HIGHER EDUCATION & LEARNER SUPPORT DIVISION
TOOLKIT OF QUALITY INDICATORS FOR NEEDS ASSESSMENT GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
JANUARY 2010
1st EDITION Version 1 – 12/09
PAGE
5 - 7 CHAPTER ONE
Introduction and Background to the Toolkit ¾ Purpose ¾ Objectives ¾ Reasonable Adjustment 8 - 9 CHAPTER TWO The DSSG: ¾ Remit ¾ Membership ¾ Tenure
¾ Roles & Responsibilities
10 – 12 CHAPTER THREE
The Validation Panel:
¾ Remit
¾ Roles & Responsibilities ¾ Membership of the Panel ¾ Workings of the Panel ¾ Training and Handover ¾ Travel Expenses
13 - 15 CHAPTER FOUR
Who Can Assess
¾ Differences between assessment by a BRITE individual or a validated institution
¾ Non-academic Organisations
16 - 20 CHAPTER FIVE
The Validation Process:
¾ Timing process for Full Applications ¾ Timeline and Flow charts
21 - 24 CHAPTER SIX
Quality Enhancement Process: ¾ Annual Statements
¾ Institutional Self Evaluation ¾ On Hold
¾ Workshops
¾ Institutional Peer Support ¾ SAAS Evaluation Surveys ¾ Peer Group Visits
25 - 34 CHAPTER SEVEN
The Toolkit of Quality Indicators: ¾ The Guidance Document ¾ The Quality Indicators ¾ Evidence Requirements ¾ The Quality Indicators ¾ DSA Assessment Forms
¾ The Validation Application Form ¾ Quality Enhancement Procedures
35 - 38 CHAPTER EIGHT Assessment Reports ¾ Purpose ¾ Best practice ¾ Reasonable Adjustments ¾ Exceptional cases ¾ Assessment fee ¾ Priority Applications 39 - 45 CHAPTER NINE
Suppliers & Equipment ¾ Roles and Responsibilities ¾ Trialling of Equipment ¾ Loan or Hire of Equipment ¾ Training
¾ Case Study ¾ Suppliers ¾ Trainers
46 - 47 CHAPTER TEN
Non Medical Personal Helpers (NMPH) ¾ General
¾ Roles and Responsibilities ¾ Rates of Pay
¾ Quality Assurance ¾ Good Practice
48 - 50 CHAPTER ELEVEN
The Appeals and Complaints Process ¾ Appeals
¾ Recording, Monitoring & Reviewing Appeals ¾ Complaints
¾ What Happens Next
¾ Recording, Monitoring & Reviewing Appeals & Complaints
51 - 90 APPENDICES
¾ 1 Quality Indicators - Examples of Good Practice ¾ 2 Person Specification - Validation Panel Members ¾ 3 Statement of Interest for Validation Panel Members ¾ 4 Current Validation Panel Members
¾ 5 SAAS/DSA Needs Assessment Form - Template ¾ 6 Institution Annual Statement
¾ 7 Institution Self Evaluation Questionnaire ¾ 8 DSA Priority Application
¾ 9 Travel Expenses Claim Form ¾ 10 External Organisations & Agencies ¾ 11 Useful Publications
¾ 12 Contact Details ¾ 14 Flowcharts
CHAPTER ONE
[top]
Introduction and Background to the toolkit
During 2003, the Funding For Learners Division in the then Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning Department in the Scottish Executive carried out a review of learner funding. The terms of reference for the review were to identify gaps and anomalies in the provision of funding to post-16 individual learners, and to recommend changes that would improve the coherence, equity, and effectiveness of overall provision. The final report of the review can be found at .
As part of the output of the review, the Disabled Students Stakeholder Group (DSSG) was established in 2004 to bring together the range of stakeholders involved in the information, advice, guidance and delivery of student support, and to consider and address issues relating to the support available to learners with disability related additional needs in further and higher education.
