Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
How are we doing?A self-assessment and improvement resource to help social care and health organisations develop the role and practice of social workers in mental health
January 2016
How are we doing?A self-assessment and improvement resource to help social care and health organisations develop the role and practice of social workers in mental health
Dr Ruth Allen
Dr Sarah Carr
Dr Karen Linde
with Hari Sewell
With thanks for their contributions to:
Dorothy Gould, Service user Consultant.
Jack Nicholas, Robert Punton and Clenton Farquharson, Community Navigator Services User-led Training and Development Organisation.
You may re-use the text of this document (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/
© Crown copyright
Published to gov.uk, in PDF format
www.gov.uk/dh
Contents
Introduction 1
Chapter 1: Avoiding duplication with other self-assessment frameworks 3
Chapter 2: Promoting five role categories for social work in mental health 5
Chapter 3: Why focus on role clarity? 7
Chapter 4: Using the five role categories in your organisation 9
Chapter 5: Thinking about roles from a systems perspective 11
Chapter 6: Doing the self-assessment and developing an improvement process 13
Chapter 7: Project ownership 15
Chapter 8: Governance of the outcomes of the self-assessment 17
Chapter 9: Use of external facilitation/consultancy 19
Chapter 10: The self-assessment and improvement team: Gathering a community of stakeholders to use the resource effectively 21
Chapter 11: Who else needs to be involved? 23
Chapter 12: Completing the self-assessment template 25
Chapter 13: Maintaining momentum when synthesising and the results of the exercise and developing the action plan 27
Chapter 14: How are we doing? – The Core Team 29
Introduction
Introduction 1
The Department of Health and the Chief Social Worker for Adults (CSWA) in England have commissioned this self-assessment and action planning guide. It is intended to enable organisations that manage and/or employ mental health social workers to self-evaluate whether they are providing the conditions for excellent practice – and to plan and deliver actions for improvement where needed.
This document – How are we doing? – is one of a suite of three resources aimed at employers, managers, learning and development leads, social workers and their professional leads. These resources build upon the document “The Role of the Social Worker in Adult Mental Health Services” launched by the CSWA and the College of Social Work in 2014, now hosted by the British Association of Social Workers1. That well received document was developed from wide consultation across the social work and mental health sectors, and with service users and carers. It sets out five key role categories for social workers in mental health which aim to describe and explain how social workers can develop and use their skills most effectively.
The three documents are:
1. Social work for better mental health: The Strategic Statement. Aimed particularly
1 Originally published by the College of Social Work and now hosted by the British Association of Social Workers https://www.basw.co.uk/resources/tcsw/Roles%20and%20Functions%20of%20Mental%20Health%20Social%20Workers%202014.pdf
at strategic and operational leaders, this document makes the contemporary strategic, policy and good practice case for developing social work in mental health services – within local authorities, within the NHS and within other parts of the sector.
2. ‘How are we doing?’ An organisational and workforce self-assessment and improvement resource for implementation of the role categories within integrated health and social care services, or in social work-only services within local authorities.
3. ‘Making the difference together’: A framework for direct service user and carer feedback and co-production to promote high quality social work in mental health. It is aimed at social workers and their supervisors, focusing on co-creating practice-based evidence and continuous learning from experience and reflection.
The term ‘Social Work for Better Mental Health’ is also used as the collective title of all three resources and conveys the role social workers have to play in improving the mental health and wellbeing of society.
It is recommended that the three resources are used together to ensure the value of social work is understood in a strategic context in your local organisations, to self-evaluate your current practices and culture, and to ensure the voice and views of people using services and their families inform and improve practice.
2 How are we doing?
The new documents have been produced after further wide consultation across the sector, through workshops with practitioners, academics and managers around the country, through written feedback and testing with social work leaders in mental health. The resources will develop and evolve further through the feedback it is hope will be gathered from their implementation.
1. Avoiding duplication with other self-assessment frameworks 3
Chapter 1: Avoiding duplication with other self-assessment frameworks
1.1. This self-assessment is complementary to other tools promoting good practice in workforce support and development in social work, particularly the Social Work Task Force’s organisational ‘Health Check’2 and the Local government Association Standards for Employers of Social Workers in England3 – the Local Government Association.
1.2. ‘How are we doing?’ is distinctive in that it is:
• Tailored for social workers in mental health settings – within local authorities and integrated NHS (and other healthcare) settings.
• More than a self-assessment because it is also an improvement tool, providing a systemic and developmental framework to explore and identify underlying issues from different perspectives – including those of people using services and their families – and to help organisations and staff make changes.
• Focused on social work role clarity, professional practice, leadership and ambition.
2 Can be downloaded from: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/swtf-appendix-organisations.pdf
3 Can be downloaded from: http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/6188796/The_standards_for_employers_of_social_workers.pdf/fb7cb809-650c-4ccd-8aa7-fecb07271c4a
2. Promoting five role categories for social work in mental health 5
Chapter 2: Promoting five role categories for social work in mental health
2.1. All three resources support the implementation of the five role categories for mental health social work and build upon the ideas and recommendations in the original document. The overarching purpose of the role categories and the work that flows from them is to support social workers to have greater impact on improving mental health outcomes through using a range of social interventions that make a real difference to people’s lives.
2.2. The five role categories are given here with a brief, updated explanation of each:
A. Enabling citizens to access the statutory social care and social work services and advice to which they are entitled, discharging the legal duties and promoting the personalised social care ethos of the local authority.
Ensuring whole systems of interagency care and support have cohorts of social work staff who hold expert knowledge of social care, its ethos and law, and its responsibilities towards people with mental health problems. Social workers with these skills and knowledge help to ensure whole system, integrated and coherent responses to complex needs – particularly important in a time of diversifying and fragmenting support pathways. Social workers uphold key aspects of organisations’ promotion of equalities. Their approach to personalisation in social care also promotes self-management and a focus on the ability of people to
protect themselves and promote their own wellbeing within a framework of entitlements and human rights.
B. Promoting recovery and social inclusion with individuals and families.
With their focus and understanding of social determinants of health and wellbeing, and of the impact of inequality on people’s lives, social workers have a key role to play within interdisciplinary approaches to recovery and social inclusion. Social workers are contributors to breaking down stigma and meeting public duties to ensuring people with mental health problems can access ordinary life opportunities. They are also key contributors (using systemic, co-productive and other relationship-based models) to the therapeutic and educational support for recovery, working alongside individuals and families in partnership.
