The CYP IAPT performance indicators are set out in three levels of performance :

• Transformation markers
• Quality indicators
• Standards and values Implementation Guidance ‘Delivering with Delivering Well’

Service transformation markers

Partnerships should agree and report on the following four proxy measures that indicate the extent to which a partnership is delivering the basic principles of the CYP IAPT programme.

1. Participation

The partnership should have an identified participation lead and children and young persons’ council or participation group, and a mechanism for involving parents wherever possible. This resource may be shared with other partnerships. The outcome of participation is fed into service development and delivery.

2. Collaboration and outcome monitoring

The key requirements are that:

• All staff are using feedback and outcomes tools in their practice as a matter of routine and this is provided in real time to children, young people and parents.
• This information is brought to and used in supervision.
• Of those cases that are seen more than twice there is an increasing proportion who have at least 2 outcome measures.
• High quality accurate information is supplied each quarter to the central team through quarterly monitoring reports submitted to the project managers.

3. Evidence Based Practice

The partnership has evidence-based care-pathways, in particular but not exclusively for depression, anxiety, conduct disorders and eating disorders.

4. Governance

A suitably senior member of staff in the partnership attends the Midlands CYP IAPT Collaborative programme board. In addition there is a dedicated CYP IAPT partnership steering group or transformation group with representation from across the partnership. All partners within the partnerships should have input into a steering group. The outcomes of this group are reported to local governance structures as well as to the Midlands collaborative.

Quality Indicators (formally KPIs)

The Quality Indicators (QIs) support high level, and effective implementation of CYP IAPT principles. It is recognised that given the context services are operating in these maybe aspirational in the early stages.

The QIs:
• Demonstrate outcomes and feedback data for all children, young people and their families where an
intervention is offered – with two time points using a matched, normed outcomes measure.
• Demonstrate that outcome monitoring and service user feedback is embedded across the whole
service, and this information is used in supervision and clinical practice to inform interventions
and better collaborative practice.
• Demonstrate treatment outcomes that compare with other services in the CYP IAPT programme.
• Demonstrate that all contact with services are goal focussed and these are agreed collaboratively
with the young person/family and clinician.
• Demonstrate the average (median) number of sessions of treatment within the parameters
of what is expected as demonstrated by research evidence (without negative impact on clinical
outcomes).
• Demonstrate the use of appropriate NICE approved treatments within the service and demonstrate
the monitoring and review of the proportion of evidence based to non- evidence based interventions
delivered (where NICE interventions are not available these should be flagged with commissioners).
• Monitor the access to and acceptability of services in terms of access through self-referral,
times, settings, methods of treatment.
• Monitor the access to and acceptability of services by cultural gender/sexuality appropriateness.
• Evidence of training and continuing professional development that demonstrates commitment to
improve training and workforce capability and capacity in targeted and specialist services in the
direction of embedding CYP IAPT principles and practice.
• Demonstrate children, young people and parents’ involvement in service delivery and design,
through their role in recruitment, training, supervision and appraisal of staff, membership on
management or board groups at service or Trust level.

 

Standards and Values: Implementation Guidance

The values set out in ‘Delivering With and Delivering Well’, produced from the CYP IAPT service
development group, have set out for services how they can demonstrate measurable
activity matched to each value. Please see the Appendix for a summary of the values and behaviours.

Performance evaluation

To support the implementation process the intention is to report on the quarterly monitoring to the
Collaborative Board. This will help identify common risks and issues and enable additional support.
In summary the assessment and responses are:
• Making good progress – No action needed.
• Specific issues – Limited progress in one or two areas – Action Dialogue between
collaborative project board and partnership to determine ‘next steps’ – review in 8 weeks.
• Major concerns – poor progress in a number of areas or very poor progress in at least one area
– joint action and implementation plan devised. Specific help provided by collaborative to the
partnership in the form of consultation, further training (outreach), practical support, weekly and
monthly progress reviews.

 

What does all this mean for my partnership?

The Midlands collaborative is required to submit quarterly monitoring reports of progress to the
Central NHSE Team.

To enable this, the Collaborative Board requires partnerships to support the monitoring
arrangements in the following ways:
• Partnerships should develop an implementation plan including a risk register. To be agreed with
the collaborative/project leads.
• Partnership leads should update the collaborative programme board every six weeks to ensure the
partnership is on track and enable support where required.
• On a quarterly basis the collaborative lead and partnership lead will jointly review
partnership progress using a number of different methods which could include:
o Quarterly returns
o Direct site/outreach visits
o Data reports from MHSDS (if available)
o Feedback from trainee’s supervisors and mangers
o Information from YoungMinds re participation
o Partnership self-assessment
o Other contact with partnerships (telephone calls, emails etc.)
o reports on action plans