One of the initial issues the stakeholder group considered was the needs assessment process, with a particular focus on higher education students applying for the Disabled Students Allowance (DSA) from the Student Awards Agency for Scotland (SAAS). The group recognised that students applying for DSA often faced delays in receiving a needs assessment and consequently their DSA support. The delays were caused by a backlog of applications for needs assessments, mainly due to there being only a limited number of accredited and recognised assessors whose reports were accepted under the process at that time. SAAS then only accepted assessment reports from a small number of sources, including the four Scottish validated access centres and a limited number of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). However, the HEIs had no obvious process or accreditation system for institutions to follow to allow them to become recognised assessors.
The Toolkit of Quality Indicators for Needs Assessments (The Toolkit) was therefore developed in 2005 to offer institutions or centres a voluntary route by which to become validated as assessors recognised by SAAS. These quality indicators were a significant step forward in improving the coherence and robustness of the assessment process, and the confidence which all stakeholders could have in it. The aim was to establish an agreed quality assurance framework under which assessments can be carried out by a wider range of assessors, including college and university staff. The ability to undertake in-house assessments will clearly have an impact on the efficiency of the DSA process.
In 2009, the Toolkit of Quality Indicators was evaluated. The Scottish Government then organised two workshops in April to discuss potential next steps for the Toolkit. Further details about this evaluation report and the feedback from the workshops can be accessed on the Scottish Government website at
The DSSG discussed the evaluation report and the feedback from the workshops at their meeting on 21st May 2009. The DSSG agreed that the pilot had been a
success and decided that, subject to some amendments, the Toolkit should be mainstreamed and that it should remain a voluntary option for institutions.
Purpose
The intention and focus of the Toolkit is very much on the assessment process for higher education students applying for DSA. However, it is envisaged that assessors should also be able to use the Toolkit as a framework to undertake assessments for other students with additional support needs. We believe that the Toolkit will also be useful for institutions when undertaking assessments for other HE students who are ineligible for DSA or for further education students, as it provides a framework to identify the support strategies and study aids which will still need to be put in place by institutions for these students.
This Toolkit should be implemented by disability advisers and institutional staff, however it is the intention that institutions or centres themselves, and not individual members of staff will be registered and accredited.
A student can apply for the Disabled Students Allowance (DSA) if they have a disability or learning difficulty and as a result of which have extra costs that are directly related to their course. This is a non-income assessed grant and is available to eligible students studying courses of higher education for example, HNC, HND, degree or equivalent level.
In terms of the actual DSA application process there will be very little change. Students and academic staff will still have to complete the relevant parts of the yellow DSA application form, as normal, and send this to SAAS.
Objectives
The objectives of introducing the Toolkit-based validation process were to:
1. Reduce waiting times between acknowledging that the student will be assessed for the DSA and the student receiving support.
2. Increase the capacity of the sector to assess students for DSA
3. Introduce an equitable process for institutions to become authorised to carry out DSA assessments
4. Improve the quality and consistency of approach to DSA assessments across Scottish universities and colleges.
5. Improve the student experience of DSA assessments.
The focus from now is to maintain the achievements of objectives 1, 2 & 3 above and to continue to move forward on 4 & 5.
Reasonable Adjustment
All Further and Higher Education institutions in Scotland are expected to meet their statutory duties under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (as amended in 2005) and as such need to consider provision for all disabled students. Colleges and Universities must ensure they can provide flexibility and, when offering a place to a student that they comply with the DDA and consider any adjustments that can and should be made to enable a student to access their course. As part of the Review of the DSA, a paper was produced which sought to:
• provide some clarification about the relationship between institutional support to disabled students through the DDA (anticipatory duties, reasonable adjustment duties and disability equality duty) and the DSA;
• examine what support is currently provided to disabled students by institutions and compare this to the support which is provided through the DSA;
• examine issues which have been raised during the review of DSA with regard to reasonable adjustments and the DSA; and
• provide case studies to highlight examples of where institutions are making linkage between reasonable adjustments and the DSA and the effectiveness of that.
