Introducing AHP Practice Placement Partnership Agreements

1
Introducing AHP Practice Placement Partnership
Agreements
2
Background

• Building on Success (SEHD, 2002)
• AHP Practice Placements Project (NES, 2004 - 06)
• AHP Practice Education Stakeholder Conference,
  (Murrayfield Stadium, 2005)
• AHP Practice Education Facilitation Programme
  (2007 09)

3
Priority 2 Memoranda of understanding between
practice placement providers and HEIs should be
established to minimise the risk to students of
unmet placement needs and to allow the HEIs to
secure a degree of commitment from practice
placement providers. Pg 21
4
How is the Agreement structured?
5
Tier 1 Stakeholder Statement

• Acknowledges
• central role of placements to prepare workforce
• continuous changes in clinical practice
• placements help develop students as safe,
  competent, reflective practitioners to work in a
  range of settings
• Successful placement provision requires
  partnership working shared responsibilities

6
Tier 2 Practice Placement Partnership Agreement

• 3.0 States function role of the HEI
• 4.0 States function role of the Health Board
• 5.0 Scope of the agreement
• Covers all pre-registration AHP placements
• 6.0 States Practice Educator Preparation
  Support
• 7.0 Equality Diversity

7
Tier 2 Practice Placement Partnership Agreement

• 8.0 Complaints Processes
• 9.0 Quality Assurance Improvement of Placements
• 10.0 Risk Management
• Disclosure/ Criminal Records Check
• Health Checks
• Insurance
• Providing a Safe Workplace
• Placement Commitment
• Information Sharing
• 11.0 Confidentiality, FOI, Data Protection

8
Tier 3 Local Schedule

• Only where necessary
• Will contain placement weeks per profession

9
How are placement weeks calculated?

• The number of students
• Multiplied by
• The proportion of a week each student spends on
  placement
• e.g. 0.4 2 days
• 0.8 4 days
• 1.0 5 days
• Multiplied by
• The number of weeks each student spends on
  placement

10
Here is an example.

• 10 physio students on placement full time for 10
  weeks
• 10 X 1.0 x 10 100 placement weeks
• 10 SLT students on placement for one session
  (half a day) for 6 weeks
• 10 X 0.1 x 6 6 placement weeks
• Comparisons across different models of placement
  can be made.

11
Tier 3 National Dietetics Schedule

• Drafted with Scottish Dietetics Alliance
• Captures differences for Dietetics
• National allocation process
• Target placement weeks for boards
• Commitment to process rather than HEI
• Undertaking to develop workforce-led
  methodologies for determining placement
  commitment from HEIs

12
Benefits of Formal Arrangements

• Clarification of roles, responsibilities
  obligations based on HPC Standards of Education
  and Training
• Improvement of risk, governance quality
• Information sharing, placement planning equity,
  future workforce
• Raised profile, educational recognition, supports
  consistency across professions
• Cited as good international practice e.g. Rodger
  et al 2007

13
Implementation in NHS Boards

• AHP Networks will be crucial to implementation
• Professional Leads will have responsibility for
• determining placement numbers, distribution of
  placements
• Advising AHP Director/Lead Delivering on content
  of agreement via professional networks and across
  services
• Timing and fine tuning will need to be undertaken
  in discussion with HEI partners

14
Implementation Across NHSScotland

• Test implementation NHS Lanarkshire (Sept 2009)
• National event (March 2010)
• Cohort 1 (May 2010) Three Health Boards
• Cohort 2 (January 2011) Six Health Boards
• Cohort 3 (October 2011) Six Health Boards

15
Support Mechanisms for Implementation of
Agreements

• National AHP PEF Programme Pre-registration
  Reference Group
• Signatories for the organisation (Hazel Dykes)
• Key contact per organisation (AHP PEL Role)
• Key contact meetings for each Cohort every six
  weeks
• Sharing of resources

16
Introducing AHP Practice Placement Partnership
Agreements