C. Intervening and showing professional leadership and skill in situations characterised by high levels of social, family and interpersonal complexity, risk and ambiguity.
Social workers are key to ensuring integrated responses to complexity and risk across systems. Their skills are crucial to complex safeguarding interventions with adults and children. Their systemic approach enables them to work effectively with complex relationships, to balance the rights and perspectives of
6 How are we doing?
different parties and to manage effectively the care/control/enablement dimensions of professional decision making, while protecting those most at risk. They are leaders in Mental Capacity Act and other legal/human rights-driven practice across systems.
D. Working co-productively and innovatively with local communities to support community capacity, personal and family resilience, earlier intervention and active citizenship.
This role category expresses the ambition that professional social work can contribute to improvement in mental health across our populations – through better prevention, earlier intervention and mental health awareness and self-support in communities and families. This is a distinctively ‘non-clinical’, sociological and systemic perspective that is the foundation for developing the evidence base for social interventions. It is also key territory for more innovation in social work.
E. Leading the Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) workforce.
While the AMHP role is now open to other professionals, social work knowledge and capability is the foundation for the training content and the standards expected of AMHPs. Local authorities also continue to have clear statutory duties to provide and assure the quality of AMHP provision. The social work foundation of AMHP services promotes a human rights based and social approach to mental health and ensures the use of mental health legislation follows the principles of the Code of Practice, including least restriction and maximization of independence.
3. Why focus on role clarity? 7
Chapter 3: Why focus on role clarity?
3.1. While role clarity is not a panacea for all organisational and workforce difficulties affecting social work, the research suggests it is a very important issue to address.4 Lack of job role clarity has been found to be related to a high level of stress, low job satisfaction, low job advancement, and low job involvement in various professions.
3.2. Research on the social work role in integrated mental health teams has identified relatively poorer outcomes for social workers. Carpenter et al, 2012,5 in keeping with earlier research,6 found a generally positive picture across disciplines within community mental health teams, with staff holding positive, shared attitudes and values concerning the philosophy and practice of community care for people with mental health problems. Staff were clear about their roles and tasks and job satisfaction was maintained at moderately high levels. However, there were relatively poorer outcomes for social workers in comparison with other professions. Social
4 Moriarty, J., Baginsky, M., & Manthorpe, J (2015) Literature review of roles and issues within the social work profession in England, Kings College, Social Care Workforce Research Unit, London
5 Carpenter et al (2012) Working in Multidisciplinary Community Mental Health Teams: The Impact on Social Workers and Health Professionals of Integrated Mental Health Care
6 Evans, S., Huxley, P., Gately, C., Webber, M., Mears, A., Pajak, S., Medina, J., Kendall, T. & Katona, C. (2006) Mental health, burnout and job satisfaction among mental health social workers in England and Wales. British Journal of Psychiatry, 188, 75-80.
Workers tended to identify less strongly with their profession, perceived the teams as being less participative, gave lower ratings for working in the team, and experienced higher role conflict and more stress than other professions.
3.3. The annual NHS workforce survey findings shows that 56% of social workers in mental health trusts suffered work-related stress in 2013. Frontline social workers overtook doctors, nurses and occupational therapists as the profession suffering most stress in mental health services. Webber and Hudson’s 2012 research into stress and burn out amongst Approved Mental Health Professionals7 (the vast majority of whom remain social workers) found role and task conflicts and workload management were factors in a worrying picture of widespread common mental health disorders amongst social workers (c. 43%) with a large minority (20%) wishing to leave the AMHP role. This tension was strongest when AMHPs were required to combine AMPH tasks and role with other roles, such as that of care coordinator, and workload management to combine these two areas of work was neither under the control of the social worker nor effectively managed by others. Negative impact on morale and stress levels are often associated with perceived lack of autonomy and control in the workplace. 7 Webber, M & Hudson, J (2012) National AMHP
Survey reported in Community Care http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2012/10/02/one-in-five-amhps-wants-to-quit-role-amid-unacceptably-high-stress-levels/
8 How are we doing?
3.4. A key issue for the development of effective teams in mental health, as in other sectors, is alignment of individual, professional and team goals and purpose in sustained and committed ways. This alignment may be achieved where professionals are clear about their role, clear about their responsibilities and scope of autonomy, know their distinctive contribution is valued and are clear how it articulates positively with others.
3.5. Carter and West (1999)8 have described a clearly defined and effective team as having clear, shared objectives with differentiated roles and a need among members to work together to achieve team objectives. Role clarity is also required for constructive thought diversity and sustained professional effectiveness. It tends to correlate with a positive sense of professional identity and a strong sense of purpose and commitment, and it guards against stress and burn out.
3.6. Organisational role clarity and social work effectiveness as explored in this self-assessment have three key dimensions:
• A description of social work that is understandable within and outside the profession to enhance professional identity and communication with other disciplines and other parts of the sector.
• A clear focus on the unique characteristics of social work practice and how they add distinctive value in mental health.
• An exploration of the cultural and systemic contexts which support or hinder effective social work practice.
8 Carter, AJW & West, M 1999, 'Sharing the burden – teamwork in health care settings'. in J Firth-Cozens & RL Payne (eds), Stress in health professionals: psychological and organisational causes and interventions. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp. 191-202.
4. Using the five role categories in your organisation 9
Chapter 4: Using the five role categories in your organisation
4.1. The role categories are not suggested as a fixed ‘blueprint’ or a specific set of ‘standards’. They are a framework of principles that can be tailored to the requirements within particular service systems, workforces and communities. They are also designed to promote an ambition for more holistic, far-reaching social work practice and interventions in mental health. In undertaking a self-assessment, organisations are encouraged to guard against dismissing aspects of them as irrelevant or ‘unrealistic’ to a particular context. Instead, comparison with the role categories should provide an opportunity for reflection and curious enquiry about the local situation and help organisations ask themselves – ‘where do we want to get to and how do we get there?’
