Case study: Joanne - Skills for Care · ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.4 Joanne brings a...
Transcript of Case study: Joanne - Skills for Care · ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.4 Joanne brings a...
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.1
Assessed & Supported Year in Employment
Fictional case study
Case study: Joanne
Joanne is a newly qualified social worker in a learning disabilities team. Marian, the
team manager, is acting as Joanne’s assessor.
Evidence that supports the assessment of Joanne’s ASYE is included after the main
case study narrative (see p.6 for index).
Learning agreement
Joanne did not take a proactive
approach to developing the learning
agreement (see evidence 1). Marian
discussed it in detail with Joanne but felt
that she took the lead in its completion
rather than this being developed in
partnership. Joanne was not able to
identify any specific learning needs
beyond the fact that she wants to further
develop her communication skills in
working with service users who are not
verbal. She stated that she agreed with
the learning needs identified by her
practice educator in her final placement
report, although she does feel that these
are learning needs that all newly
qualified workers will have.
Joanne states that since she completed
her final placement in a learning
disability team she has a good
understanding of what is required and
she feels that she has the necessary
skills. She says she is looking forward to
“getting on with the job”. Even at this
stage Marian had some concerns that
Joanne did not recognise the
importance of the assessed and
supported year and that she did not
grasp the opportunity to be proactive
about her professional development.
Use of supervision
Joanne brings her cases to every
supervision session for discussion. She
presents her work very descriptively,
describing the detail of the information
she has generated as part of her work.
She always requests direction from
Marian on what she should do next. If
Marian asks Joanne what she feels she
should do Joanne looks blankly to
Marian to make decisions, taking a “you
tell me” approach. Marian is concerned
that Joanne does not seem to use the
supervision sessions for reflection and
for discussion on her progress in relation
to the professional capabilities
framework as detailed in the learning
agreement. Marian reminds Joanne
about the agreement they made about
supervision being used to discuss cases
on a monthly basis and tells Joanne that
she is concerned she is taking a
managerialist approach to supervision,
expecting direction at every stage of her
work.
Generation of evidence in the early
stages
Joanne brings a reflective account to
supervision (see evidence 2). Joanne
feels that this provides evidence against
the PCF. Marian feels that this is very
descriptive. It also reflects work which
was mostly a shadowing opportunity as
opposed to Joanne’s own work. Whilst
the account demonstrates that Joanne
has some appropriate knowledge some
of this is confused and her
understanding and use of this
knowledge in practice is missing. A
number of statements are made which
could be considered assumptions – they
are not supported by evidence. A
number of minor grammatical errors are
present which impact on the quality of
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.2
the argument. Service user feedback is
not referred to at all. Whilst Joanne
refers to social work values Marian feels
that this is a superficial reference with
limited analysis of the impact that this
will have on Joanne’s practice.
Marian feeds her concerns back to
Joanne. She explains that while the
account might descriptively provide
some minimal evidence against some of
the domains, holistically there is no
evidence of critical reflection or of the
centrality of the service user’s thoughts
about the intervention. Marian
encourages Joanne to ensure that
future reflective accounts are about work
on her own caseload.
Marian also says that she feels the
reflective writing is not at the standard
she would expect. Joanne says that she
always found reflective writing difficult
when she was at university and Marian
suggests that it would have been useful
if she had shared this when they were
devising the learning agreement. They
agree that they will add this as an
additional learning need.
Joanne brings some feedback from
carers to the next supervision session
(see evidence 3). Joanne says that she
used the form that she had when she
was a student. Marian recognises the
comments made as positive but explains
that it does not provide significant
evidence of Joanne’s capability. Marian
also says that she has some concerns
that Joanne has simply used a form
which she has from previous
experiences – not least because it
suggested to the carers who completed
it that Joanne is a student.
Marian discusses the difficult balance
that learning disability social workers
face in addressing power dynamics in
family relationships and ensuring that
the user, rather than their family, is the
focus of the intervention. Marian asks
Joanne to reflect on what the service
user may be feeling about her
intervention. Joanne says that it’s not
possible to obtain feedback from service
users directly as the people she is
working with “do not communicate”.
Marian challenges Joanne about this,
reminding her of the learning need
Joanne identified at the learning
agreement stage. She explains that
everyone communicates in some way
and that since communication is a two
way process, Joanne needs to reflect on
how she can communicate and listen
effectively to service users, even where
they are not verbal. She asks Joanne to
reflect on the possibilities for obtaining
user feedback in preparation for the next
supervision session and advises Joanne
to talk to other team members who have
experience of generating user feedback.
Joanne comes to the next supervision
session with some alternative user
feedback questionnaires – she says that
she found these in her practice learning
documentation. She adds that she
thinks these are better forms as they
have more open questions. Joanne says
she knows that the service users she
works with won’t be able to complete
these forms but she thinks it will be best
to get people who know the service user
to complete the forms on their behalf as
they will be able to “put themselves in
the service user’s shoes”. This indicates
to Marian that that Joanne has not
moved forward since their discussion in
the previous session and that she is not
able to move away from a mechanistic
questionnaire format for gathering user
feedback.