The Paper recommended that
• when institutions/access centres write up the DSA assessment report the support strategies should also be within the parameters within which DSA operates;
• Institutions provide details of any anticipatory reasonable adjustments that have been made for the student prior to applying for DSA to students and evidence as to why the student requires the additional support as part of DSA application to SAAS;
• if a student is claiming learning support via DSA the student should be informed that the aim of the support is to develop strategies for independent learning which enable them to access their course. The DSA assessment should contain an outline plan of the support and the following year's application should outline the progress of the support and review what is further required; and
• institutions in their Toolkit applications and annual evaluations should provide evidence of student feedback and evidence to demonstrate continued mainstreaming of reasonable adjustments.
Institutions in their Toolkit applications must provide evidence to demonstrate that they are adhering to the Review of DSA’s recommendations.
Further details about this paper can be found at
The Guidance document for DSA Assessment can be found at and going to the ‘administrators section’ link.
CHAPTER TWO
[top]
The Disabled Students Stakeholder Group (The DSSG)
Following the 2003 Funding For Learners review, the Disabled Students Stakeholder Group (DSSG) was established in 2004 to bring together the range of stakeholders involved in the information, advice, guidance and delivery of student support, and to consider and address issues relating to the support available to learners with disability related additional needs in further and higher education.
The DSSG originally met four times year however in April 2006 this changed to its current format of twice a year – May and November.
Remit
To consider and address issues relating to the support available to learners with disability related additional needs in further and higher education. The group comprises of the key stakeholders and delivery partners.
Membership
Since the formation of the DSSG there have been a number of changes to the membership of the DSSG. These changes have reflected the growing interest from other stakeholders in the work of the DSSG and to reflect the group’s evolving roles. The current members of the DSSG are made up of the following:
• Scottish Government - Lifelong Learning Division • Student Awards Agency Scotland
• Scottish Funding Council (SFC) • Scotland’s Colleges (ASC & SFEU) • NUS Scotland
• Association of Directors of Education in Scotland (ADES) • Association of Directors of Social Work in Scotland (ADSW) • BRITE
• Jobcentre Plus
• Motherwell College Access Centre • Aberdeen College
• Open University
• Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) • Royal National Institute for the Deaf (RNID) • Stevenson College Access Centre
• SKILL Scotland • University of Aberdeen
• University of Dundee Access Centre • University of Edinburgh
• University of Strathclyde • Universities Scotland (US)
Tenure
There is no set time limit that a person/organisation can be a member on the DSSG. Roles & Responsibilities
The role of the DSSG members is to update other stakeholders from their sector with any information or current/ongoing work or projects that will be of interest to the group, for example representatives from colleges and universities should update their fellow disability advisers from other institutions. Members of the group represent their own organisation and are also responsible for updating their own internal colleagues of issues discussed, or to be discussed at meetings of the DSSG. Non DSSG members may also attend meetings as an observer or participant if there are particular topics on the agenda that they wish to discuss.
The group should:
• promote greater co-operation and common understanding between those representing students and assessing their needs and those developing and implementing government policy to address those needs,
• consider proposals and make recommendations on future policy development; • monitor and helping to embed implementation of the significant number of new
policy developments.
• propose actions to eliminate duplication and inconsistency;
• consider the issues identified during the analysis of the current support arrangements and institutional funding related to students with special educational needs;
• cascade information on any new pieces of equipment being piloted or used in a university or college that would benefit disabled students in other institutions e.g. Live Remote Captioning;
Previous and current specific activities include: • The Toolkit and Validation Panel
• Subgroups established to examine specific issues. For example:
o Monitoring and Quality Enhancement
o Non Medical Personal Helpers (NMPH)
o Diagnosis and Evidence
Membership of subgroups often includes representatives from colleges and universities who are not members of the DSSG. This allows other institutions an opportunity to share their expertise and become involved in the work of the DSSG Papers from DSSG and subgroup meetings can be found at
CHAPTER THREE
[top]
The Validation PanelRemit
The Validation Panel is a standing sub-group of the DSSG. Its purpose is to oversee the Toolkit Validation Process and consider applications from FE and HE institutions and Access Centres for validation by SAAS to carry out assessments of students needs for the purposes of DSA. Current members of the panel have commented on the positive experience they have gained from serving as a panel member, in particular some have felt that it has significantly helped them to consider the inclusive practices within their own institutions which has subsequently helped them to continue to improve the services they provide to their students and colleagues. Membership of the panel can also be considered as useful CPD experience.
