Evaluation of the Volunteering in Care Homes Project
•Download as PPT, PDF•
0 likes•902 views
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Evaluation of the Volunteering in Care Homes Project
Similar to Evaluation of the Volunteering in Care Homes Project (20)
More from NCVO - National Council for Voluntary Organisations
More from NCVO - National Council for Voluntary Organisations (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Evaluation of the Volunteering in Care Homes Project
- 1. Evaluation of the Volunteering in Care Homes Project Emergent findings Matthew Hill (matt.hill@ivr.org.uk) Learn and share events December 2014
- 2. What is the evaluation framework? • Formative evaluation & impact assessment • Frameworks • Volunteering Impact Assessment Toolkit (IVR, 2014) • Senses framework (Nolan et al, 2006) - security, belonging, continuity, purpose, achievement, significance • Methods (reliant on sites) • Volunteer Investment and Value Audit (VIVA) • Start and end online surveys - care home staff and volunteers • Start and end telephone interviews with key staff • Start and end 5 in-depth case studies – staff, volunteers, residents and relatives
- 3. What have we done so far? • VIVA data for all sites from October 2013-September 2014 • Volunteer and resident demographics • Online Survey 1 • 32 volunteers (of 65) – 49% • 14 care home staff (of approx. 25) – 56% • Telephone interviews 1 • All 5 Volunteer Centres (6 staff) • 7 out of 13 care homes (8 staff)
- 4. What do the volunteers do? 62 x Befriender 4 x Boccia session 4 x Digital art session Musical entertainment Illustrated talks Gardening Reading support Craft coordinator 3 x Pub games 3 x BBQs 2 x Games sessions 2 x Kite session 26 x Reminiscence
- 5. Who are the volunteers?
- 6. Recruitment, selection and training • 66% of volunteers and 75% of care home staff are very satisfied with the recruitment and selection process • Range of methods used • Supportive and sensitive • ‘Selection’ is informal but has increased through the project • Looking for commitment and emotional sensitivities • 66% of volunteers and 58% of care home staff very satisfied with induction and pre-placement training • Excellent minimum standard
- 7. % very satisfied with different aspects of the volunteer journey Care home staff (n=12) Care home volunteers (n=32) Induction and training within the home 50% 44% Day-to-day coordination 42% 34% Emotional support 33% 34% Process for dealing with problems 33% 39% Reward and recognition 50% 48% Say that volunteers have in the way their volunteering is organised 42% 40% The say volunteers have in the wider decisions within the care home 25% 19% Clarity of roles 50% 44% Staff/ volunteer relationship 58% 50%
- 8. % very satisfied with different aspects of VM support (n=12) Time for volunteer management 25 Training and support for volunteer management 17 Senior management support 33 Your skills and knowledge in VM 7 (rated ‘very high’) Opportunities to share learning 17 Support from VC 77 Support from NCVO 62
- 9. Impact • Additional time and resources: “It gets more residents involved… because there is more people to spend that time with them…” [Activities coordinator] “The main thing I get is the residents have more time just with that one person to sit and chat to them… not to be called away to do things” [Care manager] “I think it should always be the icing on the cake. Not the cake. We should provide the cake as in the activities and the team to deliver it” [Care Home Manager]
- 10. Impact • Volunteers make a distinctive contribution… “For us it is a job. For them [the volunteers] … it’s more of an entertainment than a work relationship. They [the residents] see them as someone who is coming into have fun with them… we come in to do a job” [Care Manager] “We are lucky here they are all lovely staff but the volunteers come in because that’s what they enjoy doing. They are not being paid to come in and the residents know that it’s like friends who pop in and visit… It’s a bit of a different dynamic” [activities coordinator]
- 11. Impact • High perception of social and emotional impacts for residents • Befriending, company, stimulation, combating loneliness, pursuing interests • These impacts can be profound “It does reduce distress… because they like to be able to re-live their life and tell their stories… we don’t always have the time to be able to spend with them… it settles them… it is like a de-stress” • Medical or clinical impacts • Improved engagement at mealtimes • Improved sleeping
- 12. Impact • Across different contexts, residents and volunteers. But the biggest impact is in • One-to-one interaction; • Regular, substantial and on-going commitment • Not around organisational culture (yet); • Also for volunteers, staff and relatives • Developing more systematic measures in-depth case studies; • Think broadly - cost-effective delivery; distinctive contribution (Metz et al, 2012); community engagement
- 13. VIVA data - Value • 115 placed in 13 care homes • Volunteers have contributed 2,014 hours representing £20,915 (£10.4 per hour) • 1,027 hours over the last quarter • Varies significantly between different sites and care homes • Retention is roughly 40% from training to regular placement • 18 volunteers contributed half the hours
- 14. VIVA data – Investment/ Value • What does this tell us? • This type of placement requires considerable investment of time, resources and expertise “So at the beginning it can be a lot of extra work but I think that pays off after a week or two and then you benefit… it is worth the input” [Care manager] • The situation differs across sites, homes and volunteers • There is a need to develop those volunteers who are making significant contributions of time
- 15. 6 key conclusions • Strengths: • Compelling evidence of impact (sometimes profound) • Pre-placement activity is strong • VC support for care homes is highly valued • Challenges: • Need to take ongoing volunteer management to the next level • Variety across areas, care homes and volunteers • Need to develop regular, substantial and on-going volunteering
- 16. Thank you for listening! Any questions?
