Summary of evaluation of the
educational psychology service
A report by HM Inspectorate of Education
The Highland Council
March 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?
2
5.
How good is the service’s management?
3
6.
How good is leadership?
3
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 The Highland Council educational psychology provision was
undertaken on behalf of stakeholders. The evaluation of the EPS was conducted within
a framework of quality indicators which embody the Government’s policy on Best Value.
The inspection team also included two associate assessors who were principal
educational psychologists (PEP) serving in another Scottish local authority.
This web-based report should be read alongside other strategic inspections of
The Highland Council which sets out the wider context in which EPSs are delivered.
The Educational Psychology Service
The Highland Council EPS comprised of three area teams based in six offices; in the
North Area in Brora and Wick, the Mid and West Area in Skye, Dingwall and Fort
William, and in Inverness, covering Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey. Each area was
managed by an area principal educational psychologist (APEP). In October 2009, the
service had 15.8 full-time equivalent (FTE) educational psychologists and six and a half
FTE pre-school home visiting teachers (HVT). The promoted staff consisted of one
principal educational psychologist (PEP) based in Inverness, and six APEP.
Whilst the PEP managed the HVTs, they were not included in the inspection of the
educational psychology service. The service received administrative support from two
administrative assistants based in the Inverness team.
2. What key outcomes has the service achieved?
The Highland Council EPS had achieved very good outcomes in relation to its strategic
impact on local and national priorities. For example, the implementation of Getting it
Right for Every Child (GIRFEC)1 had improved outcomes for vulnerable groups by
improving multi-agency working and planning. The use of emotionally literate
approaches within the Council’s schools and in their policies had begun to impact
positively on staff approaches to meeting children and young people’s needs. Solution
oriented approaches were well embedded within council practice and used to support
the implementation of the GIRFEC strategy. Such approaches were helping to improve
planning and decision making for children, young people and their families. The
service’s extensive programme, ‘Parental Involvement in Reading’ had improved
parental skills in supporting their children’s reading and increased children’s literacy
1
The GIRFEC approach aims to ensure that centres, schools and educational services
work more closely with partner agencies so that all children get the help that they
need when they need it.
1
skills in the early years of primary schooling. The Highland Council EPS had been
successful in meeting timescales and achieving the success criteria outlined in the
service improvement plan. However, the success criteria were not sufficiently
outcome-focused or related to national and local priorities. It was therefore difficult to
measure the contribution of each of the service’s development areas to key local and
national outcomes. It was also difficult to determine trends over time. The service
should take steps to link its targets to those of the authority and to more effectively
measure its performance over time. The service was very effective in its fulfilment of
statutory duties and in supporting the implementation of national guidelines. For
example, in the implementation of The Education (Additional Support for Learning)
(Scotland) Act 2004 (ASL Act), and the operationalising of GIRFEC.
3. How well does the service meet the needs of its stakeholders?
The service had very effectively supported a wide range of children and young people,
through individual work and by building capacity in others. For example, by supporting
class teachers in delivering emotional literate approaches to teaching and learning,
children and young people’s needs were better met. Almost all EPs were responsive to
need and provided an effective service to ensure that children and young people’s
needs were well met. They had been very successful in including children and young
people within their local community. The service should continue to build on the
services currently provided and ensure that their involvement in relation to children and
young people has maximum impact. For example, by better targeting of children’s
reviews and discussions about special examination arrangements. Parents were very
pleased with the quality of the service provided, the easy access and the continuity of
provision, particularly at transition points. Educational establishments found the service
to be very responsive to their needs. They felt that individual psychologist’s knowledge
of the local community helped them to improve services for children, young people and
their families. The service also worked well with other support services and with local
community groups, helping to facilitate their involvement with children, young people
and their families. In the wider community, the service was extending its support
through training and dissemination of their best practice. For example, the development
of approaches such as those presented in the packages, Resilient Kids, Conflict
Resolution and Developing Positive Relationships. Almost all EP staff felt supported
and challenged to improve their service. Through regular team meetings staff were
supported and challenged in relation to their practice. Administrative staff felt valued
and contributed well to team developments.