Roles & Responsibilities of members of the panel
The members of the panel can use their knowledge and expertise of the sector to inform the decision making process of the panel as a collective.
A copy of the person specification is contained within Appendix 2
Members must also respect the confidentially of an institution’s application and the information contained within needs assessments.
Membership of the panel
Institutions who apply to become validated to undertake needs assessments will be asked to confirm that as part of their application they agree that a nominated person from their institution could be asked to undertake four year tenure as a member of the validation panel.
The membership of the panel will reflect membership from the DSSG and a rotational membership of representatives from colleges and universities. SG and SAAS will provide secretarial/scribe support for panel and sub groups from within their own membership. With the exception of the Scottish Government, SFC and SAAS, who will be permanent members, membership will be for a period of four years. The total number of members will be 18 people, however this may be reviewed at a later date. The membership for January 2010 will be
o Scottish Government (x 5) ( 3 members and 2 secretariat )
o SAAS (x 4) ( 3 members and 1 secretariat )
o Scottish Funding Council
o BRITE* representing the DSSG
o Skill Scotland representing the DSSG
o Motherwell College/Access Centre*
o University of Strathclyde*
o Glasgow Metropolitan College
o Aberdeen University
o Jewel and Esk College
The members of the panel who were involved in the pilot process will remain panel members until 2012 and then 3 of the original members (highlighted with a (*) will hand over to new members. New members will be selected on a rotational basis from validated institutions. To ensure a continuum of expertise the four original members highlighted with a (*) will rotate their membership. Letters will be issued to the selected panel member at least a year in advance of their tenure so that they can make the necessary arrangements with their institution to enable them to make a commitment to the panel. It is anticipated that panel members who are also members of the DSSG will need to be available for approximately 9 days per year and 8 days a year for those who are not members of the DSSG.
During the annual meeting of the Validation Panel the members will be split into three sub panels each of which will be chaired by a representative from either the Scottish Government or SAAS. Each sub group will be supported by an administrator from the Scottish Government or SAAS. There will be six members within each sub group. The sub groups will be delegated particular applications to ensure an even spread of work load and avoid any conflicts of interest. Once each subgroup has considered their particular applications their decision and reasoning will be presented back to the full validation panel for formal agreement.
As members of the panel are drawn from the DSSG and wider sector, those members will be asked to declare a statement of interest which is available in Appendix 3 and can be viewed online on the Institutions will receive further information regarding SharePoint shortly as well as relevant login details.
Workings of the Panel
It would be expected that the panel would meet face to face at least once a year to discuss applications and annual updates. The validation panel meetings will rotate between Edinburgh and Glasgow. (1 day) To note that some panel members will also be members of the DSSG and will therefore also be meeting as part of the DSSG in both May and November (2 x 0.5 days).
Panel members will be expected to consider applications prior to meeting and on occasion post meeting if further information is required and then communicate with each other via e-mail or telephone several times during the course of a validation process. (3 days)
There will also be some peer group visits as per Chapter 6. This will involve at approximately three half day visits per year and these will mainly take place between December – March (3 x 0.5 days)
Panel members will be expected to attend one of the annual quality enhancement workshops which will take place in February. (1 day)
Training and Handover
It will be expected that panel members would be offered an appropriate induction on the validation process. This will be conducted by a panel member.
The membership will be organised on a rotational basis to ensure that there are always continuing members as well as new members
There will also be a handover period between the outgoing member and the incoming member for example the new member invited to shadow the outgoing member at their final validation meeting.
Travel Expenses
If Panel members require reimbursement for their travel expenses to and from validation meetings then the expenses claim form attached at Appendix 9 should be completed and submitted to the Scottish Government,
It is expected that members will have due regard for travelling in an environmental and cost effective manner.
