Presentation on theme: "Building a Recovery Focused Mental Health System: Reflections on Systems Change and Growth in Community Mental Health November 7, 2008 Canadian Innovations."— Presentation transcript:
Building a Recovery Focused Mental Health System: Reflections on Systems Change and Growth in Community Mental Health November 7, 2008 Canadian Innovations in Recovery Conference Kitchener, ON Jason Newberry, Senior Researcher Allan Strong, Recovery Education Coordinator
1. History and background 2. Overview of the training 3. The evaluation process 4. Preliminary findings, learnings, next steps 5. Questions and discussion Outline of Presentation
To provide an overview of how the mental health system in our region is changing to be more recovery focused. The background of our local context The building of a multi-organizational partnership to pursue a recovery focus. The development of organizational & community training. To describe the evaluation of “recovery focused case management” in the region. How consumers contributed to defining outcomes The evaluation design and approach Findings so far Our Purpose Today
2005 - Ministry of Health and Long Term care provided funding for the enhancement of case management in the area ( 1.13 million dollars) Decision about how the money should be allocated must be made by consensus Planning process involved 3 community agencies, 3 hospitals and an alliance of consumer - survivor groups
Waterloo Regional Homes for Mental Health Grand River Hospital Trellis Mental Health and Developmental Services Homewood Health Centre Cambridge Memorial Hospital CMHA Grand River Branch The Self Help Alliance
Developed and agreed to a decision making process Adopted a statement of values and principles to guide our work Designed services that were “true” to guiding principles and values 6 6
What does the word “recovery” mean to you and how would you know when you have recovered? 7 7
Statement was developed by the Self Help Alliance Statement addresses how the system will look if values and principles of recovery put in place 8 8
A recovery oriented mental health and addiction system will : Value Empowerment – The system will provide opportunities for individuals to exercise control and power with respect to their lives. Value and Instill Hope – Recovery can not occur without hope. The system will encourage hope and in doing so will focus on skills and abilities.
Value Self Determination – The system will recognize and accept that consumers will make their own decisions about their life and they will be in control of those decisions. Work toward the Elimination of Prejudice and Discrimination – The system will work toward the elimination of prejudice and discrimination toward people with mental health issues.
Value Meaningful Choice – The system will recognize and accept that individuals will make their own decisions about their life and they will be in control of those decisions. From these key values, principles were developed - copies of the document are available
Started from a shared set of values and principles that were developed by consumers. This has not been usually been the case. Values and principles provide not only a common understanding but also something to hold each other accountable. 12
Trip to Ohio - service providers went to Ohio Self Help Alliance had been developing its own programming based on recovery (independent of service providers) 13
A central part of system transformation. Training of staff in recovery values and principles, and practice. Training of consumers about recovery and their role in planning 14 Consumer and Case Manager Training 14
Since April 2006, 30 staff training sessions. 247 staff (case managers, housing staff, ACTT, management). Since January 2007, 85 consumer training sessions. Over 250 consumers participated. 15 Consumer and Case Manager Training 15
Learning the planning process… Six steps: 1. Ranking & selecting a component 2. Determining the status 3. The “MUSE” 4. Determining the goal(s) 5. Identifying skills & knowledge, developing an action plan 6. Community Resources 16 Recovery Action Planning 16
We are a non-profit and independent community-based research organization located in Kitchener, Ontario, Canada. We engage in diverse streams of work, including applied research and evaluation, needs assessments, systems change initiatives, training & education, facilitation & planning. Our values emphasize community participation, action, and relevance in the work we do.
