Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Destaque
Semelhante a Evaluation Summary - Tom Harrison House
Semelhante a Evaluation Summary - Tom Harrison House (20)
Último
Último (20)
Evaluation Summary - Tom Harrison House
- 3. … but do you know exactly what THH does? a specialist facility providing abstinence-based addiction treatment exclusively to military Veterans, reservists, emergency personnel, and their families provide trauma-informed addiction treatment through a ‘sensory and wellbeing’ model of care, support, therapy and education. “a residential environment for Veterans that supports physical and emotional healing from substance misuse”
- 4. This evaluation looked to develop understanding around three key areas…. The number and type of successful ‘completions’, and why the service is successful for certain service users? The number and type of discharges and relapses, and why the service is unsuccessful for certain service users? What recommendations are there on what (if anything) could be done differently, and what suggestions can be made to support future longer-term outcome evaluations?
- 5. We evaluated the service from Oct’14 to July ‘15, using a variety of methods & techniques: One-to-one interviews, including VoiceBox (VB) interactive video conversations. Desktop analysis - examination of THH monitoring records, including Outcome Star results. Process and outcome evaluation – meshing together the primary and secondary analysis.
- 6. What commonly characterised many of THH service users in the first year? Predominantly middle-aged, male and ex-army. •9% RAF, 6% navy & 6% emergency services – almost 80% being ex-army. 49% of SUs between 45 and 64 years of age. A further 43% between 30 and 44 years of age. Family history of addiction. •47% declared a family history of addiction. Only one of 13 SUs who left before completing treatment stated did not have a family history of addiction. Homelessness. • 38% ‘no fixed abode’ on admission, reflecting the referral route for many. Criminal Justice System experience • almost half of SUs to date had been in prison (47% admissions).
- 7. And what type of addictions were they battling? Alcohol as primary ‘drug of choice’. • 94% of First Stage admissions (n=32) listed alcohol as a ‘drug of choice’ on entry to THH. • of the 63 substances referred to by SUs, alcohol makes up over half (51%) of the substances listed. • Cannabis, heroin and cocaine next most prevalent ‘drugs of choice’.
- 8. People found their way into THH through a variety of referral ‘pathways’ in… Addaction 11% Aigburth Drive Hostel 3% Basement 17% Brook Place 3% Cathedral Archer Project 3% Derbyshire Alcohol Service 3% Flintshire Council 3% LCAS 3% Merseyside Fire Rescue Service 3% Pennine Care 6% Royal British Legion 3% Self 29% Shared Care Wirral 3% Whitechapel 6% Windsor Clinic 3% Wirral Alcohol Service 3%
- 9. And when they’re in they link through to many organisations and support…. Addaction Art & Soul Brink Everton in the Community Independence Initiative Liverpool Community College New Start Homes Potential 4 Skills Royal British Legion Shy Lowen Transit Whitechapel Windsor Clinic X Roads YMCA
- 10. Length of treatment and support varied: Green ‘bars’ indicate successful completion > Gold stars indicate when beneficiary completed First Stage (‘12 week’ ) programme Grey bars are ongoing service users (July’15)
- 11. Outcome evaluation: Case studies provide vital qualitative insight into the 3 main treatment outcomes > “‘I know he’s safe here and doing well, and now so are we - we can relax a bit more and get back into his life” (Mother of service user) “a number of life changing results” (referral agency) - including a man 20 years street drinking and homeless, who is now thriving. “Some of the things that have come out here, that I’ve done, would never come out - that’s always been my problem.” (THH Service User)
- 12. Drug and Alcohol Outcome Star - Ten Areas / Scales Drug Use Alcohol Use Physical Health Meaningful Use of Time Emotional Health Accommodation Money Offending Community Family & Relationships Outcome evaluation: Outcome Star findings add impact metric.. Overall improvement in scores, between initial Star assessment and 3rd assessment: Greatest % changes shown > +35% +29% +20% +22%
- 13. Conclusions: Design and implementation – key questions in the process evaluation: Is the service design adequately implemented? the model appears to work very well for people in the quasi-residential service – though less effective for those people who were day users of the service. Is the service design appropriate for the population being targeted and the problems faced? The service design appears highly appropriate to the needs of the people who took part in the evaluation.
- 14. Conclusions: Areas for further work Post-service tracking • Biggest gap in the evidence base = systematic way to track how well SUs progress once they have left the THH service. Regular recording of Star data • Continued impetus and momentum is required - to develop robust longitudinal outcome monitoring system. Value for money analysis • scale and scope of evaluation did not allow for a value for money assessment - required to inform a rigorous impact evaluation.
- 15. Conclusions: Effective engagement at THH highlights 6 main ‘ingredients’… 1. Initial engagement bond 6. Family-based interventions 3. Responsive staff 2. ‘Blended’ programme 5. Military focus – for trust & sharing 4. Ethos / community culture Effective engagement
- 16. Amanda Clayson Amanda is the founder of VoiceBox Inc and deeply committed to the core values of ‘curious connected co-creation’. Michael Lloyd Michael is Principal Researcher and owner at MLR, and has 20 years experience of delivering social research. Like to know more? Access the webpage or contact the Project Managers www.researchmlr.co.uk/thh-evaluation michael@researchmlr.co.uk amanda@voiceboxinc.co.uk