For Peer Group visits it is anticipated that, under normal circumstances, panel Members would seek travel expenses from their own institutions.
CHAPTER FOUR [top]
Who Can Assess?
The Toolkit was developed to offer institutions and access centres a transparent voluntary route by which to become validated, by SAAS, to carry out assessments of students’ additional needs for the purposes of DSA. The quality indicators were a significant step forward in improving the coherence and robustness of the assessment process, and the confidence which all stakeholders could have in it. The aim was to establish an agreed quality assurance framework which institutions could use to self evaluate their own service and under which assessments could be carried out by a wider range of assessors, including college and university staff.
The Validation Panel regards it as essential for institutions to employ appropriately qualified and experienced staff in order to be validated through the Toolkit process. The purpose of the Toolkit was therefore to enhance the process of needs assessment for students with disabilities, ensuring that they were able to access the support available to them without long delays. The intention was that institutions rather than individuals would be validated as this would ensure continuity and quality of assessment for students within a particular institution and an adequately resourced sustainable service that was not over reliant on any particular member of staff. The Validation Panel considers it an essential element of the validation process that the Lead Needs Assessor is directly employed by the institution and that the application for validation under the Toolkit provides a comprehensive list of all staff involved in the process, together with a statement of interests for these staff, should that be necessary. This will avoid the possibility of conflict where assessors are also involved in the supply of equipment.
Differences between ’validated institutions’ and BRITE trained individuals
There is an important distinction between the validation of an institution as a needs assessment centre (through the Toolkit process – formerly known as the Scottish Executive pilot) and the accreditation of individual needs assessors through completion of the SQA Professional Development Award through the BRITE initiative.
Completion of the BRITE Professional Development Award (PDA) leads to accreditation for the individual as a needs assessor. However, the employment of a BRITE-accredited individual by an institution does not confer on that institution the status of ‘Validated Needs Assessment Centre’ for Scottish Government Toolkit purposes. In order for an institution to assess the additional needs of students for the purposes of DSA, the institution must be validated through the Toolkit Validation process.
Institutions who opt not to pursue validation should continue to direct students to SAAS for onward referral to a Validated Access Centre for Needs Assessment.
Institutions who employ BRITE qualified individuals to undertake DSA assessments must undergo the validation process. BRITE qualified individuals who are working
within non-validated institutions cannot undertake assessment of students for the purposes of DSA on their own - these students should be referred to a Validated Access Centre in the normal way.
Within institutions, staff who have not yet completed their qualification can continue to assess students using the Toolkit. As part of the qualification process, these assessments are being countersigned by appropriately qualified assessors within the BRITE organisation. When an individual obtains their full BRITE PDA qualification, they will still be able to assess students for the purposes of DSA using the Toolkit, but this needs to be as an assessor within a Validated institution rather than as an individual.
On successful application, an institution will be validated for a four (4) year period. Further information on the Validation Process can be found in Chapter 5.
Non-academic Organisations
Non academic institutions such as RNIB and RNID have also been involved with the DSSG and Toolkit pilot process. In recognition of the specialist expertise that these organisations can bring to the needs assessment process they are considered as being key external partners that a validated institution/access centre can collaborate with in the needs assessment process. SAAS previously accepted needs assessments which were conducted by these organisations. However, as a result of the pilot experience, from January 2010, only needs assessments which have been signed off by a validated institution/access centre will be accepted by SAAS. The validated institution remains responsible for the quality assurance of the whole assessment process and the student experience.
We acknowledge that some students may prefer that a specialist organisation such as the RNIB undertake their needs assessment and that this preference should be considered by the student’s institution or the access centre. Both the specialist organisations and institutions/access centre will have a duty to explain to the student that the overall needs assessment must be under the auspices of a validated institution/access centre and the benefits ultimately for them of this process. These benefits centre around the Toolkit’s key indicators and the actual validation process, for example:
• Staff from institutions/access centres who are involved in the needs assessment process are qualified, regulated and undertake regular CPD.
