Measuring client participation in individual programme planning meetings

Abstract

Summary Clients should participate in their individual programme planning (IPP) meetings, but the question is: Do they? It would help staff in supporting their clients if a simple method were available for measuring client participation. The present article describes the development of such a method and its use with one client in a routine IPP meeting. An IPP participation checklist (IPPPC) was developed to assess the participation of one client, Mr B, who has limited verbal communication skills, at his IPP meeting. A questionnaire for staff was also devised to gauge their perceptions of Mr B's participation at the same meeting. Mr B actively participated in much of the meeting; the IPPPC highlighted areas in which he did not participate. Staff members' ratings of his participation were in close agreement. Client attendance at a meeting does not guarantee active participation. The IPPPC shows how far the client has participated in specific aspects of a meeting. It may be possible to increase client participation by the introduction of keyworker meetings, management support and IPP guidelines. The regular use of the IPPPC described in the present paper will guide staff in what to look for when assessing participation and may be especially valuable during staff training.

Views and Experiences of People with Intellectual Disabilities and Their Families. (2) The Family Perspective

“…1998). Although there are ways of increasing participation in IPs (Alexander & Hegarty 2001), these imply more work for already hard‐pressed professionals, family carers and service users.…”

Measuring Client Engagement From the Client’s Perspective in Nonvoluntary Child Protective Services

“…Studies examining the affective dimension or quality of participation have used assessments based almost entirely on providers' perspectives (Littell et al, 2001), including workers' ratings of client cooperation in family preservation services (McCroskey & Meezan, 1997), levels of participation in structured family support programs (Wagner, Spiker, Gerlach-Downie, & Hernandez, 2000), or group leaders' observations of engagement among individual group members in therapy (Wagner, Spiker, Gerlach-Downie, & Hernandez, 2000;MacGowan, 1997). In some studies, observations of affect have been combined with behavioral measures (Alexander & Hewgarty, 2001;Plasse, 2000).…”

On Not Being Noticed: Intellectual Disabilities and the Nonvocal Register

“…Antaki et al, 2006; or participant observation and interviews (e.g. Alexander & Hegarty, 2001;Carnaby, Lewis, Martin, Naylor & Stewart, 2003;Goodley, 2000;Hagner, Helm & On not being noticed 4 Butterworth, 1996), the method we need is one that is alive to the moment-bymoment unfolding of the interaction between staff member and resident, and not reliant either on potentially faulty memory, or on the inevitably incomplete record even of the best note-taker. We need an objective recording which we can inspect closely and repeatedly, to explicate both the vocal sequence of interaction and its complementary, or independent, non-vocal element.…”