4. How good is the service’s delivery of key processes?
The service provided a comprehensive range of services across the four roles of
consultation and advice, assessment, intervention, and professional development and
training. Individual assessment was of a high quality and led to better outcomes for
children, young people and their families/carers. An effective range of intervention
strategies delivered at individual, establishment and whole authority levels were very
effectively delivered by the EPS. For example, emotionally literate interventions had
been used to support and inform authority leadership training, authority-wide behaviour
2
strategy work, whole school approaches to promoting emotional health and well-being,
and work with individual pupils. Educational establishments valued the service’s annual
conference which helped to improve their skills and knowledge about key areas of
psychological activity. Training was well attended and evaluations were positive. The
service should continue to develop joint training across a range of topics with
multi-agency staff. Research and development was not as comprehensively delivered
as the other areas of service delivery. There were very good examples of the service
undertaking literature reviews to inform practice. They had also deployed formal
research methods to evaluate intervention strategies such as the Parental Involvement
in Reading programme. The service should now develop their research role so that it is
more embedded and related to the strategic improvement of its stakeholders. They
should also think creatively about how they can use the outcomes from their research
reviews to have a more immediate impact on the local community. For example,
through the publication of research reviews to help inform and improve practice.
Features of good practice:
Using an emotional literate approach to developing service delivery.
The Highland Council Educational Psychology Service uses an emotionally literate
approach to service delivery. This approach is used internally within the service, in
informal support systems, at team meetings and to support policy development. It has
also been used to support strategic planning in developing emotional literacy and
promoting positive relationships more generally in children’s services. The approach
has helped the service to deliver a unique psychological approach to national and local
outcomes such as improving post-school destinations by building resilience, improving
attainment for looked after and accommodated children and young people, and
generally in supporting vulnerable groups of children and young people.
3
5. How good is the service’s management?
The service had established a clear strategy for policy review and development.
Operational planning was well established and all staff were involved in the tracking and
monitoring of development areas. The service was beginning to set targets which were
better linked with local and national objectives. A culture of continuous improvement
was beginning to be embedded within the service. This now needed to be further
developed through more systematic participation of stakeholders in planning and
self-evaluation. Partnership working was very good with some aspects of outstanding
practice in relation to multi-agency planning for individual children and young people
and at more strategic levels of policy development. The service should continue to
engage partners in all aspects of service development and ensure that they report on
their performance to the full range of stakeholders and partners.
6. How good is leadership?
The PEP had established a very clear vision for the service which was shared by the
Highland Council staff. She provided very effective support and challenge for all the
Highland Council EPS staff and in turn received appropriate support and challenge from
authority managers. Communication between senior officers and the Highland Council
staff was good and maingrade and APEP participated well in authority working groups.
APEPs now need to develop more strategic responsibilities which more actively drive
the development of the psychological service and contribute to the vision for Education
and Children’s Services. A strong commitment to improvement and to the delivery of
high quality psychological service for all stakeholders in the local and wider community
had been demonstrated by the PEP over the last three years. Greater consistency of
practice across the Council had been achieved as a result. She had encouraged the
development of innovative practice and had guided the service towards new and
improved approaches to service delivery. A clear model of service delivery using an
emotional literacy approach was growing and this had the potential to provide a unique
approach to service delivery. It should now be articulated more explicitly to shape
future service delivery.
Key strengths
The service had:
•
very strong leadership from the PEP who had established a clear vision for the
service with an emphasis on continuous improvement;
•
very effective multi-agency working built on established positive relationships;
•
delivered high quality psychological services which had impacted positively on the
full range of stakeholders; and
•
developed very effective strategic links within the authority which had helped to
improve services for children and young people.
4
Main points for action
The service should:
•
continue to develop systematic and robust self-evaluation systems and process to
better measure impact and outcomes;
•
further develop the role of the service in the development of applied research to
assist stakeholders in improving their services;
•
further develop leadership capacity within the senior management team of EPS; and
•
improve management systems to enable the service to better measure trends in
performance over time.
As a result of the EPS high performance and good understanding of their strengths and
areas for improvement we have ended the inspection process at this stage.
Laura-Ann Currie
HM Inspector
Directorate 5
March 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
Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Very Good
Satisfactory
Very Good
Very Good
Satisfactory
Good
Very Good
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