Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Quality Management in Mind (QMiM). Introduction The Mind quality manual has been developed to help local Mind associations (LMA’s) to systematically assess the quality of the service they provide against a series of 12 quality standards. These standards have drawn upon a number of nationally recognised quality assessment tools and has the backing of the Charity Commission. Each standard has a number of requirements divided into three levels. Level 1 contains the minimum requirements that an LMA must meet to maintain its adherence to Quality Management in Mind. For some smaller LMA’s (e.g. an annual income under £250000 p.a.) meeting the requirements of Level 1 may presently be all that is required. Those LMA’s passing QMiM at an overall level 2 or level 3 with clear passes in the Governance and Finance standards will be able to use the Charity Commission kitemark. The level attained can vary between the standards; for instance it may be fairly easy for a small LMA to demonstrate level 2 or level 3 for Standard 8: User Involvement. The 12 standards are as follows: Standard 1: Commitment to quality Standard 2: Measuring performance Standard 3: Governance Standard 4: Planning and policy development Standard 5: Financial management and systems Standard 6: People management Standard 7: Information Standard 8: User involvement Standard 9: Equality and diversity Standard 10: Networking and partnerships Standard 11: Standards for services Standard 12: Branding The Mind Quality Management team expect the LMA to systematically work through the standards, assessing their position, collecting evidence, developing action improvement plans and implementing them. They will then liaise with the Quality Management team who undertake a formal assessment. How QMiM will be applied to Woking Mind. At the Management Committee in October 2009 three options regarding participation in this scheme were considered. It was agreed to establish an implementation plan whereby the numbers of standards that are assessed in any one calendar year reflect the capacity and resources of Woking Mind to undertake the work. In other words tackle the whole assessment process in digestible chunks. Given the size of Woking Mind the current expectation is that we demonstrate that we work to Level 1. We aim to assess ourselves at this level against 2 standards every year and that we assess against a cross section of the requirements rather than all of them. It would not be unreasonable to assume that if we meet a number of requirements of a standard then we are probably meeting all the requirements. A core group from the Management Committee and additional members will be established to undertake the process. The participants will change depending on the standard being assessed. This model requires the appointment of an individual to take overall responsibility for liaising with the QMiM team and for maintaining local records. Included at the end of the document is a diagram of the framework. Pauline Rogers October 2009 Management Committee to: • Sign off completed action plan • Identify standard to be assessed • Identify assessment group of 4-6 people Identification Implementation Assessment Implementation plan actioned by nominated individual(s) Evaluation 1. 2. 3. Assessment group presents findings to Management Committee Improvement plan with timescales agreed Record outcome Meeting 1: 1. Agree 4 requirements of standard to evaluate 2. Agree evidence to be sought 3. Collect evidence Meeting 2: 1. Share evidence collected 2. Gain consensus on achievement against requirements 3. Identify gaps 4. Record evidence Timetable of events Date of Management Committee where standard identified 7th October 2009 Standard Identified Members of quality group Standard 8: User involvement Rachel Bedford Paul Cheetham Pauline Rogers Paul Watchorn Date of Management Committee where findings reported Date of Management Committee where Action Plan signed off