Monday, 14 April 2008

National staff survey - BLPT results

The Healthcare Commissions's latest survey results summary can be found here. Not surprisingly I was interested in the results for BLPT. The key points which interested me were:

KEY SCORE 1 (KS 1): Percentage of staff working extra hours (the lower the score the better) 71% of staff at the trust said that, in an average week, they work longer than the hours for which they are contracted. The trust's score of 71% was in the highest 20% of mental health or learning disability trusts in England.
This suggests to me that there are not enough staff being employed, which ties in with my own experiences back in the summer. Was the recommendation for extra front line staff acted upon?
KEY SCORE 10 (KS 10): Support from immediate managers (the higher the score the better) Staff were asked questions to assess the extent to which they feel that their immediate manager provides them with support, guidance and feedback on their work, and takes into account their opinions before making decisions that affect their work. Possible scores range from 1 to 5, with 1 representing very unsupportive managers, and 5 representing highly supportive managers. The trust's score of 3.64 was in the lowest 20% of mental health or learning disability trusts in England.
How can front-line staff work effectively if management is unsupportive?
KEY SCORE 24 (KS 24): Staff job satisfaction (the higher the score the better) Staff were asked questions about how satisfied they are with various aspects of their job including: recognition for good work; support from their immediate manager and colleagues; freedom to choose methods of working; amount of responsibility; opportunities to use their abilities; and the extent to which the trust values their work. Possible scores range from 1 to 5, with 1 representing very unsatisfied staff and 5 representing very satisfied staff. The trust's score of 3.40 was in the lowest 20% of mental health or learning disability trusts in England.
KEY SCORE 26 (KS 26): Staff intention to leave jobs (the lower the score the better) Staff were asked questions to assess the extent to which they are considering leaving their trust and looking for a new job, either within or outside the NHS. Possible scores range from 1 to 5, with 1 representing staff who have no intention of leaving their jobs, and 5 representing staff who are very keen to leave their jobs. The trust's score of 2.89 was in the highest 20% of mental health or learning disability trusts in England.

No doubt this will feature in the next BLPT Trust Board meeting. Hopefully the other survey I mentioned, that on attitudes to complainants, will also be mentioned.

6 comments:

mandy lifeboats appeal said...

Hi D

Read this with interest.

I am not at all surprised by the results. What I am gathering from the care co-ordinator (reading between lines) is that she has too much work and she does seem to be busy and sometimes pre-occupied. She always runs late. I don't think she has got to me on time, once. When she sees me, her mobile goes off. It is always work related. I don't mind so much but it is a signal that the demands are high and she says she has a load of paperwork (growing) that she needs to make time to do.

I don't blame her for that although I think the Trust would say she needs to manage her time better. I say there is only so much time that can be managed.

In that respect she has my sympathy in others, as in regards to me being fobbed off, I am angry and patients should not be on the butt end of naff management, under resourcing and Trusts burying their heads in government audit trails.

I am actually reviewing what services I am getting as in do I need a Care co-ordinator who is not able to give me of their time and attention what I need? No, I do not.

I would be happier, right now, to see more of my Recovery Worker who is not pre-occupied, or bogged under, when she gets to me as we talk a while and she understands my problems and isn't always pushing me and we get to walk outside and have planned a staged process of confidence building. And to see my psychiatrist every couple of months to review and for him to make decisions about my care that are then implemented not undermined or poo poohed by the care co-ordinator.

As for Crisis Care...in the pending file whilst I start a process of making contact with the several layers I have to before it gets put in place.

If I was to complete one the BLPT surveys right now they would not be getting Brownie points from me.

MMP said...

MLA, love it : "there's only so much time that can be managed" brilliant.

I never know whether to be exasperated beyond telling with these trusts, or feel sorry for them.

Certainly the au_i_t word is a cuss word round here.....if ONLY there were not so many silly targets to be hit...then maybe care ca ordinators could remember what it is to care?

And as for phones going off when seeing a client, that's bad manners...d___ what your manager says, turn it off, and if you really can't then mute it and leave it at the bottom of the handbag
( sorry end of rant!)

I am impressed at you managing to wade through all this stuff though and i also appreciate you unpicking these for us out here.
mmp

Disillusioned said...

M, I agree totally with MMP that your CC answering phone calls during meetings with you is just plain rude. Also she shouldn't be telling you that her workload is too great - that's not your concern really.
What we need is CC who listen to what we need and then respond appropriately, not those who try to fob us off. It's BLPT's stated declaration that service users will "be treated as someone who is an expert about themselves and their own mental health." That's not my experience in the past, and it doesn't seem to be yours now. Unfortunately all the audit trails don't seem to take much account of service users as individual people, only as numbers. Wish I had the answer but I don't.

marcella said...

"And to see my psychiatrist every couple of months to review and for him to make decisions about my care that are then implemented not undermined or poo poohed by the care co-ordinator" - now wouldn't that be a thing - if they did that kind of thing round here the psychiatrists might last longer than 5 minutes in post too.

Our Trust also came in the bottom 20% - wonder who came out ok. Still all will be better now since 1st April now that they have a glossy new name and logo, won't it?

Caroline said...

yeah but no but yeah but, as someone famous once said there's lies, damn lies and there's statistics....and there are some fairly meaningless ones at that. my trust's report also places it in the 'bottom' 20% of most of the 1 is bad 5 is good questions, and the 'top' 20% in the 1 is good 5 is bad questions....but no, wait a minute, another comment says that with a score of 4.25 (out of 5) it is 'below average' in the handwashing stakes....

so is it percentages, or averages, or absolute scores that matter? is 2.76 really all that different in reality to 2.70? is it comparing like with like? in the year on year comparisions (hey, fewer people want to leave this year than last - but apparantly the wording of the question was different....

maybe somewhere in the paperwork there is an explanation of the incredibly tedious statistical analysis that went into these publications? somehow i suspect not.

hate to spoil the party but really the info in these surveys is all just a bit naff isn't it? or am i missing something

Disillusioned said...

Marcella - I'm sure the shiny new name and logo will make all the difference in the world!

C, I hear what you say and agree to some extent re statistics. Actually though I think the raw statistics (rather than the rating re other mental health trusts) are very disturbing. The fact that most staff felt management was unsupportive, for example, is surely cause for concern?
But then, when push comes to shove, there's a lot about our mental health trusts nationally that should be cause for concern. Like the fact that mental health is underfunded and so under-resourced at a national as well as a local level. I could go on. But I won't. This time.