- 17. How can we develop ongoing volunteer management in the care homes?
- 18. How can we increase the level of volunteer activity in the care homes?
Editor's Notes
- First – I just want to refresh you on what the evaluation looks like - Frameworks – QoL and QoC; broad physical, social, emotional and spiritual care - Methods (reliant on you) - In-depth case study – only time speak directly to patients – these are underway but not talking about them today really.
- Small numbers – response rate – if we get this rate across the project then we will have some solid data. It’s just how it works. Have done some of the case studies but not discussing those here – haven’t analysed those yet. They are in process.
- Also subject to change Befriending – difference between 1-2-1 and group befriending. Boccia? I didn’t know what that was either – it is a paralympic sport – so you might have seen it at London 2012 – it’s similar to boules. Latin for boss. Very good for those with physical disabilities.
- Only 9% have volunteered in a care home before Demo data – going very well on this front – It’s a snap shot – this is useful – Good on ethnicity, disability, religion. Fantastic on age – really good Still work to do on gender – this is seen in other areas but of social care but not to this degree – issues there.
- Need to be clear on all of this have the key points to make: Support is high – this is the actual process; Range of methods used – advertisements, leaflets, word of mouth, links with colleges (younger volunteers) – full range; Volunteers feel it is being done very sensitively and supportively; 4) Care home staff are very happy with selection and preparation – this is very valuable role of the VCs. Selection remains informal – no exam for volunteers but VCs become more selective as time has gone on – looking for emotional maturity and commitment – its those personal attributes that are important not specific skills or qualifications. Those who can deal with what is at times a challenging environment and those who can commit to regular involvement. So the recruitment and selection processes have been very successful but there is a strong desire from many of the homes to increase the number of volunteers and increase the regularity with which existing volunteers come into the home. Will come back to that later on. Training was very well thought of - this is a real strength of the programme – so that is a good output so far. That training has been developed with Skills for care and is delivered by expert trainers either from skills for care or the VCs. The care home staff felt it was the minimum they would expect but for the minimum it is seen as excellent. Areas for development is to get the care homes and care home staff more actively involved in the pre-placement activity. There are many examples of that working well – attending training, delivering training, carrying out training in the homes, taster sessions. The barrier to all of this is time!