Marian suggests that on her next study
day Joanne reads the principles for
obtaining service user and carer
feedback again and once again
encourages her to think more creatively
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.3
about generating feedback from service
users through discussing this with her
team colleagues. She also suggests that
Joanne might want to take this issue to
the next action learning set with other
newly qualified workers – she advises
Joanne that her peers will also need to
be generating service user feedback
and suggests that this might be a useful
forum to discuss the difficulties in
generating this kind of feedback.
Marian encourages Joanne to look
beyond questionnaires as the only
method of gathering feedback from
service users – she explains that people
may be more comfortable with providing
feedback using pictorial images,
referring to photographs, using objects
of reference etc. She refers to some
specific examples of user feedback she
has experienced – showing Joanne
some examples.
Three month review
Marian is very clear about her concerns
at the three month review (see evidence
4). Since she has already raised these
concerns with Joanne there are no
surprises for Joanne in this. As agreed
in the learning agreement, Joanne and
Marian review each of the domains and
Marian highlights where she has
concerns – referring to specific
capability statements where relevant.
They also review Joanne’s progress with
the portfolio. During the meeting Marian
and Joanne use these discussions to
develop an action plan (see evidence 5).
Joanne has already attended some
specific training on communication skills
– Marian asks her to write a reflective
account about her learning from this.
She also encourages Joanne to shadow
the speech and language therapist on
the team to extend her learning in this
area.
In order to address the issues about the
importance of seeking user feedback
and maintaining the centrality of user
perspectives in practice, Marian
arranges for Joanne to be invited to
attend one of the local self-advocacy
group sessions. She hopes that this will
enable Joanne to look at how the views
of service users can be obtained in a
creative way.
In relation to the completion of Joanne’s
portfolio they agree that Marian will
review some of Joanne’s recording and
she asks Joanne to select a completed
review to bring to supervision. They also
agree that Joanne will seek some peer
feedback on her practice.
Progress against identified issues
Joanne provides a reflective account on
the training (see evidence 6); again, this
is very descriptive. It also demonstrates
a lack of insight into the way that people
can be fully involved in the social work
process. Marian feels that the account
demonstrates that Joanne has a
confused understanding of regulatory
requirements which links to domain 1 of
the PCF. Marian also feels that the
account demonstrates a
misunderstanding of what constitutes
evidence of capability. She addresses
these issues with Joanne and provides
her with some information on regulatory
requirements and discusses again with
Joanne what can constitute evidence.
Joanne brings some peer feedback to
supervision (see evidence 7) – Anton
completed a peer direct observation
form based on a joint visit they had
undertaken. Marian notes that this
indicates that Anton picked up on similar
concerns about Joanne’s over
identification with parents’ perspectives.
This raises particular concerns in
relation to domain 4 as well as concerns
holistically across the domains.
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.4
Joanne brings a completed review form
to supervision (see evidence 8). Marian
feels that this again illustrates that
Joanne is not taking a user centred
approach – but that she is responding to
the concerns of parents. She also feels
that the form contains assumptions and
does not indicate provenance. It also
contains some basic grammatical errors
and some key sections which are used
to judge performance indicators within
the team are not completed. Marian is
concerned that these are the same
issues that Anton had picked up on and
that Joanne had said she had learnt
from. Much of the review form is cut and
paste from the original care plan
completed by a senior social worker –
which limits the specific evidence of
Joanne’s capability which can be drawn
from the document.
Joanne does not attend the self-
advocacy group, saying she is too busy
to be able to go. She does shadow the
speech and language therapist for a
day, but feedback from the therapist
suggests that Joanne focussed on
learning about the procedures of making
a referral to her rather than on how
Joanne can further develop her own
communication skills.
Six month review
In preparation for the six month review
(see evidence 9) Marian reviews the
action plan developed at the three
month review. She notes that much of
the action plan referred to issues being
discussed in supervision. She reflects
that perhaps the action plan was not
sufficiently detailed about what specific
support Joanne would receive and
reflects that taking more of a
performance management approach to
devising the action plan may have been
better.
Joanne and Marian again use the
learning agreement as the basis for the
six month review. They also discuss
Joanne’s progress against the action
plan. Marian again raises her concerns.
The initial concerns about Joanne’s
practice remain and Marian feels that
Joanne has not made use of the support
offered which gives rise to further
concerns. Joanne has not taken up
some of the development opportunities
referred to in the action plan. In addition
Marian has received some feedback
from Anton, the experienced team
member who was to mentor Joanne.
This indicates that Joanne has sought
direction from Anton and that she has
simply used the mentoring relationship
as an extension to supervision – seeking
advice on what action to take in relation
to case work.
Further to the concerns that Marian has
already raised, Marian is now concerned
that rather than developing, Joanne’s
practice has actually deteriorated. As
she has taken on more cases (even
though her caseload is well protected)
Joanne has failed to meet deadlines
consistently, has made some basic
mistakes in preparing documentation for
panel meetings and has simply failed to
make contact with some service users
allocated to her. Joanne says she is
feeling overwhelmed with the amount of
work and the timescales for completion
of work. Also Marian has received
feedback that Joanne is not regularly
attending the action learning sets. When
she raises this with Joanne she says
that she is finding it difficult to fit these
sessions into her diary.
