1 / 26

What Vision?

What Vision?. Mary Bairstow Low Vision Steering Group July 4th 2007. What a history (a reminder) What standards? What’s my opinion? So what’s the local society response ? . Late 1990’s More and better services Low vision report

louisa
Télécharger la présentation

What Vision?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What Vision? Mary Bairstow Low Vision Steering Group July 4th 2007

  2. What a history (a reminder) • What standards? • What’s my opinion? • So what’s the local society response ?

  3. Late 1990’s More and better services Low vision report Sets standards and suggests Low Vision Services Committees Nalsvi endorsed Late 1990’s More and better services Low vision report Sets standards and suggests lvsc’s as a means to change Low Vision Services Implementation

  4. It should be easy • Get everyone around the table • Identify what needs to be done • Make plans about how to do it • Work with local commissioners (PCTs , social care) • Monitor

  5. 2000 - 2007 • 78 LVSCs (Blackburn with Darwen newest) • Emperor’s new clothes or visionary groups ?

  6. A question of independence (Nov 2006) RNIB and AMD Alliance UK funded McLaughlan, B., Lightstone, A. and Winyard, S

  7. Not relevant? • The majority (91%) could see the shapes of furniture in a room (or better) Network 1000 2006 • 71% cent of people said they used magnifiers for reading Network 1000 2006 • 73% said that they used better lighting for reading tasks Network 1000 2006

  8. But what vision • 1/4 of service providers admit their services less than satisfactory or unsatisfactory AMD Alliance 2006 and……… • Service users do not know what they can expect from service providers Low Vision Project National Evaluation Report 2005

  9. Accountability • 40% - funders no accountability • 16 % require yearly audits • 14 % ask for accounts • 11% variety of different ways AMD Alliance 2006

  10. Setting Standards Some LVSCs lack clarity about their purpose (despite the clear remit given in the 1999 Report) Low Vision Project National Evaluation Report 2005

  11. Seeking a solution? How you would you recognise a good service?

  12. A consensus • LV recommendations for future service delivery • Working Group • 19 members • 2 users • Nalsvi representation (Ian Atrill) • ADSS, Rehab., Vol Orgs

  13. Status • Voluntary sector recommendations • Endorsements - Loads • Foreword - Frank Dobson

  14. 1999 standards • Who, where, what, when, continued support and monitoring services….. • Not clinical parameters • Close to home • Eye exam…. to certification … to vision enhancement training……... • Within 6 weeks • Returning as required • Monitored

  15. Setting a new Standard • Working party set up 2006 • 9 members • Included one rehabilitation worker • 4 Optometrists • 1 Dispensing Optician • 1 Ophthalmologist • 1 Orthoptist • 1 Department of Health • Consultation 2006. Launched Jan 2007

  16. Status • Recommended by the DH • Endorsed by LVSG • May be reviewed

  17. The standards 6 Headings • Design Principles • Referral, assessment and service • Information • Service improvement, monitoring and evaluation of the service • Training • Communication

  18. Local commissioners - ‘will wish’ • Service Improvement, monitoring and evaluation of the service • Modernisation techniques • Measures - numbers referred/ treated - demographics - inter-professional communications - evaluation data • Service user involvement • Annual report by commissioners - ‘working towards’ !

  19. Training • Suitably trained as part of a local protocol • Accreditation - initial - ongoing - reflect lessons learnt • Multi-disciplinary • CRB checks noted

  20. LV Consensus ‘99 Devices should be loaned Specific times (6w) DH LV ‘07 Loan/supply agreed locally Agreed timetables (though 10 days for contact) User led changes?

  21. What’s new? • Emphasis on ‘booking of appointments’ • Reference to service being refused • Notes on CRB checks • Single contact point (though this is mentioned as an LVSC aim) • Directions for commissioners

  22. What’s been lost? • Notion of implementation or governance ( LVSCs ) • Sense of ‘the essential’ • Some specifics - Transport - Issues of geography

  23. So can it work • Huge variation in activity and outcomes • Mary’s factors for success • A Vision • Self belief • Strong lead - good chair • The right membership • Service user strategy • Commissioning involvement • Reporting routes

  24. Local Society support? • Link to or attend LVSC • Give advice - pass on expertise • Support user involvement • Ensure PCT approaches acknowledge multi-agency (LVSC) model

  25. Keeping up to date Link into the national network l.beaumont@vision2020uk.org.uk

  26. Thank You for Listening You can find me at M.Bairstow@vision2020uk.org.uk Website lowvision.org.uk

More Related