4.2. Organisations are particularly recommended to consider the potential for the role of social workers to extend beyond the tightly boundaried, statutory/legal tasks of the Approved Mental Health Professional and ‘care management’ type roles – vital though these are – that have tended to dominate statutory social work in recent decades. In times of financial constraint, organisations can focus staff roles predominantly on limited statutory duties. At its worst, this becomes a focus on crisis and acute situations which have deteriorated for lack of earlier assistance. A focus on statutory interventions also risks stifling innovation and finding more effective ways to meet needs and gain better outcomes.
4.3. For the future effectiveness and efficiency of health and social care services – and to meet the intentions of the Care Act 2014 – social workers need more than ever to be part of prevention, early intervention and community innovations, as well as providing statutory responses to more acute needs. This includes being embedded in both health (NHS) and social care provision, as well as being part of the private, voluntary and not-for-profit organisations. The NHS needs social workers’ systemic knowledge and skills more than ever in order to reduce the ‘failure demands’ arising from lack of forward planning, discontinuities in service, lack of involvement of carers and families and lack of attention to interrelated social and health issues.
4.4. Even though the five categories are described separately, they should be understood as interdependent, describing interrelated areas of professional capability. Success in one area will often be dependent on strength in another.
4.5. The five categories also map onto the Professional Capabilities Framework9 for social work which has been developed as a framework for England to guide the deepening of interrelated capabilities for social workers throughout their careers. They also complement the Knowledge and Skills Statement for Adults – which references the Role of the Social Worker in Adult Mental Health Services as a key source document
9 Professional Capabilities Framework can be accessed via https://www.basw.co.uk/pcf/
10 How are we doing?
– and other contemporary work aimed at raising the profile and clarifying the distinctive constellation of social and systemic offers that social workers can make to the mental health system10.
10 See, for instance, the work by Professor Martin Webber on ‘social connectedness’ interventions and of conceiving of social workers operating across the individual, family/group and community/societal – or ‘micro, meso and meta’ – levels. Webber, M, Reidy, H, Ansari, D, Stevens, M & Morris, D 2015, 'Enhancing social networks: a qualitative study of health and social care practice in UK mental health services' Health & Social Care in the Community, vol 23, no. 2, pp. 180-189.
5. Thinking about roles from a systems perspective 11
Chapter 5: Thinking about roles from a systems perspective
5.1. In order to help organisations think afresh about social work roles and how well they are working in your organisation, this self-assessment process uses an organisational development approach based on systems thinking (systemic approaches) and a solution focus. Systemic approaches provide a helpful foundation for organisational improvement, encouraging a learning culture and collaborative, compassionate organisations – themes of great interest and relevance across health and social care now11.
5.2. Systems approaches help us understand organisational challenges (such as role clarity) from diverse perspectives, encourage us to look at them from historical as well as within current inter-relational context and help to focus on finding solutions from the assets and contribution of many, not just the few ‘at the top’.
5.3. As Peter Senge has summed it up, using a systems approach means:
‘…a very deep and persistent commitment to ‘real learning’ (which means) I have to be prepared to be wrong. If it was pretty obvious what we ought to be doing, then we’d be already doing it. So I’m part of the problem, my own way of seeing things, my own sense of where there’s leverage, is probably part of the problem. This is the domain we’ve
11 West, M et al (2014) Developing Collective Leadership for Healthcare. The Centre for Creative Leadership/The Kings Fund. London.
always called ‘mental models.’ If I’m not prepared to challenge my own mental models, then the likelihood of finding non-obvious areas of leverage are very low.
(There is also) the need to triangulate. You need to get different people, from different points of view, who are seeing different parts of the system to come together and collectively start to see something that individually none of them see (and then need to realise) it may take some time to really develop, adapt and apply really alternative behaviours and approaches” 12
5.4. This self-assessment and improvement tool is informed by these principles, encouraging a process that brings different perspectives together to investigate whether the underlying organisational conditions exist to enable social work to thrive. This includes considering leadership, governance, supervision, policy, culture and organisational structures – as well as considering the development of social work specific knowledge, skills and roles. The improvement process encourages an honest and multi-perspective review of barriers as well as recognition of existing positives upon which change can be built.
12 From lecture ‘Navigating Webs of Interdependence’ Peter Senge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOPfVVMCwYg&feature=player_embedded
6. Doing the self-assessment and developing an improvement process 13
Chapter 6: Doing the self-assessment and developing an improvement process
6.1. Organisations are encouraged to follow the process steps laid out here, to get the most from the self-assessment and make it worth the investment of time and thinking.
6.2. The main steps of the process – which are expanded further below – are:
v. establishing a senior ‘sponsor’ within the organisation who is well briefed on the process and its intentions;
vi. establishing an internal facilitator/project lead for the process;
vii. deciding whether an external consultant or facilitator will be engaged to support completion;
viii. establishing a self-assessment and improvement team of (it is recommended this is of about ten people) from diverse perspectives;
ix. holding and capturing an initial ‘set-up’ dialogue within the team to set high level aims and enable all members to start articulating their position on an equal footing;
x. during the above, deciding who else beyond the self-assessment team should be asked to contribute and how that should be done;
xi. setting clear and sufficient time aside to explore and complete the self-assessment;
xii. discussing and analysing the findings from the self-assessment;
xiii. agreeing a self-evaluation report with highlighted priorities for change;
xiv. creating a development and improvement plan;
xv. agreeing and implementing the cycle of review, refresh and reporting back to stakeholders on actions and achievement – including accountability to senior management team and to the social work workforce.
7. Project ownership 15
Chapter 7: Project ownership
7.1. Most organisations rely heavily on senior management leadership ‘from the top’ to sign off on change and use of resources. Depending on the nature of your organisation, decide what senior leadership (or ‘sponsorship’) and support will be needed to make the self-assessment meaningful and likely to have impact, and try to make sure this is secured at the outset. This should include written agreement with senior management on the scope and mandate of the process. This level of sponsorship and clarity may not be possible, in which case you may want to proceed with a view to working out over time how to access senior buy in once the findings and recommendations have been gathered.
8. Governance of the outcomes of the self-assessment 17
Chapter 8: Governance of the outcomes of the self-assessment
• It is recommended from the outset that the ongoing governance of the improvement actions is planned as robustly as possible. Here are some questions that may need to be answered:
• Who will sign off the findings and improvement actions?
• Who will release any resources needed?