• A needs assessment is student centred and takes into account the requirements/context of the course and the learning environment within the institution.
• The needs assessment process and the institution’s application to become validated have undergone a rigorous application process involving a panel of experts;
• Ongoing quality assurance and monitoring processes to ensure that standards are maintained;
• Students have access to information about the whole process, know their rights and responsibilities, and there are procedures for appeals and complaints.
Within this framework, institutions have the scope to create formal partnerships between themselves and external organisations with specific expertise. While these organisations are not validated to undertake needs assessments under the toolkit, they are able to provide expert advice in certain areas. A directory or list of potential external partners and their expertise is contained within Appendix 10 to raise awareness amongst institutions of what expertise is available across Scotland. This list is illustrative and not exhaustive nor is it a recommendation of any one organisation over another.
As not all institutions are aware of the possibility of a partnership approach to a needs assessment and the importance and usefulness of external organisations, the DSSG will consider this topic for future DSSG workshops.
If an institution/access centre decides to enter a partnership approach to the needs assessment this should be undertaken in a formal manner. The arrangements should be set out for example in a formal partnership agreement which outlines the following:
• the roles and responsibilities of each of the partners, • any timescales involved in the process;
• the quality assurance procedures for monitoring and improving the partnership; and
• the % of the assessment fee associated with the elements of the assessment which are being carried out by the external partners.
Any such partnership agreement should be included in an institution’s application to become validated or subsequent midyear statements. The application should also contain details of how this process has been communicated to the student and what opportunity the student has to provide feedback on their whole experience, including the involvement of the external partner.
An example of a Draft Partnership Agreement will shortly be available through the Best Practice section on the SharePoint website.
CHAPTER FIVE [top]
The Validation Process
Timing process for Full Applications
As the Pilot is adopted as mainstream practice, institutions will be required to renew their validation. Initially, only those institutions that were validated in the first round of the pilot and were due to submit a full application in 2010 will be asked to re-apply. In addition, a further 12 institutions that have never been validated but have BRITE qualified Assessors working within their institutions will be asked to apply. As from January 2010, staff holding the BRITE PDA level 4 qualification will no longer be able to undertake assessments, for the purposes of DSA, in a non-validated institution. Students from these institutions will need to be referred to Validated Access Centres. However, it should be noted that it was never the expectation that all institutions would become validated. HE students attending non-validated institutions will be referred for DSA assessment to a Validated Access Centre in the normal way.
These initial institutions will be notified by the Scottish Government, in December 2009, that they are being invited to apply for Full Validation in 2010 and the necessary papers will be forwarded to them. Should any of these initial institutions choose not to apply or re-apply at this stage, they will be put on hold and then be invited to re-apply with all other institutions for the new Round One in March 2011.
All other institutions will either be invited to submit applications by March 2011 or 2012. The year of application will depend upon what stage of the pilot process the institution has reached at that time. The Scottish Government will write to each institution in December 2010 advising them what stage of the process they are at and what information they will be required to provide in order to remain validated. Thereafter, full validation will only be required every FOUR (4) years. All applications and evidence will only be accepted if provided in electronic format
and must be submitted to We will also be using
in the first year to send alerts and updates where appropriate and all institutions will receive password and login details for this service shortly. A link to further guidance on use of the effectiveness of this forum will be reviewed at the end of the first year of operation. SAAS will issue a letter to institutions to confirm their validation and will ensure that the institution is listed on the SAAS website. If an institution is required to submit additional information before a final decision can be made the Scottish Government will request this in writing
At the end of year 1, institutions will be required to submit an Annual Statement to the Validation Panel via the electronic submission inbox detailed above. This should be signed by the Principal of the institution, or their delegated authority and should confirm that the circumstances in relation to staffing and resources within the institution remain as per the initial application and that the institution is still adequately resourced to continue with assessments. Alternatively, the institution
should provide evidence that any changes continue to meet the expectations of the panel. On receipt of this information the validation panel will issue a letter confirming the validation status.
