Evaluating the Partnerships for Older People Programme: National

1
Evaluating the Partnerships for Older People
Programme National Local Activity

• Dr Angela Dickinson, National Evaluation Team
• Dr Roger Beech, National and Local (Wigan)
  Evaluation Teams

2

• Outline of Presentation
• What is POPP?
• Why evaluate it?
• Why Local and National?
• What are we doing?
• What does each add to understanding the
  effectiveness of POPP?

3
What is POPP?

• Aim
• To improve the health, well being and
  independence of older people.

4
What is POPP?

• 29 local authorities, their health and third
  sector partners (voluntary and private
  organisations), are being funded by the
  Department of Health (DH) to set up innovative
  pilot projects.
• 60 Million investment.
• Assist the wider health and social care community
  make the strategic shift towards prevention that
  government policy now sees as a priority.

5
National Evaluation
POPP Pilot Sites Local Evaluation
6
POPP The National Evaluation

• Dr Karen Windle (PI), University of Hertfordshire
• Dr Roger Beech, University of Keele
• Prof Ann Bowling, University College London
• Dr Angela Dickinson, University of Hertfordshire
• Dr Julien Forder, London School of Economics
• Catherine Henderson, London School of Economics
• Prof Martin Knapp, London School of Economics
• Kathryn Lord, University of Hertfordshire
• Prof Brenda Roe, John Moores University
• Dr Richard Wagland, University of Hertfordshire
• Prof Gerald Wistow, London School of Economics

7
Aim Objectives
To compare and critically analyse the innovative
partnership and financial approaches of the POPP
pilots
Examine the contribution of the POPP pilots to
the PSA targets
Identify, measure and profile partnership and
financial models
Assess the cost-effectiveness of the POPP pilots
Identify the characteristics of partnership/
financial approaches that can be integrated in
other care groups
Explore, analyse and profile the shift of
services toward preventative care
Explore and contrast user experiences of the
intervention
8
(No Transcript)
9
Quality of Life Questionnaire

• 4/5 sections
• EQ-5D
• Quality of Life (Ann Bowlings work and
  short-form Ryff)
• Service Use (cost-effectiveness analysis)
• About yourself
• Local questions
• Personalisation of the Questionnaire by Local
  Teams.

10
Documentary Analysis

• Initial assessment of pilot sites
  conceptualisation of partnership and
  prevention
• Description of partnership types adopted within
  the pilot sites
• Analysis of level of involvement of older people
  in development and assessment of POPP schemes

11
Documentary Analysis Structure of POPP site
programmes

• Project size/ grant size
• Demographics
• Number/ type of Projects
• Focus of projects (i.e. mental health, carers,
  staff training)
• Partners involved
• Governance structures

12
Total Number of Organisations Involved as
partners within all 29 POPP Sites
13
Population Focus of POPP Projects
14
Categorisation of Levels of Need
15
Needs Levels supported by all POPP Projects
16
Total Number of Staff Across the Pilot Sites
17
POPP Programmes and Older Peoples Involvement
18
Total number of users contacting/ referred
19
Source of Referral
20
Cost-Effectiveness

• Addressing effectiveness at three levels
• Wider Health Economy ( across 29 pilot sites)
  (Macro-level)
• Individual POPP Pilot Sites (Micro-level)
• User Level (Micro-level)
• Comparator POPP Non-POPP sites
• Cost-effectiveness will draw on data from across
  the research
• Exploring income and expenditure around the POPP
  pilots

21
Partnerships for Older People Projects The
Impact So Far
22
LTC PSA
Change in Bed-Days Average by Month Underlying
Trend and POPP Deviation
23
Example of Outcomes

• Analysis of older peoples perception of
  prevention as an acceptable approach to improved
  well-being
• Analysis of improved quality of life of those
  older people within the POPP pilots compared to
  those receiving normal care
• Analysis of well-being and satisfaction in
  relation to the POPP initiatives and services/
  resources outside the POPP

Interviews with older people
24
Local Evaluation An Example from Wigan
25
EVALUATING POPP IN WIGAN

• Types of scheme introduced.
• Evaluation links with national agenda in terms of
  impacts of POPP on client
• wellbeing and quality of life
• needs for more intensive services for health
  and social care.

26
WIGANS POPP SCHEMES

• Low level
• BME Carers and Mental Health, Gardening
  Scheme, Stop and Lock, Stepping Out.
• Intermediate level
• Time Limited Contact, Handy Person Scheme,
  Care and Repair.
• High level
• Counselling, Rapid Intervention Scheme,
  Holistic Home Assessments

27
EVALUATING THE IMPACTS OF SCHEMES

• Key approaches
• Quantitative analysis of demographic and service
  related data about clients
• Qualitative analysis of processes of care
  interviews with POPP scheme providers
• Analysis of data from client case studies,
  satisfaction surveys and quality of life
  surveys.

28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
IMPACTS OF POPP SCHEMES ON CLIENT WELLBEING AND
NEED FOR MORE INTENSIVE SERVICES

• Analysis by scheme clusters.
• Focus on
• source of referral
• recent changes affecting client
• selected client characteristics.

32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
(No Transcript)
36
(No Transcript)
37
(No Transcript)
38
(No Transcript)
39
(No Transcript)
40
(No Transcript)
41
(No Transcript)
42
(No Transcript)
43
EMERGING FINDINGS FROM WIGAN POPP

• Initial results indicate that POPP schemes are
  helping to
• improve client wellbeing and quality of life
• reduce/delay client needs for more intensive
  services for health and social care.
• Ongoing research will confirm (or otherwise) and
  quantify (where relevant) these impressions.

44
OVERALL CONCLUSIONS

• Evidence informed decision making about POPP
  schemes requires national and local research
  activity.
• These research streams can compliment and enhance
  each other by
• investigating common questions
• testing impressions and findings at different
  levels using different approaches.