisocial behaviour were first observed in adulthood.

The study findings suggest that targeted services in childhood and adolescence may have a role in reducing the offending behaviour and forensic involvement of people with ID. This has implications for the service models provided for children and adolescents with ID with challenging or offending behaviour.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the common stock price reaction and the changes to the risk exposure of the cross-listing for real estate investment trusts (REITs).

The paper adopts the event study methodology to assess the abnormal returns (ARs). Pre- and post-cross-listing changes in the risk exposure for the domestic and foreign markets are examined, via a modified two-factor international asset pricing model. A comparison is made for two broad cross-listings, namely, the depositary receipts and the dual ordinary listings, to examine the impacts from institutional differences.

Cross-listed REITs generally experience positive and significant ARs throughout the event window, implying significant superior returns associated with the cross-listing for REITs. On systematic risks, REITs exhibit significant decline in their domestic market β coefficients after the cross-listing. However, the foreign market β coefficients do not yield conclusive evidence when compared across the sample.

Results are consistent with prudential asset allocation for potential diversification gains from the cross-listing, as the reduction from the domestic market beta is more significant than changes in the foreign market beta.

The results and findings should incentivise REIT managers to explore viable cross-listing.

Such cross-listing for REITs should enhance risk diversification.

This is a pioneer study on cross-listing of REITs. It provides a basis for investment decision making, and could provoke further research and discussion.