At the end of the six month review
Joanne and Marian agree to develop a
revised action plan and Marian suggests
a revised framework based on her
reflections about the lack of specific
detail in the initial plan. The revised
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.5
action plan (see evidence 10) is much
more specific about what support
Joanne will be offered and about the
fact that Joanne needs to take up the
development activities.
Subsequent development
Marian begins to address the concerns
she has about Joanne’s progress within
each supervision session – reviewing
the revised action plan at each session.
She has taken a clear performance
management approach to the situation,
identifying the concerns and jointly
developing an action plan. In each
supervision session the concerns and
Joanne’s progress against these are
reviewed in detail.
Despite the support arranged for Joanne
and the regular reviews of progress,
Joanne does not develop sufficiently. In
fact she continues to struggle with her
work, and misses some key deadlines.
Marian feels that she is not able to
allocate the amount of work to Joanne
that she feels she should be able to take
on at this stage in her career. Marian
also reviews Joanne’s work against the
HCPC standards of proficiency and
considers the mapping of the HCPC
standards to the PCF. She feels that
Joanne is not meeting the standards
expected.
Joanne consults with Becky, the service
area manager. She has been discussing
the situation with Becky regularly but at
this stage they arrange a formal meeting
to discuss Marian’s concerns. Becky
reviews the evidence that Marian is
drawing on and agrees with Marian’s
concerns. Becky and Marian consult
with more senior managers to clarify the
way that the department will manage the
situation in terms of performance
management and capability procedures.
Summative assessment judgement
Marian makes the decision to fail
Joanne. Marian feels that her concerns
have been discussed at every stage of
the process. She feels that the
expectations of Joanne have been clear
and that she has been provided with a
good level of support to help her to
develop her practice.
Marian makes clear that this is a holistic
assessment decision, partly based on
cumulative capability (as Joanne’s
workload has increased she has not
been able to maintain some of her
qualifying capability). In addition, Joanne
does not recognise the need for
professional decision making – in an
attempt to respond to pressure from
carers and taking a risk averse
approach, Joanne abdicates
responsibility for decisions – expecting
constant direction and decisions to be
made by Marian or other team
members.
This was a very painful process for all
involved, but Marian makes the decision
on the basis that she has a responsibility
to safeguard the profession and ensure
that workers have the necessary
capabilities. She also recognises that
she has a responsibility to Joanne and
has concerns that her health and safety
will be affected in terms of stress and
potential burnout if she further
progresses in her career.
Marian feels that she has drawn on a
range of assessment methods and that
her assessment is valid and robust. She
is also confident that she has ensured
Joanne has had access to a wide range
of support matched to her learning and
development needs. The outcome of the
assessment, the reasoning behind the
decision and the evidence this is based
on, will contribute to the agency
performance management process to
which Joanne is now subject.
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.6
Index of evidence to go with this case study
Page
1. Learning agreement 7
2. Reflective account 1 – on work with service user 15
3. Carer feedback 17
4. Three month review 20
5. Action plan 28
6. Reflective account 2 – on training 32
7. Peer feedback 33
8. Work product evidence – review documentation 35
9. Six month review 37
10. Revised action plan 45
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.7
Evidence 1: learning agreement
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.8
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.9
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.10
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.11
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.12
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.13
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.14
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.15
Evidence 2: Reflective account 1
The Case study I am going to discuss is a 64-year-old lady with Downs Syndrome and Vascular
Dementia, who I will call Mary. I have chosen to discuss this case is because it is a very
complex one so it shows that I can work in very complicated situations. I did this piece of work
with a senior social worker on the team because it was so complex she needed some help with
the case. One of the difficulties was that this lady had no insight into her situation. I had two
main roles in this work – working with Mary’s niece who provided a large amount of support
and supporting Mary alongside the senior worker.
Under the Carers Recognition and Services Act 1995 the niece was entitled to a carers
assessment in her own right. I carried out the carers assessment which acknowledged that the
support I was providing was meeting her needs.
My role with Mary was about empowering her to sustain a Community presence. This situation
was a prime example of how people in power can target the vulnerable, the niece was trying to
keep Mary in the Community, but the OT was liaising with the warden and they were voicing
their concerns that they felt Mary was not managing in the community. Mary moved to the
sheltered accommodation when her mother died after Mary had been caring for her mother for
a long time. There were also concerns about how accurate the information that the warden and
the OT were providing. In terms of Anti- Oppressive practice I was disgusted at how oppressive
people could be to an individual who had no insight into her condition. At times individuals were
not interested in what Mary had to say and decided to make their own choices.
Part of my involvement with Mary was to try and maintain her Community Presence; According
to the Warden other residents were advising her that Mary was going out wandering. Mary did
not understand the concerns and was not able to accept responsibility in relation to her
situation. I therefore did discuss my concerns with my manager in supervision. This was a time
where we were able to reflect. We identified that I could use a Task Centred Model in this case.