• How will the actions be monitored and overseen to ensure completion?
• How will all relevant staff be informed and involved in the improvement process?
• How will the impact of the actions be evaluated and who will be involved in that?
• How will this process be part of continuous learning and improvement?
9. Use of external facilitation/consultancy 19
Chapter 9: Use of external facilitation/consultancy
9.1. A decision needs to be taken at the outset about whether an external consultant or facilitator will be engaged to help. The value of some external support include:
• facilitating clarity of purpose of the exercise;
• encouraging fidelity to the process and use of the outcomes;
• encouraging inclusivity and flattening of any formal power hierarchies within the local system;
• bringing a perspective that is not intrinsically part of the local culture and system;
• providing support and guidance if the process becomes difficult or stuck; and
• supporting effective approaches to senior management to lever change.
10. The self-assessment and improvement team: Gathering a community of stakeholders to use the resource effectively 21
Chapter 10: The self-assessment and improvement team: Gathering a community of stakeholders to use the resource effectively
10.1. The self-assessment and improvement team should include a number of perspectives. These may be a cross section from social work practitioners; AMHPs; professional social work lead/s; workforce and organisational development staff; representatives of people using services and their families and friend; operational and strategic managers, and, for interdisciplinary settings with health, medical and allied health professionals. It may be appropriate to include voluntary or community sector stakeholders too.
10.2. The precise makeup of your stakeholder group will be determined by local circumstances and priorities. Pragmatically, it is recommended that an organisational lead for the self-assessment is assigned to coordinate the self-assessment group.
10.3. Having paid attention to ‘who should be involved’, the self-assessment team should be a manageable size (around 10 people) to enable efficiency and clarity of purpose. The team should come together before the self-assessment questionnaire is completed to address the following ‘set up’ questions:
• What do we each bring to this process and what do we want out of it?
• Who else has an interest in and/or an important view about the quality and impact of social work in mental health?
• Who has relevant professional and expert knowledge of excellent social work?
• Who could help make a difference to role clarity and improving social work practice impact?
10.4. The questions should be answered through open discussion and inclusive dialogue within one meeting. It is recommended all members of the group receive a copy of this self-assessment guidance document with the questions one week in advance of the meeting.
11. Who else needs to be involved? 23
Chapter 11: Who else needs to be involved?
11.1. The self-assessment team needs to be small and focused, but should consider who else needs to feed in to this process and how to involve them. (e.g. getting a large number of people to feedback on the questionnaire and analysing their responses; asking a wider range of people to give feedback on a sub-set of priority issues or asking for discussion and feedback from team meetings – whatever makes sense in your organisation).
12. Completing the self-assessment template 25
Chapter 12: Completing the self-assessment template
12.1. It is recommended this is done within an agreed fixed time frame (e.g. within two half day sessions of the self-assessment and improvement team plus whatever workshops are agreed to be necessary) and that this is not commenced until all the set up processes outlined above have been achieved. Scores should be agreed by consensus where possible. Major split scores should be noted in the narrative.
12.2. The narrative overall should be kept short and ‘lean’ and should include the evidence for the score – but should not be just a list of items. It needs to indicate reasoning and the ‘story’ behind the score, and should try to focus on what is most important to resolve or to celebrate.
13. Maintaining momentum when synthesising and the results of the exercise and developing the action plan 27
Chapter 13: Maintaining momentum when synthesising and the results of the exercise and developing the action plan
13.1. It is recommended that the group takes a break from the process after completing the questionnaire and reconvenes within a week or two for the process of synthesising the results and completing the action plan. This will allow participants to reflect on the process and refresh their thinking. At least another two half days are likely to be needed to complete the action plan, but this could be longer depending on how many stakeholders are to be involved and the complexity of the issues to be addressed.
13.2. It is important that this process overall is given sufficient time from beginning to end and is approached positively with a spirit of enquiry throughout. It is also important to keep the focus on the positive and on solutions, remembering that ‘what we talk about grows bigger’.
14. How are we doing? – The Core Team 29
Chapter 14: How are we doing? – The Core Team
The
proj
ect s
pons
or
Nam
eO
rgan
isat
ion
(if r
elev
ant)
Job
or
oth
er r
ole
The
proj
ect c
oord
inat
or/m
ain
poin
t of c
onta
ct
Nam
eO
rgan
isat
ion
(if r
elev
ant)
Job
or
oth
er r
ole
The
core
eva
luat
ion
team
: cap
ture
her
e de
tails
of a
ll w
ho h
as b
een
invo
lved
in c
ompl
etin
g (o
r ov
erse
eing
com
plet
ion)
of t
he s
elf-a
sses
smen
t inc
ludi
ng p
eopl
e w
ho u
se s
ervi
ces,
fam
ilies,
par
tner
s fro
m o
ther
org
anis
atio
ns o
r pr
ofes
sion
s et
c.
Nam
eO
rgan
isat
ion
(if
rele
vant
)Jo
b t
itle
or
oth
er
rele
vant
des
crip
tion
Ro
le in
eva
luat
ion
team
14. How are we doing? – The Core Team 31
g n d l i anv ta s a n
. H
e
els o t m
m k r nee rt cs o sy
l w e
e s loa dci oc
ivr d a
e n s n
x s
t ie n d a
ll e i
p
ce mm e r ch
vr o r o
o s co rf ps dek o lr m
o cr d i
g o
k w n n
le a
ge a
is
b ser ao li sn
l w
a savr
ch e a r
y a ora lii s
f
s oc i
a u a
t f h
o s e on t t
h s io f y py
g p aa . I dtl lw sea t a
ni c r a
e t i er v
l h
o r has
n e tt i
a e s
n e
t h s
t a i t aen lt aa cre en u
c
r m e
d l h oac t , yr n su of s
a co
e p
o kde t m
u
n y r oo r
c w i lv u
d g
n o o drisa e p r a eno fio cri t bt o p
f
ua fo r de
kr t u e
m b e h
t ao tro n s s
r o
f r w
e un o w i
, om
d i o ke f y l
le o
e be
r
e o
n rg l wu
d a fi t ao ao ilr n r ocgk y
a . p
r p e mcac i et t h s
i ea l ac e t tr laa
B l r h eC a c
p T h
Num
ber
o
r %
Co
mm
ents
incl
udin
g r
easo
ns if
can
not
answ
er q
uest
ion
1. T
otal
num
ber
of s
ocia
l wor
kers
und
er re
view
in th
is s
elf-
asse
ssm
ent (
indi
cate
whe
ther
usi
ng h
ead
coun
t or
who
le ti
me
equi
vale
nts)
2. H
ow m
any
of ‘1
.’ ar
e w
ithin
adu
lt m
enta
l hea
lth s
ervi
ces?