CCBR was contracted by the community partners to develop an evaluation framework in reference to new system changes. The purpose of the evaluation is to…. “To understand how a recovery focus in the Waterloo-Wellington-Dufferin mental health system leads to positive changes for individuals using case-management services” Building an Evaluation Framework
CCBR promotes the use of participatory and collaborative research approaches. In this project, we engaged with consumers in two cities to help us define what the outcomes of the recovery process should be. We also hired and trained consumer researchers – almost all our data from consumers was collected by our consumer researchers. Our Process
An important element of our evaluation was the creation of “logic models” – visual diagrams the depict the relationships between CM services and expected outcomes. CCBR developed a set of logic models through community forums with service users and case managers (separately). Synthesized the models and fed them back to our steering committee. The Logic Model Process
The logic models helped us gain an understanding of recovery focused outcomes from the perspective of different stakeholders. Helped us plan the evaluation – what to measure, how, and when. The Logic Model Process
Intensive Case Management Service Standards (in Ontario) provide standards and indicators of best practices. However, they are not focused on outcomes – the actual benefits experienced by consumers. They are largely focused on service delivery. Example: Where possible, assertive outreach will be offered to engage potential consumers in their place of choice, considering the safety and security of the consumer and the provider. Service provision must be managed in a manner that responds to fluctuations/variations in consumer need. Recovery Outcomes – A Different Emphasis
A few of the Standards (and their indicators) approach and outcome orientation (e.g., consumer satisfaction, perceptions of accessibility). Our logic model sessions generated a greater range of outcomes that: add to the Standards, giving a fuller picture of consumer experience. help us think critically about why we think recovery planning will lead to outcomes desired by consumers. are recovery focused and quite different from traditional outcomes (e.g., rehospitalization, medication compliance, etc.). Recovery Outcomes – A Different Emphasis
Planning Educating consumers about principles of recovery Housing, Practical Support, Information, & Advocacy Respectful relationships Outcomes for Service Users (synthesis) Work with employers to discuss health issues, accomm’s, etc Provide information & advocacy re: services, benefits, rights Providing services that are respectful sensitive to cultural diversity Providing practical support & resources Use of accessible, plain language Increased awareness of legal rights re: discrimination, employment, etc. Increased feelings of hope & ability to dream about recovery Increased sense of control & choice regarding their health, lives A sense of diminished professional boundaries -- more informal relationship, openness, Increased feelings of comfort, trust, & respect for lived experiences Ensure open & transparent reciprocal communication -- honesty in relationship Practical assistance in pursuing career, employment; finances Minimal disruption to your life when having difficulty Linking to peer support environment s Linking to formal health supports Connecting Involve & educate family & social networks in person’s health Increased connections & sense of support in community, social & family life Creating social connections with the community Ongoing listening without an agenda Developing a proactive & personal plan to prevent crisis Developing a consumer-driven & realistic wellness plan about future goals Increased self- awareness & recognition of reasons of health problems Feelings of support in crisis Developing interpersonal skills & relationship goals Communicating & exploring options Increased stability in employment Increased meaningful work and volunteering Increased opportunities, resources & connections to work & volunteering Understanding & believing in your personal goals & dreams Increased confidence in workers & system Greater quality of life Increased self esteem & sense of dignity & respect Feelings of personal empowerment People express their identity beyond the mental health system Greater self- fufilment & contentment Sense of renewal, spirit, joy, hope Increased confidence & faith in own decisions, needs, values Acting on one’s own plan for recovery (practicing options) Willingness to take risks, to fail, & to learn from it Improved mental health & stability Increased skills & knowledge to pursue goals Increased knowledge of the concept & process of recovery Greater participation in regular, day-to-day community life Sharing the process & success in relationship to others Increased financial security & stability Increased resources & support in daily living Case management occurs where desired Recovery Focused Case-Management Logic Model: Outcomes for Service Users Improved overall physical health Increased choice in accessing different aspects of system or alternative support * * * * * * * * * Increased movement toward personal goals Providing support in acquiring & maintaining adequate housing Improved housing stability
KEY RECOVERY-FOCUSED OUTCOMES An emphasis on hope and dreaming, risk- taking and action, confidence in the system, and decision making leading to a cycle of recovery.
How and to what extent is a recovery-focused approach to case management helping people gain the skills and knowledge they need to develop their wellness plan and pursue their own goals? Are people beginning to understand the idea of recovery and what it can mean for their own goals? How and to what extent is recovery focused approach to case management helping to alter the traditional relationships between case managers and people they support? Priority Outcomes and Questions Service User Model
What is being done to ensure a reciprocal, honest and open relationships between case management and people? To what extent are people feeling an increased sense of control and choice regarding their health and lives? To what extent are people beginning to dream about recovery and are hopeful that they will reach their goals? To what extent are people active in their recovery plan – taking risks, practicing options, and achieving learning and confidence?
What are the experiences, successes, & challenges of the organizations within partnership in building a collaborative, system wide approach to recovery-focused case management? What is the impact of the training on the knowledge and skills of case managers to promote a recovery focus What are the successes and challenges? Is a recovery focus apparent in the practice? Are there attitudinal or organizational barriers? Priority Outcomes and Questions Service/System Model
Design & Methodology – Service Users 1.Service User Survey Interview A mix of demographics, existing & customized scales focused on outcomes, and qualitative questions focused on service use. This is our main “pre-post” to examine change. 86 participants 2.Service User Qualitative Interviews Qualitative interviews to explore ideas about recovery, its relationship to case management, and expected outcomes. 9 participants (4 Well.-Duff.; 5 Wat.Reg.)