The niece was at an extremely vulnerable time due to the stress of the situation, there was also
information that Mary was incontinent of both Urine/Faeces, again on observation there was no
indication on how true this was.
Major meetings were planned in relation to the Mary’s capacity. Part of my role with Mary
involved including her in what she thought of her situation. It was decided that Mary did not
have capacity to make a decision, part of my process involved supporting the social worker in
the Best decision practice which is part of the Mental Capacity Act (2007) law. In terms of this
Act I have found it extremely difficult and frustrating. I feel professionally as workers it does
support us as practitioners, but more legal intervention is required. I feel that it protects
individuals with any Mental Health Problems.
After a number of meetings with the family, the Psychiatrist, the learning disability nurse and
the warden, due to the stress the niece was under she felt that the best decision would be for
Mary to go to a residential home. Mary was then placed there and apparently agreed to stay
there, again, there were concerns about this. A short while later I visited and there were
concerns that Mary was trying to leave the building. After a day Mary had lost her ability to
perform Daily living skills in the community even with a maximum support package in place this
process could not be implemented. Due to the strange environment Mary’s memory had
deteriorated. To observe Mary become distressed, angry, disorientated and try to leave the
property whilst in a situation that was quite clear that she did not wish to be in was very
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.16
distressing. My anxiety levels at times were also extremely high due to the fact that regardless
what was going on I still had to try to work with Mary and she was an extremely volatile lady
and at times could become abusive to me.
The next step was to arrange for an advocate about mental capacity “There remains the users
who, because of their disability, are unable to express their own views and/or who wish to have
independent representatives to act on their behalf. This will include suffering from dementia or
severe learning disability. These users will be disadvantaged if the authority/agency confines
itself to the promotion of Self-advocacy” (HMSO 1991). The advocate was then able to work
closely alongside Mary and try to ensure that her interests were protected. The role of the
advocate was to listen to Mary’s views and try to establish what she thought of the situation. By
this time if Mary had left the residential care home, she would have no familiarity of the area
(as the home was approximately 10 minutes away) and she seemed to have no road sense so
there was significant risk. Mary was allegedly trying the door on a number of occasions, and the
home owner would not have any legislation to bring her back. He would have to rely on
Common Law. After discussions with the consultant it was felt that a Guardianship order would
be the best option. The guardianship involved 2 medical recommendations (Doctor, Psychiatrist)
a pre planning meeting would then have to be held, a Social Report is completed on why
guardianship is the safest option. I ensured that Mary’s niece was keep fully informed and
involved. She said that she felt reassured that if her aunt did go missing then the home owner
could be able to contact the police and request that Mary is returned to the home.
The advocate and myself have stayed involved with Mary she has become more familiar with
the home, and has regular involvement with washing up, laying the tables. She enjoys
becoming involved in these tasks.
The Act produces many difficulties in it as you could argue that this may be a good thing, as
two professionals need to complete a consent form. All decisions have to be recorded, and a
number of steps taken to identify your decision, usually referring to the Best Decision practice.
My role as a Social Worker is to respect service users and work within their best interests. Lots
of people with Downs Syndrome get dementia. If an individual has dementia then they would
probably still insist that they wish to remain at Home. Due to their memory impairment they are
not able to understand the risks, they may also have no insight into their condition and this can
be quite challenging as you are there as a Social Worker to ensure their safety and wellbeing is
protected. In terms of my values this has been quite challenging as I decided to enter into the
profession to help people. One of the issues is that in this role you also have to protect the
service user, this is not always agreeing with they want. As an individual I have always worked
on the basis of treating people how you would like to be treated. If an individual has no
capacity and is not safe then you have a duty to take them to a place of safety.
A main concern is how the Mental Capacity Act coincides with the Human Rights Act, the right
to be respected, the right to privacy, if a service user is then being placed against her will then
this will not be seen as abiding by the Human Rights Act. The frustration here is this situation
could be misinterpreted as being similar to the Bournewood Judgement. This ruling was made
by the high court and it was identified that an individual was taken to a daycentre, and because
he seemed to be acting out of character he was taken to the hospital. It was then found that he
was stopped from seeing his carers they then started legal proceedings and it was found that
he was being detained against his will. This case has become known as the Bournewood
Judgement.
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.17
Evidence 3: Carer feedback report
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.18
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.19
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.20
Evidence 4: Three-month review
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.21
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.22
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.23
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.24
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.25
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.26
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.27
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.28
Evidence 5: Action plan
Domain 1, Professionalism Social workers are members of an internationally recognised profession, a title protected in UK law. Social workers demonstrate professional commitment by taking responsibility for their conduct, practice and learning, with support through supervision. As representatives of the social work profession they safeguard its reputation and are accountable to the professional regulator
Joanne is using supervision to seek advice on what to do with her work. She is not yet making wider use of the supervision offered as part of the assessed and supported year. We agreed that Joanne will seek to make more effective use of supervision to meet the specific capability statement: make proactive use of supervision to reflect critically on practice, explore different approaches to your work, support your development across the nine capabilities and understand the boundaries of professional accountability.
