The pilot evaluation of VALORIS in a social

The pilot evaluation of VALORIS in a social establishment for elderly Kaidi-Mari Liping France, March 2009

Presentation of the pilot evaluation

Course v. Evaluation of the structure was carried out at the end of August 2008 (18 th – 22 nd) by the team of evaluators v. The evaluation included: visiting the surroundings, visiting the institution and meetings/interviews with people, getting acquainted with written documents about the institution; filling in the cards, joint discussion and giving marks; doing oral and written feedback report

Evaluators team v Peep Piirsalu- Head of Social Department, Võru County Government Email address: peepp@mv. werro. ee v Aivar Rosenberg- Head of Council, Sõmerpalu Rural Municipality Email address: aivar. rosenberg@neti. ee v Lenhard Ermel- Head of Sõmerpalu Rural Municipality Email address: maia@spalu. werro. ee v Hellen Danilson -Social Work Specialist Email address: hellen@spalu. werro. ee v Kaidi-Mari Liping- Manager, Siksali Development Centre Email address: kaidimari@siksali. ee v Gerli Pähn- Project assistant, Siksali Development Centre Email address: gerli@siksali. ee

Description of the structure

General information Name of structure: Sõmerpalu Nursing Home Name of the Director: Harri Lindmets Origin of the funding: Sõmerpalu Rural Municipality Sector of activity: Social Sector Subsector: Elderly, handicapped adults

Precise the activity of the structure v Began its activities in 1997 v It provides general welfare / services to elderly people and handicapped people (18 places) and for people with special needs the service of supporting them with everyday-life (4 places). v The Nursing home has been built as an extension building attached to the kindergarten. The complex is located in the manor park and the territory is 1, 1 hectares. It shares communication systems, heating system and kitchen with the kindergarten. v Workers: The work of the Nursing home is directed and planned by the Manager. There are 5 practical nurses, a cook and a cleaning lady taking care of the clients. In addition to her work as a practical nurse, one of the employees is also responsible for medical assistance.

Synthesis of the results

Recommendations Structure/Equipment Human resources to buy new beds, including some specialized functional beds, new specialized equipment, equipment for drying laundry Maximum 2 people in a room. More privacy / room for intimacy Put signposting make special food for elderly people Involve a special person who would work on these matters (eg help to control the quality of staff’s work) To elaborate a special training plan for the staff To employ a nurse, who would also monitor the activities of the caretakers (kind of internal quality control) Management Methods Put daily agenda on the wall Make a feasibility study / business plan for nursing home’s services Introduce a Questionnaire where to ask customers’ opinion about certain matters regarding their life at Finance the nursing home To purchase or rent a special bus to transport the customers more specialized rooms for hygienic purposes Improve the ventilation system Quality of the services someone could read the newspapers loud to people Communication

Major reservations Human resources Structure/Equipment Quality of the services Management Methods Someone from the family, not the customer himself/herself, signs the contract of staying at the nursing home. Normal practice is signing contract between 3 parties: customer, family member, community government Finance Communication

Feedback of Estonian external experts

Main difficulties v The wording of the handbooks and pedagogical kit materials is too complitated, sometimes sounds very bureaucratic. Probably caused by multiple translation (French – English – Estonian) v Motivating institutions to participate in the evaluation will be also problematic because the process is time and resource consuming for both sides. v Using the methodology stands high expectations to the evaluators. Within a short period of time, one must acquire a complex and abundant material, interview in strict conditions in order to achieve an adequate result and do effective cooperation in order to make proposals. v When it turns out during an evaluation that a person needs certain services which we do not provide, then the assessment and time (as well as money) spent have no outcome; therefore, we have just wasted already lacking resources. Still, without commencing anything we will achieve no results. v Wherefrom to find independent evaluators – Estonia is so small that representatives of one field know each other too closely.

Positive feedback v Methodology itself is profound and, by my mind, quite applicable. v In general, the system is very thorough and we would like to employ its usage v The handbooks are very thorough and contain lots of useful material. The handbook for internal evaluation seemed especially helpful – I believe it to be a very good guide for noticing such elementary things, which we consider to be self-evident. Truly good! I believe it will work if there is a wish and will to implement it. v The assessment material of VALORIS was a pleasant and tutorial set of reading. In relation to the assessment of the content of the services of the institutions, the methodology was very thorough according to the EU standards, and the evaluation process was very well advised. v The handbooks to be necessary even as a teaching material or as an example of what we could do to take better care of people.

Recommendations v To review the translation and make the used language easier (more like every-day spoken language) and consult with specialists who are familiar with the terminology used in social care sector v Definitely necessary to organize training for future evaluators as well as for internal evaluation. v To discuss, whether some criterias (chapters) are more important than others when doing the evaluation v To discuss, what would motivate structures to pass an evaluation – as it is a very time- and resourceconsuming process

Summary of results of experts` evaluations v As a summary it can be said, that the majority of the experts who evaluated the handbooks and the pedagogical kit were satisfied with the materials and saw potential use of them in their work. Only one expert, representing a structure (to be potentially evaluated in the future) expressed the view that they would not be willing to have their institution evaluated through this methodology (if any at all). v As a conclusion it can be said, that the materials can be useful in Estonia for the evaluation of quality of services in the social care sector.

Thank you for your attention!