- That takes us on to the next stage of what we call the volunteer journey – that is the management and coordination of volunteers within the care homes. The levels of satisfaction amongst volunteers and staff with these aspects of the programme is lower… Includes ongoing training – especially in specific areas like dementia awareness; Includes day-to-day coordination – this is volunteers not always knowing what to do when they come in and not always being informed about the residents – say if they have had a bad week or just what they have been up to; Includes emotional support – is a challenging role – especially around bereavement; Process for dealing with problems – thankfully there haven’t been many problems so far but volunteers don’t always have a key contact; Volunteers don’t have much say in the way their vol is organised and the wider decisions within the care home. Now these are quite broad categories and the volunteers don’t expect to be making decisions about budgets or such but from the comments and interviews it is more about the integration of volunteers in the staff team. What is encouraging is that some of these areas are being developed – Bereavement training and support has been provided to volunteers Some care homes are providing group supervision sessions or 6-monthly catch-ups with staff and volunteers to raise issues and share experiences or access to ongoing training. BUT - this is an area that needs development - Managing volunteers is very different to managing paid staff – they have very different motivations and expectations and it is a real skill to harness their contribution to maximum affect. Not just skills – it is the whole understanding of what the potential of volunteers is and could be. Not surprising especially in organisations that have not involved volunteers before. So why is this? [insert quote on TIME at first]
- STAFF – very low numbers but this has been backed up even more substance in the telephone interviews: Time is clearly a huge issue – we recognise the very intense time pressures in care homes – they are huge – indeed it is a big motivation for the project. This has been an issue in some homes with staff devoting very little time to volunteer management. But that is not the only issue: There is a lack of training and support for VM; relatively low level of skills in VM. This has been strongly backed up by the interviews and case studies; Very few - although opportunities like this are fantastic – for staff, especially from different care homes to share learning; One issue we expected to see was some tensions between vols and staff especially around fears of job substitution. Little evidence of this – this has been generally well managed in the care homes with staff knowing what the vols are there for. The roles are quite distinct. So the model is working well generally – the pre-placement is strong and in theory the passing over of responsibilities for VM to the care homes is good in theory. The care homes really value the support they have received from the VCs and NCVO. But there is a challenge about taking VM to the next level within care homes. This should be a focus of the next stage of the project. It’s not just good practice – it is about retaining volunteers and supporting them to make as big a contribution as possible. So we will come back to that but let’s move now to the impact that the volunteers are having…
- We will hear from some of the staff here. The biggest impact that the volunteers are having in the homes is the additional time and resources they are providing. That may seem obvious but the staff really value it. Getting more residents involved in activities – One-to-one befriending that staff don’t always have time to do – Stressing that this time and resource is not substituting for paid staff – not providing personal care or physical care. It should be the icing on the cake. Staff and volunteers feel very strongly about this. Quotes are from staff [have you got a vol one?]
- Indeed – the distinctive contribution of volunteers is really important. You have staff time and then the vols bring something different.
- Distress – gentleman who suffered with dementia who lost his wife and the volunteer coming in every week really helped him come to understadn that and terms with that.
- Relatives example – living away – the peace of mind, reduction in guilt. So let’s just end by looking at the figures….
- Let’s just get into the numbers a bit more….. 115 have been placed - Well over 100 – it is likely to be well above that – need to update the data - Up to end of Sept 2014 – over 2,000 hours Varies between sites and care homes – not going into the details of that yet – but will discuss some of the factors later on – would be very useful to follow up individually. In some there is a high level of regular and considerable activity – others have been very low activity. Retention – This is not a particularly accurate figure for a range of reasons – partly because of the delay but an estimate is that of 127 vols trained 90 were placed (these figures are much higher now). So the rate is 71%. Track them overtime. From placement to continuous engagement (still going after three months) – well there are 75 currently active volunteers – we have 25 new ones – of 90 vols there are 50 still placed. 56% retention rate….. So overall it is roughly 40% - that’s not too bad actually but: 41 volunteers contributed 4 hours or less The issue is more the to do with the depth and intensity of involvement. Of the 115 volunteers Max. 114 hours and £1,098 So there is real value in the project already – what do these figures mean…
- The model???? – not yet cost-effective – but is highly valued; It is about organisational change; Is it just right in some homes? Also mention some for the evaluation – speaking to residents? Managing some data collection issues.
- Think very broadly – There is no time to do this – it should be the VCs that should do this? Training? A volunteer champion on the staff team? Organisational change and culture change? What specific mechanisms would work – online, peer support etc, etc Have a broad discussion but stay focused on this question for 10 minutes.
- How can we increase the level of activity in the care homes? No this should be taken very slowly – some of the care homes – although a minority feel this Need more vols? Need vols that offer greater intensity and commitment – more selective? How do we do this? Enhanced management? More selective of retired or facilitating weekends. This is where we want to real expert findings -
- The model is good – I mean the general concept of it makes a lot of sense to everyone involved. Volunteer manager contact – is necessary at this stage – they need to take ownership and leadership of the programme; Ratios vary from 1 to 4 to 1 to 8 Not much on care home size or status.