Summary of evaluation of the
educational psychology service
A report by HM Inspectorate of Education
East Renfrewshire Council
07 September 2010
Definition of terms used in this report.
HM Inspectors use published criteria when making evaluations. They are published as
quality indicators which relate evaluations to six levels. HMIE began using a six-point
scale to make evaluations in August 2005. The table below shows how the six-point
scale relates to the four-point scale that we used previously.
Old level
Very good
Good
New level
Excellent
Very good
Good
Fair
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Weak
Unsatisfactory
Description
Outstanding, sector leading
Major strengths
Important strengths with some areas for
improvement
Strengths just outweigh weaknesses
Important weaknesses
Major weaknesses
This report also uses the following words to describe numbers and proportions:
almost all
most
majority
less than half
few
over 90%
75-90%
50-74%
15-49%
up to 15%
Contents
Page
1.
The aims, nature and scope of the inspection
1
2.
What key outcomes has the service achieved?
1
3.
How well does the service meet the needs of its
stakeholders?
2
4.
How good is the service’s delivery of key processes?
3
5.
How good is the service’s management?
3
6.
How good is leadership?
4
Appendix 1 - Quality indicators
6
1. The aims, nature and scope of the inspection
Recommendation 20 of the Review of Provision of Educational Psychology Services in
Scotland (2002) charged HM Inspectorate of Education (HMIE), on behalf of the
Scottish Ministers, to provide an external evaluation of the effectiveness of the
Educational Psychology Service (EPS) in improving the impact and outcomes for
children, young people and families.
The inspection of East Renfrewshire Council educational psychology provision was
undertaken on behalf of stakeholders. The evaluation of EPS was conducted within a
framework of quality indicators which embody the Government’s policy on Best Value.
The inspection team also included an Associate Assessor who was a principal
educational psychologist (PEP) serving in another Scottish local authority.
This web-based report should be read alongside other strategic inspections of
East Renfrewshire Council which sets out the wider context in which EPS are delivered.
The Educational Psychology Service
The East Renfrewshire Council EPS was based in one office in Barrhead. At the time of
the inspection, the complement of educational psychologists was 10.9 full-time
equivalents (FTE). Promoted staff consisted of a principal educational psychologist, a
depute principal educational psychologist, and four senior educational psychologists.
The service also had two FTE assistant psychologist posts. Administrative support was
provided by one FTE administrative assistant, 0.9 FTE clerical assistants and 0.5 FTE
recording officer.
2. What key outcomes has the service achieved?
The EPS had made significant contributions to the authority’s Local Improvement Plan.
They had also successfully achieved almost all of their targets as set out in their own
Improvement Plan. The EPS had worked very effectively with the education authority
(EA) to improve outcomes for children with dyslexia and to increase the performance of
children’s early literacy and numeracy skills in P1. The EPS made very effective
contributions to policy and practice within the EA and Council. For example, it had
improved transitions for vulnerable groups of children and young people through the
More Choices More Chances strategy group. They had also taken a lead role in
developing more effective approaches to managing behaviour and improving social and
emotional wellbeing through the development of the Outreach Support Service and
Learning Centres. The EPS had worked very well to improve services to pre-school
children and had shown improving performance over the last three years in terms of the
number of children seen and the range of services provided to this sector. Similarly, it
had over the last five years, achieved a reduction in out of authority school placements
as a result of well-targeted intervention for high risk children and young people. Further
targeted work for vulnerable groups at risk of exclusion had resulted in an authority wide
reduction in exclusions over the last three years. Overall the EPS had performed very
well in relation to its contributions to national, local authority and educational psychology
services aims, objectives and targets. It had also shown steady improvements in
1
performance over the last three years in service delivery to a wide range of
stakeholders. Some of these improvements had made a very positive impact,
especially in relation to vulnerable groups of children and young people with social and
emotional needs.
The service complied fully with appropriate legislation, including the ASL Act and
professional guidance from the British Psychological Society. This was well embedded
in individual practice and service documentation. The PEP should ensure that all
administrative staff are regularly updated in child protection procedures.
3. How well does the service meet the needs of its stakeholders?
The impact of the service on children and young people was excellent. The service
used an unusually wide range of therapeutic interventions targeted at individual children
and young people. For example, cognitive behavioural therapy, the use of Eye
Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR), dance therapy, and solution
focused approaches had resulted in more children and young people remaining in their
local communities. The service adopted a very child-centred approach. It was very
effective in providing support and challenge to workers in other services to ensure that
children and young people were included. Almost all schools felt that the EPS was very
effective in helping them to support individual children and young people. They also felt
that training was of a very high quality and that it enabled them to improve their skills.
Parents and carers felt that educational psychologists (EPs) provided very good advice,
and were extremely responsive to their needs. They particularly appreciated individual
contact with psychologists. The service had developed a very comprehensive support
service for parents across East Renfrewshire, engaging over 2000 parents in
workshops designed to increase their confidence and competence in child development.
A few external agencies were not aware of the wide range of services offered by the
EPS. However, those who had received a service were very satisfied with the advice
and felt that psychologists provided clarity about children and young people’s needs in
multi-agency contexts. The service had made very positive contributions to the
development of psychological approaches within the EA and with some external
providers. They now need to take a more active role in disseminating and influencing
practice at a National level.