DRAFT copy – not to be used without permission Design & Methodology – Case Managers 3.Case Manager Online Survey A combination of custom scale items and open- ended questions to assess: the implementation of the recovery training use of the recovery action plan tool in practice perceptions and attitudes regarding recovery values and practice. 57 case managers completed the survey 4.Case Manager Focus Group To gain a deeper understanding of the survey findings. 10 case managers participated.
DRAFT copy – not to be used without permission Design & Methodology – Managers 5.Management Key Informant Interviews Interviews with members of the committee to gain insight regarding… building a multi-organizational partnership creating system wide service delivery policies Successes & challenges in translating policy into practice Future initiatives of the system partnership 5 key informant interviews were conducted.
Feedback on the Case Manager Training Training has been well-received and appreciated by most case managers. There was a desire for more training with more practical dialogue, exchange and discussion. Difficulties with the training, when cited, would appear to linked more so to “difficulty with the tool”.
Attitudes & Perceptions There was very strong support for the principles and values of recovery (80%+ above the midpoint of the scale). CMs tended to believe that their home organization was doing a good job of incorporating principles and values of recovery – but the system had a long way to go.
Use of the Recovery Planning Tool 41% reported using the tool; 18% with some modifications; 26% were not using the tool 66% were engaged in 1-5 plans; 23% in 6-10 plans; 11% in 10 or more plans Explanations for modifying the tool ranged from simple changes to make it a bit easier to significant changes (and abridged summary form). From the focus group: “For some clients the smallest amount of paperwork can be intimidating. With 1 hour of flipping back and forth with this cumbersome book, it’s pretty intimidating. Clients say; “I don’t want to go there”. When in fact they have a vision of what recovery is but the book and paperwork in front of them prevents them from moving forward because they are frightened by it.” – focus group participant
RE: the Recovery Planning Tool & Process The tool/process was viewed by CMs as difficult or confusing for some service users and CMs alike. 44% of CM agreed that many service users are not ready to go through the process; 37% believed the process was not suitable for many service users. We also heard in some cases the tool wasn’t being used with service users – information was being gathered by CMs and then the tool was being filled out later. This represents a lack of engagement with the recovery plan process.
RE: the Recovery Planning Tool & Process A very positive finding was that case managers, system-wide, have been truly engaging with the tool to try to improve it and have initiated processes to make it more user-friendly and accessible. Case managers also reported feeling supported by their supervisors and organizations in the area of recovery planning.
Case Managers’ Perspectives on Outcomes At this point, there is little evidence that relationships between CMs and services users (from CMs perspective) has improved, although a majority of CMs cite “improved communication”. Perceptions of service user outcomes were only moderate (mean between 4 and 5.5 on a 7-point scale) (see Table 12, p. 38) This is baseline data, and is expected. It could also be a function of mental averaging of CMs. We will be following up on this data in the next phase.
Service User Evaluation – Demographics 86 service users participated 86 service users participated 57% were male, 43% female 57% were male, 43% female CM service use ranged from.5 to 39 years, CM service use ranged from.5 to 39 years, Average length was 11 years and 6 years for their current agency Average length was 11 years and 6 years for their current agency 55% had completed H.S.; 21% had college/university; 24% had primary school. 55% had completed H.S.; 21% had college/university; 24% had primary school. Age categoryFrequencyPercentage Less than 30 years89.3 30-391820.9 40-492832.6 50-592326.7 60years or older910.5 Total86100
Service User Evaluation – Baseline Outcomes Our survey assessed: Community Integration Social Support Knowledge of Recovery Concept and Own Goals Hope and Dreaming Risk-taking, Action and Confidence Relationships with Staff Independence and Interdependence Control and Choice (empowerment)
Service User Evaluation – Baseline Outcomes This is baseline data. We do not expect “good outcomes”, but a range of responses and moderate or low averages. We appear to have “good measures” – they were internally consistent & reliable, there was lots of variation, there were no “ceiling effects”. The measures intercorrelated in ways that made theoretical sense: Better relationships with staff are associated with high MHR scores. Sense of control is associated with MHR scores. Greater interdependence, community integration, and social support are associated MHR scores.