Joanne is also finding the transition to a professional and the workload that this implies challenging. She needs to further develop her time and workload management skills, as identified in the learning agreement, in order to meet the specific capability statement: demonstrate workload management skills and develop the ability to prioritize.
Domain 2 -Values and Ethics: Apply social work ethical principles and values to guide professional practice.
Social workers have an obligation to conduct themselves ethically and to engage in ethical decision-making, including through partnership with people who use their services. Social workers are knowledgeable about the value base of their profession, its ethical standards and relevant law.
It would be useful for Joanne to give more critical consideration to the values conflicts she faces in her practice. There have been some specific examples in reviews she has completed recently where parents have been resistant to service users developing relationships. In review documentation Joanne has recorded the views of the parents clearly – but this has not necessarily been balanced with the views of the service user.
We have agreed that we will keep this issue under review in supervision.
Domain 3. Diversity: Recognise diversity and apply anti-discriminatory and anti-oppressive principles in practice
Social workers understand that diversity characterises and shapes human experience and is critical to the formation of identity. Diversity is multidimensional and includes race, disability, class, economic status, age, sexuality, gender and transgender, faith and belief. Social workers appreciate that, as a consequence of difference, a person’s life experience may include oppression, marginalisation and alienation as well as privilege, power and acclaim, and are able to challenge appropriately
Joanne is understandably sometimes drawn more towards what parents and carers are saying, particularly where a service user has limited verbal communication – as the example above demonstrates. This means that Joanne is not always recognizing the oppression that service users can face from within their own family. Again we agreed to keep this issue under review in supervision.
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.29
Domain 4. Rights, Justice and Economic Wellbeing: Advance human rights and promote social justice and economic well-being
Social workers recognise the fundamental principles of human rights and equality, and that these are protected in national and international law, conventions and policies. They ensure these principles underpin their practice. Social workers understand the importance of using and contributing to case law and applying these rights in their own practice. They understand the effects of oppression, discrimination and poverty.
Joanne is beginning to develop her understanding in this area, although again her tendency to over identify with the views of parents means that she may miss issues of human rights for service users.
Domain 5. Knowledge: Apply knowledge of social sciences, law and social work practice theory
Social workers understand psychological, social, cultural, spiritual and physical influences on people; human development throughout the life span and the legal framework for practice. They apply this knowledge in their work with individuals, families and communities. They know and use theories and methods of social work practice
Joanne is developing her knowledge of agency policy and procedure and she has developed a good working knowledge of the area which the team covers. The reflective account which Joanne has completed for her portfolio demonstrates that she has knowledge – for example of the Human Rights Act and the Bournewood ruling. However, how she makes use of this knowledge in her practice is not so clear. In supervision Joanne is developing more of an ability to identify relevant theory – however, again she is not always able to discuss how she has used this in her practice. We agreed that we will consider the impact of Joanne’s knowledge on her practice and the impact of her knowledge on the outcomes for service users in supervision sessions.
Domain 6. Critical reflection and Analysis - Apply critical reflection and analysis to inform and provide a rationale for professional decision-making
Social workers are knowledgeable about and apply the principles of critical thinking and reasoned discernment. They identify, distinguish, evaluate and integrate multiple sources of knowledge and evidence. These include practice evidence, their own practice experience, service user and carer experience together with research-based, organisational, policy and legal knowledge. They use critical thinking augmented by creativity and curiosity.
Joanne needs to develop her skills in critically reflective in order to meet both of the specific capability statements in this domain. Isabella recently identified that she finds reflective writing a challenge. Marian will ensure that Joanne is provided with some examples of good quality reflective writing. Marian will also look into whether there is any training available which may be able to assist Joanne to become more reflective.
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.30
Domain 7. Intervention and Skills: Use judgement and authority to intervene with individuals, families and communities to promote independence, provide support and prevent harm, neglect and abuse
Social workers engage with individuals, families, groups and communities, working alongside people to assess and intervene. They enable effective relationships and are effective communicators, using appropriate skills. Using their professional judgement, they employ a range of interventions: promoting independence, providing support and protection, taking preventative action and ensuring safety whilst balancing rights and risks. They understand and take account of differentials in power, and are able to use authority appropriately. They evaluate their own practice and the outcomes for those they work with
Joanne has identified that she would like to develop her skills in working with service users who are not verbal. Marian has allocated some reviews of people who have limited verbal communication to help Joanne develop in this area. We agreed that Joanne will reflect on her learning from these reviews in supervision. Joanne has also accessed some training on communication with adults where there are barriers to communication. We agreed that Joanne will develop a reflective account on her learning from this – as this will also assist Joanne in relation to domain 6. Joanne will also attend the local self-advocacy group to consider who people with limited verbal communication are enabled to advocate on their own behalf. Marian also suggested that Joanne shadow the speech and language therapist to develop her knowledge in this area.
Domain 8. Contexts and organisations: Engage with, inform, and adapt to changing contexts that shape practice. Operate effectively within own organisational frameworks and contribute to the development of services and organisations.