3. H
ow m
any
of ‘1
’ are
with
in o
lder
adu
lt m
enta
l hea
lth s
ervi
ces?
4. H
ow m
any
of ‘1
’ are
with
in c
hild
and
ado
lesc
ent m
enta
l hea
lth
serv
ices
?
5. H
ow m
any
of ‘1
’ are
with
in o
ther
men
tal h
ealth
ser
vice
s?
6. H
ow m
any
of a
ll th
ese
soci
al w
orke
rs a
re e
mpl
oyed
and
m
anag
ed b
y th
e lo
cal a
utho
rity?
7. H
ow m
any
of a
ll th
ese
soci
al w
orke
rs a
re e
mpl
oyed
by
the
loca
l aut
horit
y, m
anag
ed b
y N
HS
?
8. H
ow m
any
soci
al w
orke
rs a
re e
mpl
oyed
and
man
aged
by
the
NH
S m
enta
l hea
lth s
ervi
ces?
A
re th
ese
incl
uded
in th
e nu
mbe
rs g
iven
in ‘1
’?
9. H
ow m
any
soci
al w
orke
rs a
re e
mpl
oyed
in o
ther
loca
l men
tal
heal
th s
ervi
ces
not c
over
ed in
‘1’ o
r ‘8
’ (e.
g. in
priv
ate
men
tal
heal
th h
ospi
tals
?)
10.
How
man
y of
the
soci
al w
orke
rs in
‘1’ a
re A
MH
Ps?
32 How are we doing?
Num
ber
o
r %
Co
mm
ents
incl
udin
g r
easo
ns if
can
not
answ
er q
uest
ion
11.
How
man
y of
the
soci
al w
orke
rs in
‘1’ a
re B
est I
nter
est
Ass
esso
rs?
12.
Wha
t per
cent
age
of p
osts
in th
e ad
ult m
enta
l hea
lth s
ocia
l w
ork
wor
kfor
ce a
re v
acan
t (i.e
. cur
rent
ly n
ot o
ccup
ied
by a
pe
rman
ent s
ocia
l wor
ker?
)
13.
Wha
t per
cent
age
of p
osts
are
cov
ered
by
agen
cy/t
empo
rary
so
cial
wor
kers
?
14.
Wha
t is
your
ann
ual s
ickn
ess
rate
for
soci
al w
orke
rs in
adu
lt m
enta
l hea
lth?
Yes/
No
Co
mm
ents
15.
Is th
ere
a se
nior
lead
role
for
men
tal h
ealth
soc
ial w
ork
in
your
are
a?
16.
If ‘y
es’ t
o th
e ab
ove,
are
they
con
side
red
to b
e a
Prin
cipa
l S
ocia
l Wor
ker
or e
quiv
alen
t in
thei
r lo
calit
y?
17.
Do
you
use
any
stan
dard
mea
sure
s of
wor
k st
ress
or
wel
lbei
ng fo
r yo
ur m
enta
l hea
lth s
ocia
l wor
kers
?
18.
Do
you
regu
larly
sur
vey
soci
al w
orke
rs a
bout
thei
r w
ork
and/
or w
ellb
eing
?
tnemevor pse mss e
ie run tk uae e
fr
w hr
ts
o op s
fna
t goitan da nc ufii ongi g
ft w
ith s nor
g st
u nt b
ittenet , sexe
e ergmo t de
o s ne
2 =
t llecx l n
ea
im o a
n4
= t
1 =
mi
reh tllt a
rur
ft a o
m f
0 =
no
ooh
rt elb t wi
a nci el tp xp
t a d e
o oo: X
= n
o a
gye
K 3 =
t
14. How are we doing? – The Core Team 33
1P
RO
FES
SIO
NA
L LE
AD
ER
SH
IPS
core
Nar
rativ
e ex
pla
natio
n an
d e
vid
ence
Prim
ary
ques
tions
(sco
re a
nd g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)0-
4
1. T
o w
hat e
xten
t is
soci
al w
ork
expe
rtis
e an
d pr
ofes
sion
al
guid
ance
em
bedd
ed in
the
seni
or le
ader
ship
of t
he
orga
nisa
tion
man
agin
g m
enta
l hea
lth s
ocia
l wor
kers
?
2. T
o w
hat e
xten
t are
soc
ial w
orke
rs a
t all
leve
ls o
f the
or
gani
satio
n su
ppor
ted
to d
evel
op a
nd u
se p
rofe
ssio
nal
lead
ersh
ip s
kills
in p
ract
ice
(e.g
. dev
elop
ing
capa
bilit
y to
adv
ise
othe
rs &
mai
ntai
n a
clea
r pr
ofes
sion
al v
iew
in
inte
rdis
cipl
inar
y di
scus
sion
)?
3. H
ow c
onsi
sten
tly a
nd e
ffect
ivel
y is
hig
h qu
ality
pro
fess
iona
l su
perv
isio
n an
d gu
idan
ce a
vaila
ble
to a
ll so
cial
wor
kers
?
Sys
tem
ic q
uest
ion
(sco
re a
nd g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
How
sat
isfie
d do
you
thin
k so
cial
wor
kers
are
with
the
prof
essi
onal
(soc
ial w
ork)
pee
r ne
twor
ks a
nd c
olle
ctiv
e so
cial
w
ork
lead
ersh
ip w
ithin
the
orga
nisa
tion
man
agin
g th
em?
Sol
utio
n-fo
cuse
d qu
estio
n (d
o no
t sco
re, g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
Giv
e on
e ex
ampl
e of
effe
ctiv
e m
enta
l hea
lth s
ocia
l wor
k le
ader
ship
that
impr
oved
pra
ctic
e ou
tcom
es in
the
last
tw
o ye
ars.
W
hat m
ade
it po
ssib
le a
nd w
hat w
as a
chie
ved?