All EPs were highly committed to the service and to its vision, values and aims. Staff’s
increasing role, over the last two years, in service improvement was having a
significant, positive impact on service delivery. EPs worked very well together in teams
to develop a range of training programmes for parents and school staff. For example,
they worked together to develop a resilience to stress evening for school staff which
was very well evaluated. All EPs were very clear about the need to continue to develop
their skills in line with service and EA priorities and worked cooperatively to share
learning across the team. More recently, EPs had been involved in peer evaluation and
shadowing. This had helped to build capacity across the team, strengthen consistency
of service delivery and improve the quality of individual practice. All EPs were very
effectively involved in strategic and operational groups at service and EA levels.
Administrative staff provided very good support to the service and felt that they were
valued.
2
4. How good is the service’s delivery of key processes?
The EPS provided very good services across the four Currie roles of consultation and
advice, assessment, intervention, and professional development. The service provided
high quality interventions and training which impacted positively on authority policy and
strategies. For example, the development of Learning Centres and the introduction of
nurture groups. They were developing more research opportunities in schools and
across other agencies and had a clear plan for improvement. This now needs to be
further embedded within the schools’ improvement plans to have greater impact. A
wide range of assessment tools was used and this led to sound advice and support for
individual children and young people. The service had significantly increased its
systemic work with schools over the last three years. For example, they had provided
comprehensive training for teachers in the assessment of dyslexia and in intensive
interaction approaches to improve outcomes for children and young people with
additional support needs. Some innovative interventions were being piloted by the
service in partnership with outside agencies. For example, Brainology, designed to
improve children’s self-efficacy and motivation leading to improvements in attainment.
All interventions were very well-evaluated with a clear emphasis on impact.
Features of good practice:
Mental Health and Well Being: A comprehensive approach to supporting children and
young people’s mental health and well-being.
Building Parental Capacity: Universal and targeted interventions to further develop
parental skills in a wide range of contexts.
5. How good is the service’s management?
The service had a robust and systematic improvement planning cycle which articulated
well with the Council’s Single Outcome Agreement and EA planning. Targets set within
quality improvement plans outlined actions required, personnel involved, timescales and
the expected outcomes. Service delivery was guided by a set of policy documents
which were comprehensive, clear and appropriate. Policies made links to council
objectives and national guidance and legislation. They reflected the EPS vision, values
and aims very well. A very robust self-evaluation management system had been
established over the last two years. Evidence obtained from stakeholders was used
very effectively to improve service delivery. The service should build on their very
effective management practices by involving a wider range of partners in policy
development, improvement planning and stakeholder evaluation.
3
6. How good is leadership?
Senior officers within the EA provided a very strong and coherent vision within which the
EPS was able to develop a very high quality service. Very effective support and
challenge had been provided by the EA to enable the service to engage in meaningful
self-evaluation and to further improve services. The PEP had a clear vision for the
service which was shared and shaped by senior managers and very successfully
supported by all members of staff. Senior managers of the EPS very effectively
monitored and tracked the performance of individual EPs which impacted very positively
on service delivery to all stakeholders. All staff had clear roles and responsibilities and
made significant contributions to service planning and self-evaluation. There was a very
clear focus by all staff on continuous improvement with a strong emphasis on impact
and outcomes for children and young people. Creativity and innovation were well
supported and managed by the PEP through planning structures, staff supervision and
training, and a positive service ethos. The PEP, senior mangers and staff should now
build on their major strengths and use their expertise to continue to improve their impact
on the implementation of Curriculum for Excellence both locally and nationally.
Key strengths
The service had:
•
Demonstrated very effective leadership which was strongly supported by Senior
Officers of the EA and which permeated to all staff within the educational psychology
service.
•
Provided exceptionally high quality services to children and young people resulting
in very positive outcomes for all, but in particular, vulnerable groups.
•
Engaged exceptionally well with parents and carers to build capacity through direct
work and by providing a wide range of parental workshops to an outstanding number
of parents and carers across the authority.
•
Developed a very powerful sense of collaboration and teamwork within the service
with all staff fully engaged and committed to continuous improvement.
4
Main points for action
The service should:
•
Continue to improve research and development so that it is more directly related to
school improvement planning and helps stakeholders to enhance and improve
services.
•
Strengthen its impact on the wider community particularly in relation to its
contribution to the national development of educational psychology services.
As a result of the EPS’s high performance and very good understanding of their
strengths and areas for improvement we have ended the inspection process at this
stage.
Dr Laura-Ann Currie
HM Inspector
07 September 2010
5
Appendix 1
Quality Indicator
Evaluation
Improvements in performance
Fulfilment of statutory duties
Impact on children and young people
Impact on parents, carers and families
Impact on staff
Impact on the local community
Impact on the wider community
Consultation and advice
Assessment
Intervention
Provision of professional development and
training for other groups including parents,
teachers and health professionals
Research and strategic development
Inclusion, equality and fairness
Policy development and review
Participation of stakeholders
Operational planning
Partnership working
Leadership and direction
Leadership of change and improvement
6
Very Good
Very Good
Excellent
Excellent
Very Good
Very Good
Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
If you would like to find out more about our inspections or get an electronic copy of this
report, please go to www.hmie.gov.uk.
Please contact us if you want to know how to get the report in a different format, for
example, in a translation, or if you wish to comment about any aspect of our
inspections. You can contact us at HMIEenquiries@hmie.gsi.gov.uk or write to us at
BMCT, HM Inspectorate of Education, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park,
Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA.
Text phone users can contact us on 01506 600 236. This is a service for deaf users.
Please do not use this number for voice calls as the line will not connect you to a
member of staff.
You can find our complaints procedure on our website www.hmie.gov.uk or alternatively
you can contact our Complaints Manager, at the address above or by
telephoning 01506 600259.
Crown Copyright 2010
HM Inspectorate of Education