Operate effectively within multi-agency and inter-professional partnerships and settings
Social workers are informed about and pro-actively responsive to the challenges and opportunities that come with changing social contexts and constructs. They fulfill this responsibility in accordance with their professional values and ethics, both as individual professionals and as members of the organisation in which they work. They collaborate, inform and are informed by their work with others, inter-professionally and with communities.
Joanne feels that the team have been very supportive and she feels that she has become very much a member of the team. Marian feels that it would be useful for Joanne to develop a closer relationship with the more experienced practitioners on the team. It was therefore agreed that Joanne will be linked to Anton a senior practitioner on the team. Anton can provide Joanne with support and will encourage Joanne to go on joint visits with him to more complex cases to develop her skills in this area.
The agency are developing a keyworker / named worker system. Marian would like Joanne to consider the communication that has been sent to the team about this and present her thoughts on the proposed system in a supervision session.
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.31
Domain 9. Professional Leadership: Take responsibility for the professional learning and development of others through supervision, mentoring, assessing, research, teaching, leadership and management
The social work profession evolves through the contribution of its members in activities such as practice research, supervision, assessment of practice, teaching and management. An individual’s contribution will gain influence when undertaken as part of a learning, practice-focused organisation. Learning may be facilitated with a wide range of people including social work colleagues, service users and carers, volunteers, foster carers and other professionals.
As yet, Joanne is still developing her practice skills and is not yet demonstrating the potential for professional leadership. Joanne said she would like to provide support to a student who will be shadowing the team for two days. Marian feels that at this stage it would be preferable for Joanne to focus on other areas of her development.
Portfolio progress
Joanne has completed one reflective account on her work with Mary. As detailed, Marian feels that this is not at the standard she would expect. Joanne will be given some examples of reflective writing and Marian will look at whether there is any training which Joanne can undertake.
Joanne has obtained some carer feedback. Marian felt that Joanne should not have used the student feedback form. To date Joanne has located some forms / questionnaires to gather user feedback. Marian advised that sometimes user feedback approaches need to be more creative – particularly in relation to the service user group. Marian advised Joanne to ask for some advice from the local self-advocacy group when she visits about creative ways of obtaining feedback. She also asked Joanne to raise this issue at the next action learning set.
We have completed one direct observation of practice. This is still to be written up for the portfolio.
We agreed that Joanne will bring some review documentation to supervision for Marian to review in relation to the capability statements. This will assist Marian in developing her report.
We also agreed that Joanne will seek some peer feedback on her practice. Since Joanne is going to link up with Anton it may be useful for Anton to complete a direct observation form in relation to a joint visit – this will ensure that the peer feedback is sufficiently focused.
Marian suggested that Joanne re-read the guidance she has been given on the completion of the portfolio – particularly the guidance on critical reflection and on gathering user feedback.
We agreed that the portfolio will be kept under review in supervision. Joanne also advised Joanne that she might like to take the portfolio to the action learning set facilitator for feedback and advice.
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.32
Evidence 6: Reflective account 2
One good example of registration requirements is that it ensures that workers who are not fit to
practice will be dealt with under the code of conduct, this ensures that the Social Work title is
protected. A major focus is the introduction of training requirements. It ensures that Social
workers have to complete approximately so many days training, again, this is a good idea as it
ensures that a worker is able to do training to enhance their skills. It also ensures that the
worker completes the relevant research that will enable them to undertake their role.
I went on some training about communication. The training was very good. The atmosphere
was laid back and some of the exercises were good fun. The tutor was very complimentary
about how keen I was to be there and how I volunteered to feedback some of our small group
discussions.
The tutor said that you should find a good place to communicate in – somewhere quiet without
distractions. If you are talking to a large group you have to remember that some people may
find this difficult. He also said to use gestures and facial expressions to mirror what you are
communicating. So it would be a good idea if you are asking if someone is unhappy to make
your facial expression unhappy to show what you are saying. I will try to do this more in my
work with service users.
I found out that some people find it easier to use objects to communicate, called objects of
reference but photos and pictures can be good as well. I also learnt to do some signs in sign
language – I can say hello and biscuit and man and lady and coat. He showed us a computer
system where you can type words in and it comes up with pictures to translate the words. I think
this will be good for doing care plans and other documents, so I will see if we can get it for the
team.
Most important of all was I learnt how to support individuals with communication difficulties, how
to use the sign language, it made me realise how protected families were of service users with a
learning disability. It was also clear how people with a learning disability could become
institutionalised due to a system. Most of the people at the training were from voluntary
services. The settings were a lot more relaxed than Social Services, the paperwork was a lot
more reduced and there was no bureaucracy involved. Realistically I think the voluntary sector
has a lot more time to spend with the service users and you can be a lot more creative in your
approach to practice so they can spend more time communicating with people with sign
language and other different ways.
I have got the certificate from the course and all the handouts. There were lots of handouts
about all the different ways of communicating, so that is good evidence of what I have learnt.