At the end of the second year there will be a mid-cycle self evaluation questionnaire which should again be submitted to the Validation Panel via the electronic submission inbox. This will be a questionnaire similar to the interim validation from the Pilot and will again ask for confirmation from the Principal or their delegated authority, that the institution remains properly resourced to continue assessing students under the Toolkit. After consideration, the validation panel will issue a letter confirming the validation status.
At the end of year 3 institutions will submit a second Annual Statement**, via the electronic submission inbox, again confirming that circumstances in relation to staffing and resources within the institution remain as per the application and that the institution is still adequately resourced to continue with assessments. Alternatively they should provide evidence that any changes continue to meet the expectations of the panel.
** Further information on this is available in Chapter 6
At the end of the fourth year institutions will require to submit a full application
Case Study examples showing 3 different validation scenarios are attached below as is a Timeline showing the initial process for the test round.
Example 1
University A applied to become validated in 2005 and was successful. They will be sent an invitation in December 2009 to apply to become validated under the new Toolkit. They will submit their application in March 2010.
a) If they are successful their validation will last for 4 years (until May 2014).
o March 2011 provide a written statement,
o March 2012 they will be asked to complete the questionnaire,
o March 2013 they will provide a written statement and
o March 2014 they will submit a full validation application.
b) If they were completely unsuccessful they would lose their validation status from May 2010. They would have an opportunity to reapply in March 2011 and if successful they would then be validated in May 2011 for 4 years and not have to apply again until March 2015
c) If they were required to clarify a point they would remain validated until the deadline for the information. If the information was accepted then they would be return to route (a), if the information was not acceptable then they would follow route (b).
Example 2
College B has never been validated however they have a BRITE qualified needs assessor. Therefore they will be invited in December 2009 to apply to become validated under the new Toolkit.
a) If they are successful they would become validated from May 2010 and their validation will last for 4 years (until May 2014).
o March 2011 they will provide a written statement,
o March 2012 they will provide a questionnaire,
o March 2013 they will provide a written statement and
o March 2014 they will submit a full validation application.
b) If they are completely unsuccessful their needs assessor will, from May 2010, no longer be able to undertaken needs assessments for DSA applications. The College will have an opportunity to reapply in March 2011 – if they are then successful they would be validated from May 2011
for 4 years.
o March 2012 they will provide a written statement,
o March 2013 they will provide a questionnaire,
o March 2014 they will be asked to provide a written statement and
o March 2015 they submit a full validation application.
c) If they are required to clarify a point the assessor can continue to undertake a needs assessment until the deadline for the information. If the information is accepted then they would return to route (a), if the information is not acceptable then they would follow route (b).
d) If they fail to apply for Validation, their needs assessor will, from May 2010, no longer be able to undertaken needs assessments for DSA.
Example 3
College C applied to become validated in 2006 and was successful. They will be sent a letter in December 2009 requesting they submit an annual statement. An invitation will then be sent to them in December 2010 inviting them to apply to become validated under the new Toolkit. They will submit their application in March 2011.
a) If they are successful, their validation will last for 4 years (until May 2015).
o March 2012 they will provide a written statement,
o March 2013 they will submit their questionnaire,
o March 2014 they will be asked to provide a written statement and
o March 2015 they will be invited to submit a full validation application and start the process again.
b) If they were completely unsuccessful they would lose their validation status from May 2011. They would have an opportunity to reapply in March 2012. If successful they would be validated from May 2012 for 4 years.
o March 2013 they would submit their statement,
o March 2014 they would submit the questionnaire,
o March 2015 they would submit the statement and
o March 2016 they would submit their full reapplication.
c) If they were required to clarify a point they would remain validated until the deadline for the information. If the information was accepted then they would be return to route (a), if the information was not acceptable then they would follow route (b).
THE VALIDATION PROCESS
Phase 0 – From Pilot to Mainstream
An outline of the initial stages to change from Pilot to Mainstream is given below.
