Search results

The purpose of this paper is to describe and critique the methodology used to develop a core competency framework for mental health professionals working with people with an intellectual disability and co-occurring mental ill health.

A multi-phase, multi-method design was used to collect qualitative and quantitative data, including a scoping survey, modified online Delphi, and consultation with multiple stakeholders. The implementation phase involved a launch forum and workshop, toolkit development, and evaluation strategy.

Results from the scoping survey and consultation process informed the development of a core competency framework with 11 domains. An accompanying toolkit was also developed with practical guidance to assist with the implementation of the core competencies. In total, 93 professionals attended the launch forum, and the framework has been downloaded 998 times during the first year it has been available.

Detailed information specific to each profession cannot be included when a whole of workforce approach is used. The ways in which to use the framework in conjunction with other core competency frameworks is discussed.

This framework can be utilised by mental health workers including clinicians, managers, service developers, and educators, from multiple professional backgrounds. The approach taken can also be used by others to develop similar frameworks.

This is the first core competency framework, to the authors’ knowledge, specifically designed for public mental health professionals from varied backgrounds working with people with an intellectual disability. Consulting with multiple stakeholders, not just experts, elicited new information that may otherwise have been overlooked.

An intellectual disability (ID) mental health core competency framework was developed to articulate the essential attributes the mainstream mental health workforce requires to meet the needs of people with ID. This study aims to evaluate the framework’s impact.

Mental health clinicians, managers, supervisors and educators completed an online survey at download and 3- and 12-months post-download to evaluate the implementation, utility and impact of the framework.

The majority of respondents at 3-months (62.9%) and 12-months post-download (59.1%) said the core competencies covered important aspects of their role. At 3-months 47.8% of clinicians were working towards developing the core competencies. Respondents rated their confidence working with people with ID significantly higher at 12-months post-download compared to pre-download (EMM pre = 3.51 vs 12 m = 4.21, p < 0. 001).

The framework was well-received and can be used to underpin education, training and recruitment in ID mental health. The evaluation can also inform the development of similar frameworks.

This is the first evaluation, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, of a core competency framework specifically designed for public mental health professionals from different professional backgrounds working with people with ID.