Tota
l sco
re a
nd p
riorit
ies
for
actio
n in
this
sec
tion
34 How are we doing?
2 AIN
TE
GR
AT
ION
AN
D IN
TE
RA
GE
NC
Y W
OR
KIN
G
(INT
EG
RA
TE
D N
HS
/LA
AN
D M
ULT
IDIS
CIP
LIN
AR
Y
TE
AM
VE
RS
ION
)
Sco
reN
arra
tive
exp
lana
tion
and
evi
den
ce
Prim
ary
ques
tions
(sco
re a
nd g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
1. T
o w
hat e
xten
t are
loca
l par
tner
s an
d st
akeh
olde
rs (e
.g. l
ocal
au
thor
ity, c
omm
issi
oner
s, N
HS
pro
vide
rs) a
bout
the
dist
inct
ive
cont
ribut
ion
and
role
s of
soc
ial w
orke
rs to
del
iver
inte
grat
ed
orga
nisa
tiona
l and
team
obj
ectiv
es?
2. H
ow e
ffect
ivel
y ar
e so
cial
wor
kers
man
aged
and
pr
ofes
sion
ally
sup
ervi
sed
to e
nabl
e th
em to
man
age
thei
r w
orkl
oads
, tim
e bo
unda
ries
and
spre
ad o
f tas
ks (e
.g.
bala
ncin
g ca
re c
oord
inat
ion,
AM
HP
and
oth
er s
tatu
tory
ta
sks?
)
3. T
o w
hat e
xten
t are
soc
ial w
orke
rs a
ble
to fo
cus
on s
ocia
l and
sy
stem
ic in
terv
entio
ns w
ithin
mul
tidis
cipl
inar
y te
ams?
Sys
tem
ic q
uest
ion
(sco
re a
nd g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
To w
hat e
xten
t do
you
thin
k pe
ople
usi
ng y
our
serv
ices
(and
/or
thei
r fa
milie
s an
d fri
ends
) wou
ld s
ay th
at s
ocia
l wor
k br
ings
a
dist
inct
ive
and
valu
able
con
trib
utio
n to
mul
tidis
cipl
inar
y te
ams?
(W
hat w
ould
they
say
they
val
ue, i
f any
thin
g?)
Sol
utio
n-fo
cuse
d qu
estio
n (d
o no
t sco
re)
Cho
ose
one
aspe
ct o
f int
egra
ted,
mul
tidis
cipl
inar
y te
am w
orki
ng
in y
our
area
that
is p
artic
ular
ly e
ffect
ive.
Wha
t mak
es it
pos
sibl
e?
Cou
ld le
arni
ng in
this
are
a su
ppor
t im
prov
emen
t in
othe
r as
pect
s of
inte
grat
ion?
Tota
l sco
re a
nd p
riorit
ies
for
actio
n in
this
sec
tion
14. How are we doing? – The Core Team 35
2 BIN
TE
RA
GE
NC
Y W
OR
KIN
G (L
OC
AL
AU
TH
OR
ITY
MA
NA
GE
D
SO
CIA
L W
OR
K T
EA
M V
ER
SIO
N)
Sco
reN
arra
tive
exp
lana
tion
and
evi
den
ce
Prim
ary
ques
tions
(sco
re a
nd g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
1. T
o w
hat e
xten
t is
ther
e an
exp
licit
agre
emen
t and
un
ders
tand
ing
betw
een
loca
l org
anis
atio
ns a
nd d
iffer
ent
prof
essi
onal
s ab
out t
he d
istin
ctiv
e co
ntrib
utio
n an
d ro
les
of
soci
al w
orke
rs w
ithin
the
loca
l men
tal h
ealth
sys
tem
?
2. H
ow w
ell a
re s
ocia
l wor
kers
sup
port
ed to
man
age
time
and
wor
kloa
d ef
fect
ivel
y, e
nsur
ing
they
del
iver
soc
ial w
ork
prio
ritie
s w
ithin
the
loca
l int
erag
ency
sys
tem
of c
are
and
supp
ort?
3. T
o w
hat e
xten
t are
soc
ial w
orke
rs a
ble
to c
ontr
ibut
e di
stin
ctiv
e so
cial
and
sys
tem
ic in
terv
entio
ns th
at c
ompl
emen
t the
offe
rs
from
oth
er p
rofe
ssio
ns a
nd o
rgan
isat
ions
?
Sys
tem
ic q
uest
ion
(sco
re a
nd g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
To w
hat e
xten
t do
you
thin
k pe
ople
usi
ng y
our
serv
ices
(and
/or
thei
r fa
milie
s fri
ends
) wou
ld s
ay th
at s
ocia
l wor
k br
ings
a
dist
inct
ive
and
valu
able
con
trib
utio
n to
inte
rage
ncy
team
s? (W
hat
wou
ld th
ey s
ay th
ey v
alue
, if a
nyth
ing?
)
Sol
utio
n-fo
cuse
d qu
estio
n (d
o no
t sco
re)
Cho
ose
one
aspe
ct m
enta
l hea
lth s
ocia
l wor
k in
you
r ar
ea th
at is
pa
rtic
ular
ly e
ffect
ive.
Wha
t mak
es it
pos
sibl
e? C
ould
lear
ning
in
this
are
a su
ppor
t im
prov
emen
t in
othe
r as
pect
s of
pra
ctic
e?
Tota
l sco
re a
nd p
riorit
ies
for
actio
n in
this
sec
tion
36 How are we doing?
3D
EV
ELO
PM
EN
T O
F T
HE
PR
OFE
SS
ION
AL
SO
CIA
L W
OR
K
WO
RK
FOR
CE
Sco
reN
arra
tive
exp
lana
tion
and
evi
den
ce
Prim
ary
ques
tions
(sco
re a
nd g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
1. T
o w
hat e
xten
t is
the
need
for
high
qua
lity,
evi
denc
e-in
form
ed s
ocia
l wor
k pr
actic
e in
tegr
ated
into
the
man
agin
g or
gani
satio
n’s
wor
kfor
ce d
evel
opm
ent p
lans
?