Overall reflecting on the training, I feel that all professionals and service users should try to work
from the same perspective. I have no regrets entering the profession and am proud to call
myself a Social Worker as I am fulfilling my value basis and achieving what I went into the
profession for by helping people. Now I can communicate better with them so that is a good
result from the training.
Ensuring social workers go on training I personally feel has been a positive development as it
has only set standards that most Social Workers adhere to anyway. I also feel that it is a good
idea to ensure that all training needs are up to date. My reflection on this is that practitioners are
being asked to reflect on how they practice in a competent manner. That can only be a good
thing for everyone.
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.33
Evidence 7: Peer feedback
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.34
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.35
Evidence 8: Review document Date: 06-05-2013
Attendees
Reviewer: Joanne Percival
Service user: Peter Thackley Carer (s): Kevin and Fiona Thackley
Relationship to service user: Parents Location: 134 Mead Avenue, Grangeford
Review
Please refer to care plan. Please list each element of the care plan and indicate whether assessed needs
are being met.
1 For my safety to be promoted when I am visiting my friends or going to town centre on my own.
I will have my mobile phone with me with credit on it will be charged up. I know how to find my
parent’s phone number and will call them as agreed when I am out.
Is this need being met?
Service User: Yes.
Carer(s): Sometimes, on some occasions Peter doesn’t phone as agreed and don’t answer his
phone when we ring him, but most of the time he’s pretty good.
Agreed actions: Peter to remember to call and answer phone as per support plan. Parent’s to remind
him more often.
2 To keep me and my family safe during periods of distress, my parents and I will keep to the crisis
plan agreed with my CPN. If I become angry or frustrated and display aggression to others or to my
belongings we will use the grounding strategies I have learned and I will take my prescribed medication
when necessary.
Is this need being met?
Service User: No answer
Carer(s): No, not at all. Peter’s behaviour has worsening and we are really struggling to cope with
him. Since he has left college it seems he has become fed up with anything we try and
do for him. His angry outbursts are becoming more often and the medication does’nt
work at all
Agreed actions: Peter to attend meeting with CPN to go through grounding strategies and methods to
reduce impact of angry outburst. CPN to refer to psychiatrist for medication review.
3 To help me have a good daily routine and good sleep hygiene, I will attend JUMP day
opportunities 3 times per week with the money I receive from Direct Payments. This will also help keep
in touch with my friends, help me develop more lifeskills and help me gain my food hygiene
qualifications.
Is this need being met?
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.36
Service user: Yes, I’m going every week, really enjoy it. I want to go for more days per week now that
I’m finished at college.
Carer(s): Yes, we’re very happy about, him going to JUMP. The direct payments was a bit
complicated but once they were set it up it seems to be working well. Not sure about
Peter going for more days a week as we are trying, to get some voluntary work for him.
Agreed actions: Continue with current direct payment support for JUMP day opportunities.
4 For my parents to be offered respite support for 1 weekend per month. I will go to Hanswell
House independent residential care provider. My parents have also been offered contact details for
Grangeford Carer’s Association for further support if necessary.
Is this need being met?
Service user:
Carer(s): This has been a massive help, to have 1 weekend a respite month has really been useful
so that we can reenergise and refresh and it has really helped our relationship with
Peter. He’s a bit quiet before he goes but staff say he always has a good time when he
comes back.
Agreed actions:
5 To give me more confidence with managing and understanding the importance of looking after
my money , I will sit down with my dad once per week to budget my spending for the next week.
Is this need being met?
Service user: No. My dad won’t let me look after my own money, he is always telling me I can’t
spend it on the things I want to.
Carer(s): No. Peter never sticks to the budget as agreed and is always wanting to buy PS3 games.
There’s no point to sitting down at the moment, he’s just not ready to look after his own
money.
Agreed actions: Peter should listen to his dad more. Obviously he can’t be spending his money on these
games all the time.
Is there anything further that needs to be included?
Peter walked out of the review after the last discussion – he shouted and swore. Obviously he is very
aggressive if he doesn’t have his own way.
Service user:
Carer(s):
Next review date:
Review Completed by: Joanne Percival Signature:
Service user: Peter Thackley Signature:
Carer(s): Kevin Thackley Signature:
Fiona Thackley
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.37
Evidence 9: Six month review
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.38
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.39
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.40
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.41
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.42
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.43
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.44
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.45
Evidence 10: Revised action plan
Area of
concern
Links to PCF Support and
development
opportunities
Desired outcomes Review
Joanne uses
supervision to
discuss her
work in
procedural
terms. She
seeks advice
on every
aspect of her
case work –
seemingly
making no
decisions
herself.
Domain 1 –
make proactive
use of
supervision to
reflect critically
on practice,
explore different
approaches to
your work,
support your
development
across the nine
capabilities and
understand the
boundaries of
professional
accountability
Joanne and Marian
will have more
regular supervision
to provide Joanne
with more
opportunities.
Joanne will develop
the agenda to give
her the opportunity
to understand the
need for a variety of
areas to be covered.
Joanne will also be
provided with some
directed reading on
the use of
supervision in social
work.
Joanne will make
better use of
supervision.
Joanne will explore
her learning and
development in
supervision – using
it as a critically
reflective space.
