1

Single Assessment Procedure Promoting the Independence of Vulnerable Older People (PIVOP)

Steve Batley

Project Director PIVOP

Wirral, Woking and Surrey

2

What is the FAME Programme?

• Generic framework for information sharing

• National initiative to improve the provision of services to citizens

• Funded by ODPM

• Information Sharing

– Relevant, timely

– Quality, Not duplicated

– Protocol

• Flexible

• Scalable

• Cost effective

• Technology independent

• Multiple vendors involved

What is PIVOP?• Promoting Independence

of Vulnerable Older People

• One of the seven fame strands or workstreams

• Development of a Single Assessment Process

3

Who are our partners?

FAMEPIVOP

-Woking BC-SHAW PCT-N Surrey PCT-ASP Hospital-SCC NW ACC-GP ‘s W Byfleet HC-CIBER UK

-Older people 65+-Adults complex needs

ProgrammeOffice

ODPMNewcastleUniversity

Strategic Health Authorities

-Wirral MBC-Wallasey/Birkenhead PCT-Bebington/W.Wirral PCT-Wirral Hospital Trust-Cheshire/Wirral P/shipMental Health Trust-Age Concern-Liquid Logic

4

WIRRAL MBC

WOKING BC

Unitary

Two Tier

EASY CARELIQUID LOGIC

FACECIBER UK

Vendor NeutralDifferent Political

Structures

5

How is the project governed?

Wirral FAMEPIVOP

WokingFAMEPIVOP

Programme Board

Joint ProjectBoard

LocalSteeringGroup

Local SteeringGroup

6

Where did we start?

OPPORTUNITY

DESIRE

ABILITY

DETERMINATION

7

What is our vision?

More joined up

More person centred More

responsive

Continue to improve the services we provide to older people

Germane to other service areas

8

What did we need to do?

PARTNERS AGREED WE

SHOULD HAVE

A shared and morecomprehensive

multi agency viewof the

older person and their needs

A faster and more secureway for the partnersto access and share

each others information

9

How were we doing?

A shared and morecomprehensive multi agency

viewof the older person

and their needs Information

collected, recorded and storedseparately

Older personfrequently asked

for the sameinformation

Service providers have single view of the older person

Service uncoordinated

and ‘silo’ based

10

How were we doing?

A faster and more secureway to access

and share information

Information shared by fax

telephone or snail mail Information

sharingnot secure and often

incomplete

Information cantake some timeto reach other

partners

11

What are we doing about it?

A shared and morecomprehensive view

of the older person’s needs

Information collected, recorded

and storedin the same way

Older personless likely to

be askedfor the sameinformation

Service providers have a shared view of the older person

Service providersare more informed

about needs

Developing and implementing

Single Assessment Process

12

What are we doing about it?

A faster and more secureway to access

and share information

Electronically Securely Timely

Providing a technology solution that enables information about older

people to be stored, accessed and shared: -

13

Information Sharing Protocol

• Based on premise that consent is given• Telephone or written consent ok• ISP agreed by partners and is specific to the

project• Compliant with DPA/FOI• Staff given guidance during training• Will form part of the evaluation and learning

14

Rational for electronic SAP

• Generic to provision of both health and social care services

• Provides a shared view of the service user• Supports the generic framework for

information sharing• Improves business processes and workflow• Supports the achievement of NSF target• Addresses one of the e-gov key priority areas• Principles could be used in other service

areas• Benefits all health, social care and housing

partners • Benefits service users

15

Development and Implementation

• Followed the 12 steps of SAP implementation• Involved service practitioners• Use of DoH accredited SAP tool agreed• Processes to define ‘as is’ and ‘to be’ processes• Governance overseen by Steering Group• Need to be aware of national SAP developments• Need to be aware and take account of NPfIT• Project led – Prince 2• Information sharing protocol agreed• Technical architecture and levels of security agreed

16

Lessons Learnt

• Engage technical partners early• Engaging practitioners secured ‘buy in’ and

commitment• Identify key influences• Do not underestimate impact of national

developments• There is no one single agenda• Private sector skills are vital• Project managers need new skills beyond project

management• Define and agree outcomes early – will help to

identify what success looks like?• Identify ‘champions’

17

What other considerations did we make ?

• Work with legacy systems and processes• Changes to internal processes and

procedures was a matter for individual partners

• Good practice, e.g. retaining telephone contact was recognised

• Use of DoH accredited SAP tool agreed

18

What is the overall effect?

ElectronicSAP

Consent given

Shared view

Co-ordinateservice

Help informcare Plan

Improveworkflow

Potential forother services

EfficientEffective

Improveservice

delivery and outcomes

Secureimmediateelectronic

19

What are the next steps?

• Evaluate pilot• Promote wider roll out• Documented products for wider dissemination and

adoption: -– Process definition

– Business requirements

– Business Case

– Process maps/workflows

– Technical specification and framework

– Road map and case studies

– Implementation plan

– Local evaluation