think people can be prioritised based on need more a combined “I model.. It’s sometimes difficult for users to hear that they get help from the advocate who is can’t helping someone else because they have to access a different service.” priority - longer waits, more frustration, for non-priority individuals. Ultimately “Lower will they lose the service altogether?” may lead to frustration and anxiety for some clients. A prospective timescale “This should be provided as far as possible.” impact will be people waiting longer for advocacy and not getting a service at “The all.” 2b. Would any of the following suggestions help to minimise any negative impacts? Select all that apply Table 4 shows that the majority of respondents selected all of the suggestions provided. Over three quarters (76%) of respondents selected service ‘Better promotion so that people are referred into the non-statutory service earlier and before reaching a crisis as a suggestion to help minimise any negative impacts point’ resulting from more flexible waiting times for non-advocacy provision. There was little variation to this question based on the respondent type (table 5). Table : Number of responses received for each option in question 2b Count % of respondents selecting this option Better service promotion so that people are referred into the 35 76% service earlier and before reaching a crisis point Increased knowledge of the Health Advocacy Services by health, 34 74% social care and other professionals so that they refer or signpost people to services earlier Making self-referral routes available so that people have to wait 33 72% don’t for a professional to make a referral Providing toolkits and other self-help information to support people 29 63% to self-advocate whilst they are waiting for an advocate from the service provider/partnership Regular updates and contact from the advocacy provider about 29 63% when the advocacy service will commence, so people are not left waiting indefinitely. Advocacy Service volunteers making contact with the client/keeping 28 61% in touch with the client to understand any changing circumstances Other, please state: 11 24%
“I think people can be prioritised based on need more a combined model.. It’s sometimes difficult for users to hear that they can’t get help from the advocate who is helping someone else because they have to access a different service.” “Lower priority - longer waits, more frustration, for non-priority individuals. Ultimately will they lose the service altogether?” “This may lead to frustration and anxiety for some clients. A prospective timescale should be provided as far as possible.” “The impact will be people waiting longer for advocacy and not getting a service at all.” 2b. Would any of the following suggestions help to minimise any negative impacts? Select all that apply Table 4 shows that the majority of respondents selected all of the suggestions provided. Over three quarters (76%) of respondents selected ‘Better service promotion so that people are referred into the non-statutory service earlier and before reaching a crisis point’ as a suggestion to help minimise any negative impacts resulting from more flexible waiting times for non-advocacy provision. There was little variation to this question based on the respondent type (table 5). Table : Number of responses received for each option in question 2b Count % of respondents selecting this option Better service promotion so that people are referred into the service earlier and before reaching a crisis point 35 76% Increased knowledge of the Health Advocacy Services by health, social care and other professionals so that they refer or signpost people to services earlier 34 74% Making self-referral routes available so that people don’t have to wait for a professional to make a referral 33 72% Providing toolkits and other self-help information to support people to self-advocate whilst they are waiting for an advocate from the service provider/partnership 29 63% Regular updates and contact from the advocacy provider about when the advocacy service will commence, so people are not left waiting indefinitely. 29 63% Advocacy Service volunteers making contact with the client/keeping in touch with the client to understand any changing circumstances 28 61% Other, please state: 11 24%
health-advocacy-services-consultation-report-ask-warwickshire-v1.docx