Paying the piper and calling the tune? Commissioners' evaluation of advocacy services for people with learning disabilities

TY - JOUR

T1 - Paying the piper and calling the tune? Commissioners' evaluation of advocacy services for people with learning disabilities

AU - Hussein, Shereen

AU - Rapaport, Joan

AU - Manthorpe, Jill

AU - Moriarty, Jo

AU - Collins, J

PY - 2006/3

Y1 - 2006/3

N2 - Increases in funding of advocacy schemes are leading to their general expansion in the UK. Little is known of how their activities are evaluated by funders. This article examines how local authorities evaluate the outcomes of advocacy schemes. It reports on and discusses the findings of a survey of local authorities. Respondents identified the types of support they provided to advocacy schemes and their requirements for service reports. Data are presented on the length of time that schemes have been funded, geographical variations and whether schemes are generalist or specialist. This analysis is set in the context of discussion with stakeholders. The authors conclude that monitoring and review systems are not well known or extensively used, that while user involvement in evaluation is seen as appropriate this is not well developed, but that advocacy services themselves are interested in contributing to processes of improvement and accountability.

AB - Increases in funding of advocacy schemes are leading to their general expansion in the UK. Little is known of how their activities are evaluated by funders. This article examines how local authorities evaluate the outcomes of advocacy schemes. It reports on and discusses the findings of a survey of local authorities. Respondents identified the types of support they provided to advocacy schemes and their requirements for service reports. Data are presented on the length of time that schemes have been funded, geographical variations and whether schemes are generalist or specialist. This analysis is set in the context of discussion with stakeholders. The authors conclude that monitoring and review systems are not well known or extensively used, that while user involvement in evaluation is seen as appropriate this is not well developed, but that advocacy services themselves are interested in contributing to processes of improvement and accountability.

U2 - 10.1177/1744629506062281

DO - 10.1177/1744629506062281

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 75

EP - 91

JO - Journal of Intellectual Disabilities

JF - Journal of Intellectual Disabilities

IS - 1

ER -