2. H
ow e
ffect
ivel
y ar
e so
cial
wor
kers
in m
enta
l hea
lth c
onsu
lted
on th
eir
prof
essi
on-s
peci
fic tr
aini
ng n
eeds
and
am
bitio
ns?t
3. H
ow e
ffect
ive
are
the
recr
uitm
ent,
rete
ntio
n an
d pr
ogre
ssio
n pl
ans
of y
our
orga
nisa
tion
for
grow
ing
and
sust
aini
ng th
e so
cial
wor
k w
orkf
orce
?
Sys
tem
ic q
uest
ion
(sco
re a
nd g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
If yo
u as
ked
med
ical
, nur
sing
and
oth
er p
rofe
ssio
nals
, how
wou
ld
they
rate
the
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
pro
fess
iona
l soc
ial w
ork
in y
our
orga
nisa
tion?
(And
wha
t wou
ld th
ey li
ke m
ore
of?)
Sol
utio
n-fo
cuse
d qu
estio
n (d
o no
t sco
re, g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
If in
five
yea
rs y
ou h
ad th
e be
st s
ocia
l wor
k w
orkf
orce
and
pr
ofes
sion
al d
evel
opm
ent s
trat
egy
you
can
imag
ine,
wha
t wou
ld
be th
e to
p th
ree
achi
evem
ents
, and
wha
t wou
ld h
ave
been
you
r fir
st s
tep
to p
uttin
g th
ese
in p
lace
?
Tota
l sco
re a
nd p
riorit
ies
for
actio
n in
this
sec
tion
14. How are we doing? – The Core Team 37
4O
RG
AN
ISA
TIO
NA
L D
EV
ELO
PM
EN
T, Q
UA
LIT
Y A
ND
P
ER
FOR
MA
NC
ES
core
Nar
rativ
e ex
pla
natio
n an
d e
vid
ence
Prim
ary
ques
tions
(sco
re a
nd g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
1. T
o w
hat e
xten
t are
soc
ial w
ork
outc
omes
vis
ible
and
in
tegr
ated
into
the
perfo
rman
ce a
nd q
ualit
y fra
mew
ork
of th
e or
gani
satio
n th
at m
anag
es m
enta
l hea
lth s
ocia
l wor
k?
2. H
ow e
ffect
ivel
y an
d ro
utin
ely
is m
enta
l hea
lth s
ocia
l wor
k pr
actic
e au
dite
d (o
r si
mila
rly e
valu
ated
) to
brin
g ab
out
impr
ovem
ent?
3. T
o w
hat d
egre
e is
feed
back
on
soci
al w
ork
prac
tice
regu
larly
ga
ined
from
peo
ple
usin
g so
cial
wor
k se
rvic
es a
nd th
eir
fam
ilies
and
used
to in
form
org
anis
atio
nal l
earn
ing
and
qual
ity
impr
ovem
ent?
Sys
tem
ic q
uest
ion
(sco
re a
nd g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
If yo
u as
ked
a cr
oss
sect
ion
of te
am m
anag
ers
in th
e or
gani
satio
n th
at m
anag
es m
enta
l hea
lth s
ocia
l wor
kers
, to
wha
t ext
ent w
ould
they
say
the
qual
ity o
f soc
ial w
ork
prac
tice
is im
port
ant t
o th
e or
gani
satio
n’s
qual
ity a
nd p
erfo
rman
ce
prio
ritie
s?
Sol
utio
n-fo
cuse
d qu
estio
n (d
o no
t sco
re, g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)
If so
cial
wor
k ou
tcom
es w
ere
inte
grat
ed o
n a
par
with
oth
er
outc
omes
with
in y
our
orga
nisa
tion,
wha
t wou
ld b
e ha
ppen
ing?
H
ow fa
r ar
e yo
u fro
m th
at p
ositi
on n
ow a
nd w
hat w
ould
be
a co
ncre
te fi
rst s
tep
tow
ards
that
?
Tota
l sco
re a
nd p
riorit
ies
for
actio
n in
this
sec
tion
38 How are we doing?
f
u e o h
r y f t d
5 o
n
. O e o
s loe s 4
a
t eal e R
gp h
me n t
n pa
g t
t o
din n s
oee
e c umir oge c er o t
e p
l da
h ain le
c
s t og
r a ir e
rhen e o
f thna t t s o
e m
ook
a noit
m pia u l r
e s cso
h d y e
s in
t f de ed inr eek d b r
r m e
o m ta
l w. osr ca ei e
c kro s r
o e up
d
f s l w
t i hs t i d t
ie a n nr f o il eco a oh m s a
g ee h s s e
n b s cit et i va
e w s rs e
C w o a-s f
ole o li h
S
l c e t
e lr
e s a
e b e e
R
xn
e ht l He a f tlv p tn
m Fi t or
e ly in
a
a
e t t s pa
et Mhe inh i ul t o h
e t d
g t s j
n i g t
e h in
e t r in
A l .i tt p ten m l nt e
me p ee ko l rp m o m
n c
m o u
le a o l Wn c c
p do
u c
n c ae ic
m h so a o ihI Y c W S t 5IM
PLE
ME
NT
ING
TH
E F
IVE
RO
LE C
AT
EG
OR
IES
Sco
reG
ive
a p
ract
ical
ex
amp
le
of
how
the
o
rgan
isat
ion
enab
les
this
ro
le (o
r ke
y el
emen
ts o
f it)
to
be
fulfi
lled
Des
crib
e th
e to
p t
hree
o
rgan
isat
iona
l o
r in
tera
gen
cy
ob
stac
les
to
the
fulfi
lmen
t o
f g
oo
d
pra
ctic
e in
re
spec
t o
f th
is
role
Iden
tify
thre
e p
ract
ice
dev
elo
pm
ent
and
/or
CP
D
op
po
rtun
ities
yo
ur s
oci
al
wo
rker
s w
oul
d
need
to
rea
lise
this
ro
le o
r ke
y as
pec
ts o
f it
and
imp
rove
th
e sc
ore
yo
u ha
ve g
iven
yo
urse
lf?
