Making Sense of GIRFEC
Making it Work
What is it about and what are we
saying ?
• Improving outcomes for children, young
people and their families
• What has th...
Who can be involved?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Maternity Services
Public Health
Allied Health
Community Paediatrics
CAMHS
E...
GIRFEC components
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

A Named Person
Single Agency Assessment
Informed Consent
Chronology
Request for Assista...
What does it mean for us?

It has to be proportionate and reasonable
• Philosophy centres on the whole child – notion of
a...
SHANARRI
Can we manage GIRFEC?
•
•
•
•
•

Named Person – point of contact
Chronologies
Common Approach – ISP
Lead Professional - ta...
It looks like what we are doing already!
• Early Identification – staged intervention
•
•
•
•
•

Discussions with staff
Me...
What if?
•
•
•
•
•
•

Needs unmet
- LA
Non Cooperation - LA
Holidays
- LA
Parents want FOI - You have the records
Parents ...
If all else fails -

FUKITOL
AHDS2013 WS 2 Making sense of GIRFEC
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

AHDS2013 WS 2 Making sense of GIRFEC

640 views
444 views

Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
640
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
7
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • POINT 1:Scottish Government felt it had to make things work – throwing money at social reform for years to no avail (Embedded in the CYPB)Things were not happening – many agencies working with children, young people and families – but in isolation – not joined up – what was /is required is a shared understanding of need. (Speech therapy and FTA)POINT 2:Joining up to identify need and distributing appropriate resources according to need. (14 professionals round the table – high tariff. Family and child at the centre – not doing it to people but doing it with families.POINT 3: Common goals – be clear what you are about – meet with parents before anyone else – ask them about sharing information and with whom.
  • Basically anyone and everyone can be involved. If many agencies are involved hence the need for a lead professional. Until we become slicker at working with others and less possessive about our patch it will be a tough ask.Build relationships – find out what people do and what they offer – tell them what we do and what we offer and tell them that they are not learning because we are not teaching them but its because of their behaviours, attitude, friendships, enuresis or what ever.What about housing – big Henry story
  • A Named Person Point of contact no problem chances are that the majority of our youngsters will never need us to be a named person their parents will be their advocate.Single Agency Assessment – What are we thinking about this child – what do we know – what do we want – what will we do? Dynamic assessment (SAA – only if you are moving up staged intervention) Series of examples DON’T DO OTHER PEOPLES PAPERWORKInformed consent - ISP would you want people talking about your kids without you knowing – exception is Child Protection - it is hard to do this bit but it is important that we are open and honest with parents. Signing SAA OMG! Story It makes us more professional less judgemental. Chronology – probably the best thing that has come out of GIRFEC (for me) why and what for and who Request for Assistance: I’m a tad unhappy with this one but I remain open minded – CAMHS- too much writing – build a relationship and phone health visitor An Integrated Assessment: A dynamic assessment – usually done by SW – send in your IEP/ASP - get copies of the SW child’s plan A Lead Professional: Not likely to be us ( Although I have assumed the role to get things moving BUT) there needs to be one person to monitor and coordinate otherwise we can all be doing things in a counter productive way. It may be in your best interests to assume that role. Only for a very few young peopleA Child’s Plan – A Coordinated support plan – in debate currently with SG as why have both?
  • Lets look at this in reality – guidance staff are named persons – SW phone me up and ask for info about a child and I get the class teacher to phone them. They know the child best – proportionate and reasonable ? – we’ve been doing this for years.Moving from crisis intervention to early intervention – makes total sense – the child with the issue doesn’t suddenly develop it in P6 – unless … Nursery – pre 5 – health visitor – links and liaison – transition from pre-5 to P1 meeting with parents of youngsters who have difficulties – your resources depend on what you know and the needs of the child. Take responsibility – set up nursery meetings – looking at interventions – what we have to do, what speech therapy has to do, what the parents should be doing – then its not all down to you!!Managing/Monitoring the interventions can be remarkably therapeutic - the need is the reason to intervene – not because he is autistic but because he is distracted – so what do we do and how has he managed – once we have him concentrating by using a visual timetable with an egg timer we can move on to friendships – Josh and dobbing kids in!
  • In summary – can we do this – is it proportionate and reasonable to expect us to do this?
  • Needs unmet – move up staged intervention – involve other outside agencies ultimately go to LA as you are unable to meet the needs of this child within your school and the exigencies available to you and what's more you have the story to tell!! If outside agencies do not cooperate go to your LA – Child protection coordinator or SMPS – don’t involve the parent initially.If you are on holiday and there is an important meeting tell them and they will change it or if the case is about to blow tell your line manager and appraise them of the situation and give them that last case note and tell them to get on with it! FOI – at a touch of a button you have everything!Tribunal – again you have the story
  • New medication for all ails.
  • AHDS2013 WS 2 Making sense of GIRFEC

    1. 1. Making Sense of GIRFEC Making it Work
    2. 2. What is it about and what are we saying ? • Improving outcomes for children, young people and their families • What has the AHDS said so far • What have others said
    3. 3. Who can be involved? • • • • • • • • • • • • Maternity Services Public Health Allied Health Community Paediatrics CAMHS Education – pre-school world of work Social work Scottish Children’s Reporters Administration Skills Development Scotland (Careers Service) Voluntary Sector Partners Adult Services such as NHS addictions Et al – housing
    4. 4. GIRFEC components • • • • • • • • A Named Person Single Agency Assessment Informed Consent Chronology Request for Assistance An Integrated Assessment A Lead Professional A Child’s Plan and Review
    5. 5. What does it mean for us? It has to be proportionate and reasonable • Philosophy centres on the whole child – notion of a one stop shop – named person • Moving from crisis intervention to early intervention – taking responsibility • Monitoring interventions - need is the reason for the intervention
    6. 6. SHANARRI
    7. 7. Can we manage GIRFEC? • • • • • Named Person – point of contact Chronologies Common Approach – ISP Lead Professional - taking control Plan (Child’s Plan)
    8. 8. It looks like what we are doing already! • Early Identification – staged intervention • • • • • Discussions with staff Meeting parents Recording meetings (case notes) Planning (single planning ASP/IEP/MP/CSP) Monitoring / Tracking progress (case conference review )
    9. 9. What if? • • • • • • Needs unmet - LA Non Cooperation - LA Holidays - LA Parents want FOI - You have the records Parents want a tribunal – You have the story All too much for you ….
    10. 10. If all else fails - FUKITOL

    ×