Increased feelings of hope & ability to dream about recovery Increased sense of control & choice regarding their health, lives Increased confidence & faith in own decisions, needs, values Acting on one’s own plan for recovery (practicing options) Willingness to take risks, to fail, & to learn from it Increased skills & knowledge to pursue goals Increased knowledge of the concept & process of recovery Increased feelings of trust, comfort, and respect for lived experience A sense of diminished professional boundaries, informal relationships Increased confidence in workers & the system CONTROL STAFF RELATIONSHIPS ELEMENTS OF RECOVERY
Increased feelings of hope & ability to dream about recovery Increased sense of control & choice regarding their health, lives Increased confidence & faith in own decisions, needs, values Acting on one’s own plan for recovery (practicing options) Willingness to take risks, to fail, & to learn from it Increased skills & knowledge to pursue goals Increased knowledge of the concept & process of recovery Increased feelings of trust, comfort, and respect for lived experience A sense of diminished professional boundaries, informal relationships Increased confidence in workers & the system Increased connections & sense of support in community, social & family life Greater participation in regular, day-to- day community life Sharing the process & success in relationship to others ELEMENTS OF RECOVERY SOCIAL SUPPORT & COMMUNITY INTEGRATION
Re: Community integration… “…without the Recovery Plan I don’t think I would have made it to go here or to go there. For example meeting, coming out from the house, catching the bus, coming to meet people is a very good thing for me. Talking to people where I know that I can discuss about my problems.” – service user interview Re: Moving towards recovery... “My case manager put me in a state of mind where I would look forward to the future rather than “just sit on ODSP.” She helps me with self esteem and problem solving. I have confidence now that I can go back to work. My case manager is very supportive and empathetic.” – from the survey
Re: the “Cycle of Recovery” – risk, action, confidence “Over time my case manager said: `why don’t you try certain things to see if…go step-by step and see how you might do’….I’m hopeful for achieving my goals considering my past experience in the last 5 or 6 years. I went to school and took 10 courses over 5 years and I did fairly well in all of them. That gives me the motivation then to want to continue to try and do something more if at all possible.” - Service user interview Re: Recovery planning... “My case manager put me in a state of mind where I would look forward to the future rather than “just sit on ODSP.” She helps me with self esteem and problem solving. I have confidence now that I can go back to work. My case manager is very supportive and empathetic.” – from the survey
Re: Relationships “It's always very important to me in any relationship that it be a good relationship. However, some of the workers I've had in the past have not respected the fact that if they constantly cancel appointments, if they say they're going to do something and then they don't do it, that affects me. That to me is very difficult….I'm available when I'm supposed to be, and I'm doing that I'm supposed to do and just like with anything I think that that needs to be mutual.” VS. “(In a good relationship) I feel more empowered. I feel like I'm – I've had a good appointment, we've come up with some really good solutions, I'm going to try this and I'm more motivated to keep going during those really tough times.” – service user interview
Participation in the Recovery Process Life Area With recovery plan (N= 56; 65%) Without recovery plan (N= 30; 35%) Number% % Community integration 4173.2%1136.7% Work/meaningful activity 3969.6%1446.7% Access to resources3867.9%1550.0% Power and control3664.3%1033.3% Clinical care3664.3%1446.7% Family support3460.7%1446.7% Peer support/relations 3053.6%1136.7% Spirituality2748.2%620.0% Education2544.6%930.0% Stigma2137.5%1136.7%
Participation in the Recovery Process Among those who had a plan in process: 56% had a copy of their plan, 44% did not 56% had a copy of their plan, 44% did not Of those with a copy: 12 (39%) had not consulted their plans 12 (39%) had not consulted their plans 14 (45%) did so only “rarely” or “sometimes” 14 (45%) did so only “rarely” or “sometimes” 5 (16%) did so “often” 5 (16%) did so “often” This finding is an area that deserves attention.
Future Evaluation – Phase II Re-administering the service user survey as a time 2 follow up, to compare to baseline. Re-administering the service user survey as a time 2 follow up, to compare to baseline. Re-administering selected pieces of the case manager survey to compare changes over time to practices. Re-administering selected pieces of the case manager survey to compare changes over time to practices. Recommend collecting more qualitative data from a more diverse cross-section of service users. Recommend collecting more qualitative data from a more diverse cross-section of service users. These three activities comprise the main components of the next evaluation phase. Questions, Comments? Questions, Comments?
Think about the Saskatchewan experience… What are the greatest challenges to pursuing a recovery-focused system in your region (province, city, town, community)? How can they be overcome? 50 Open Discussion… 50