Joanne will make
some decisions
herself –
recognising those
that need to be
shared in
supervision
discussion.
Joanne does
not take a user
focused
approach to
her work.
Where parents
or other carers
are actively
involved, she
appears to
identify with
their
perspectives
even where
these may be
in conflict with
the service
user’s views.
Domain 2 –
recognise and
promote
individuals’ right
to autonomy and
self-
determination
Domain 4 – apply
in practice
principles of
human, civil
rights and
equalities
legislation and
manage
competing rights,
differing needs
and perspectives
Domain 4-
empower service
users (and
carers) through
recognising their
rights and enable
access where
appropriate to
Joanne will attend
the local self-
advocacy group and
listen to the views of
service users.
Joanne will attend
some training on
person centred
approaches.
Joanne will be given
the opportunity to
meet with two peer
advocates who are
willing to share their
experiences of
conflict with their
families.
Joanne will be
provided with some
directed reading for
her study days.
Joanne will be more
user-centred in her
work – promoting
rights and self -
determination.
Joanne will work in
a more person
centred way
incorporating an
active support
model.
Joanne will be
better able to
manage the conflict
between carers and
service users.
Joanne will be
better able to
advocate for service
users – recognising
the limitations to the
advocacy role and
the need for
independent / peer
advocacy.
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.46
Area of
concern
Links to PCF Support and
development
opportunities
Desired outcomes Review
independent
advocacy
Joanne is
struggling to
manage her
caseload and
meet deadlines
– despite this
being very
protected. She
feels that she
needs to
develop her
time and
workload
management
skills.
Domain 1 –
demonstrate
workload
management
skills and
develop the
ability to prioritise
Joanne will be
provided with two
one to one sessions
on time and
workload
management
strategies (provided
by the learning and
development
department).
Joanne will continue
to have a protected
caseload.
Time and workload
management will be
discussed in every
supervision session.
A discussion will
take place within the
team meeting about
how team members
manage their
workload. This will
focus on the sharing
of good practice
generally rather than
highlighting
Joanne’s needs.
Joanne will be able
to manage her time
more effectively.
Joanne will meet
departmental
targets – for
example on making
initial contact with
service users after
allocation.
Joanne and Marian
will feel confident
about Joanne
moving towards an
increase in her
workload in line with
electronic allocation
procedures used
within the
department.
Joanne’s
recording is not
always of an
acceptable
standard.
Plans are not
clearly
evidenced and
outcomes do
not always
seem to follow
on from the
expressed
wishes of
service users.
Domain 7 –
record
information in a
timely, respectful
and accurate
manner. Write
records and
reports, for a
variety of
purposes with
language suited
to function, using
information
management
systems.
Distinguish fact
from opinion and
record conflicting
Joanne will go on
the recording with
care training again.
She will meet
individually with the
course facilitator for
support and advice
on recording.
Marian will provide
detailed feedback to
Joanne on her
recording.
Joanne’s recording
will reflect the
requirements of the
department and
values of the team.
Joanne’s recording
will be evidence
based, will
demonstrate
provenance and will
demonstrate
effective
professional
decision making.
ASYE fictional case study: Joanne p.47
Area of
concern
Links to PCF Support and
development
opportunities
Desired outcomes Review
views and
perspectives.
Joanne has not
been able to
consider a
variety of ways
to gather user
feedback. She
is focussing on
using
questionnaires
and asking
parents /
carers to
complete
these. It is
important that
Joanne looks
at how she can
generate
feedback
directly from
service users.
Domain 7 – use
a range of
methods to
engage and
communicate
effectively with
service users,
eliciting the
needs, wishes
and feelings of all
those involved,
taking account of
situations where
these are not
explicitly
expressed.
Joanne will seek
advice from the self
advocacy group
about how they feel
people’s views can
be identified.
Joanne will also talk
to her peer group in
an NQSW action
learning set.
Marian will obtain
user feedback at or
after each direct
observation and will
share how she
obtained this with
Joanne to help
Joanne identify
other ways to obtain
feedback.
Joanne will gather
meaningful
feedback from
service users and
will reflect on how
she can make use
of this to improve
her practice.
Joanne will have a
range of user
feedback to include
in her final portfolio.
This will provide
evidence of
Joanne’s capability
against the PCF.
Joanne needs
to further
develop her
skills in
reflective
writing. The
development of
these skills will
also assist
Joanne in
developing her
analytical skills
and will
improve the
quality of her
recording.
All of domain 6 Joanne will discuss
reflective writing
with the NQSW
action learning set
facilitator who has
offered to provide
support to Joanne in
developing her skills
in this area.
Joanne will consider
a range of models of
reflective writing –
using the directed
reading and
examples of
reflective writing she
has been provided
with.
Joanne will be able
to produce
reflective accounts
which evidence her
capability against
the PCF.
Joanne’s skills in
critically reflective
practice will be
enhanced.
Joanne will further
develop her
analytical skills.
This fictional case study is provided by Skills for Care and the Department for Education, © 2012. It can be copied for the purposes of administering the ASYE, but must not be published for sale.