Thin
k of
you
r so
cial
wor
k w
orkf
orce
as
a w
hole
, or
deci
de w
hich
sub
-set
/s o
f you
r st
aff y
ou w
ant t
o lo
ok
at in
rela
tion
to th
e fiv
e ro
le c
ateg
orie
s. F
or e
ach
of
the
cate
gorie
s, s
core
and
giv
e br
ief n
arra
tive
on th
e ex
tent
to w
hich
soc
ial w
orke
rs c
urre
ntly
fulfi
l the
role
. Th
is d
oes
not m
ean
all s
ocia
l wor
kers
doi
ng a
ll ro
le
area
s. If
a ro
le c
ateg
ory
is n
ot re
leva
nt m
ark
n/a
and
expl
ain.
14. How are we doing? – The Core Team 39
A.
Enab
ling
citiz
ens
to a
cces
s th
e st
atut
ory
soci
al
care
and
soc
ial w
ork
serv
ices
and
adv
ice
to
whi
ch th
ey a
re e
ntitl
ed, d
isch
argi
ng th
e le
gal
dutie
s an
d pr
omot
ing
the
pers
onal
ised
soc
ial
care
eth
os o
f the
loca
l aut
horit
y.
B.
Pro
mot
ing
reco
very
and
soc
ial i
nclu
sion
with
in
divi
dual
s an
d fa
milie
s.
C.
Inte
rven
ing
and
show
ing
prof
essi
onal
lead
ersh
ip
and
skill
in s
ituat
ions
cha
ract
eris
ed b
y hi
gh le
vels
of
soc
ial,
fam
ily a
nd in
terp
erso
nal c
ompl
exity
, ris
k an
d am
bigu
ity.
D.
Wor
king
co-
prod
uctiv
ely
and
inno
vativ
ely
with
lo
cal c
omm
uniti
es to
sup
port
com
mun
ity
capa
city
, per
sona
l and
fam
ily re
silie
nce,
ear
lier
inte
rven
tion
and
activ
e ci
tizen
ship
.
Lead
ing
the
App
rove
d M
enta
l Hea
lth P
rofe
ssio
nal
wor
kfor
ce.
Sys
tem
ic q
uest
ions
(sco
re a
nd g
ive
brie
f nar
rativ
e)S
core
Brie
f nar
rativ
e an
d co
mm
ents
To w
hat e
xten
t do
your
team
/ser
vice
man
ager
s pl
ace
impo
rtan
ce o
n en
ablin
g so
cial
wor
kers
to fu
lfil
clea
r ro
les?
How
wou
ld y
our
soci
al w
orke
rs d
escr
ibe
how
wel
l th
ey a
re s
uppo
rted
to b
alan
ce d
iffer
ent a
spec
ts o
f th
eir
role
s an
d ta
sks?
Whi
ch o
f the
se ro
le c
ateg
orie
s do
you
thin
k se
rvic
e us
ers
and
thei
r ca
rers
, fam
ilies
and
frien
ds m
ight
va
lue
the
mos
t, an
d w
hy?
(do
not s
core
, giv
e br
ief
narr
ativ
e)
Sol
utio
n-fo
cuse
d qu
estio
n (d
o no
t sco
re, g
ive
a br
ief
narr
ativ
e)
40 How are we doing?
One
of t
he th
emes
run
ning
thro
ugho
ut th
e fiv
e ro
les
is ‘r
elat
iona
l’ (o
r ‘re
latio
nshi
p-ba
sed’
) pra
ctic
e. T
hink
of
an
exam
ple
of w
hen
rela
tions
hip-
base
d so
cial
w
ork
prac
tice
mad
e a
dist
inct
and
pos
itive
diff
eren
ce
to o
utco
mes
for
an in
divi
dual
, fam
ily o
r so
cial
ne
twor
k. W
hich
rol
e ca
tego
ry/ie
s do
es th
is e
xam
ple
fit in
to?
Wha
t wer
e th
e in
gred
ient
s of
pro
fess
iona
l go
od p
ract
ice
that
mad
e th
e di
ffere
nce
in th
is c
ase?
Tota
l sco
re a
nd p
riorit
ies
for
actio
n in
this
sec
tion
14. How are we doing? – The Core Team 41
Synthesising the results and developing a SMART Improvement and Action Plan to Improve Mental Health Social Work Role Clarity and Effectiveness
To synthesise and evaluate your response, review your scores and identified priorities for action. Discuss the following:
• Does anything in the total or subtotal scores surprise or particularly interest you?
• Were there any areas where there was considerable disagreement about the score? What does that tell you?
• Review the priorities for action. Upon reflection, are these the right ones?
• Are these actions likely to have systemic impact – i.e. do they get to some of the more ‘wicked problems’ and are they likely to have impact on the wider system and culture of the organisation to support social work role development?
It is suggested you choose no more than six initial actions – one for each of question categories 1 – 4 above and 2 related to developing specific improvements in role clarity (question 5).
It is also suggested that you choose a mixture of actions – some that address problems/deficits and some that build on the positive practice areas you have identified.
It is recommended that each action is:
• designed to have some systemic impact, i.e. is a catalyst for further change and improvement;
• SMART – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-boundaried;
• owned by an ‘action lead’; and
• monitored for progress and completion through formal governance structures.
The action plan should have a senior (e.g. Executive) sponsor/lead. Each action should have an owner who reports on progress through your formal governance structures. The reporting and sign off process should be clear and efficient so there are no undue delays in implementing changes. Building in transparent accountability to frontline staff and to people using services and their families for evidence of implementation may be an important way to keep actions and deliverables on track.
42 How are we doing?
So
cial
wo
rk fo
r b
ette
r m
enta
l hea
lth –
sel
f-as
sess
men
t ac
tion
pla
n
Sen
ior
proj
ect s
pons
or .
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
..
Pro
ject
lead
...
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
Res
pons
ible
gov
erna
nce
foru
m/p
roce
ss
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
.
Act
ion
des
crip
tor
Who
is r
esp
ons
ible
for
the
actio
n?W
here
and
whe
n w
ill p
rog
ress
and
co
mp
letio
n?
Dat
e fo
r co
mp
letio
n an
d
sig
n o
ff b
od
y
No
tes
1 2 3 4 5 6
© Crown copyright 2016 2904867 Produced by Williams Lea for the Department of Health
![The Annual Report 2011 – how well are we doing? Partnership Board Self Assessment Report [date of your meeting]](https://img.pdfslide.net/doc/110x75/56649cea5503460f949b57f8/the-annual-report-2011-how-well-are-we-doing-partnership-board-self-assessment.jpg)