NOV 09 DSSG Meeting and invitations to new Panel Members DEC 09 Letters to initial test institutions
• Advising re new procedures and that all institutions will be asked to provide Panel Members at some stage
• Invite initial institutions to apply for validation
• Inform institutions about the March 2010 Workshops and advise that attendance at these will be seen as a necessary part of the validation process
• Give a deadline for applications of late March 2010 Letters to ALL remaining institutions
• Advising re new procedures and that all institutions will be asked to provide Panel Members at some stage
• Advise that they will all be able to apply for Validation under the new procedures by March 2011
• Inform institutions about the March 2010 Workshops and advise that attendance at these will be seen as a necessary part of the validation process
JAN/
MAR 2010 Prepare and deliver Workshops
MAR 2010 Receive initial applications
• Issue applications to Panel EARLY
MAY 2010 Panel Meeting to consider applications • Appropriate notifications issued LATE
MAY 2010 DSSG Meeting
Information on how the process will run after the initial test round can be found on the following page – Overview of Annual Cycle.
*Peer group visits will take place between December and March each year.
Overview of Annual Cycle
Jan Feb March Apr May (early) May (late) Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 Issue new
Guidance & test round invitations
2010 DSSG Workshop
(Early March 2010)
New test round applications to be submitted Validation Panel – test round applications DSSG Meeting DSSG Meeting
Invites for Cycle 1 round 1 (R1) 2011 * DSSG Workshop Cycle 1 – Round 1 applications to be submitted Validation Panel meet DSSG Meeting DSSG Meeting
Invites for cycle 1 round 2 (R2)
2012 * DSSG Workshop Cycle 1 - Round 2 applications to be submitted Validation Panel meet DSSG Meeting DSSG Meeting
Invites for cycle 1 round 3 (R3)
2013 * DSSG Workshop Cycle 1 - Round 3 applications to be submitted Validation Panel meet DSSG Meeting DSSG Meeting
Invites for cycle 1 round 4 (R4)
2014 * DSSG Workshop Cycle 1 - Round 4 applications to be submitted Validation Panel meet DSSG Meeting DSSG Meeting
Invites for cycle 2 Round 1 (R1) 2015 * DSSG Workshop Cycle 2 – Round 1 applications to be submitted Validation Panel meet DSSG Meeting DSSG Meeting
Invites for Cycle 2 Round 2 (R2)
CHAPTER SIX [top]
The Quality Enhancement Process
As part of the Toolkit’s quality enhancement and monitoring strategy institutions that are validated will be required to undertake a series of processes which are designed to
enhance the quality and effectiveness of assessments and information on what action the institution has taken to improve the student experience;
identify strategies which have been implemented and have been effective; ensure continuous improvement of services; and
maintain a consistency of approach and standards. The strategy includes:
• institutions providing a signed statement from the senior member of staff who is accountable for an institution’s validation application;
• a self evaluation questionnaire completed by the institution;
• provision of three anonymised needs assessment reports (one provided by the institution and two selected by SAAS);
• attendance at DSSG workshops and evidence of staff participation in other forms for CPD,
• peer review visits,
• evidence of student feedback
The time line for the full a validation cycle will be: Year 1 Application
Year 2 Statement of confirmation & possible peer group visit
Year 3 Self Evaluation Questionnaire and needs assessment reports Year 4 Statement of confirmation & possible peer group visit if not
already taken place. Repeat the process from Year 1
Annual Statement
At the end of year 1 and year 3 of the four year validation cycle, a validated institution will be required to provide a signed statement which confirms that (a) the institution is providing, at a minimum, the same level of service for which it was originally validated to provide (b) the institution has identified and is in the process of improving the level of service it is providing to students and this is supported by specific examples (c) staff have undertaken appropriate CPD during the course of the year (d) students have had the opportunity to provide feedback through a variety of appropriate means on the services provided and as a result of the feedback the statement should provide examples of changes that have been made.
A copy of the statement, which will require sign off by the senior member of staff – normally the Principal or their delegated authority - responsible for the institution’s application, is available in Appendix 6 (see also Chapter 5 & Chapter 6)
An institution may decide that they are temporarily unable to continue to remain validated and should therefore declare in their statement that they wish to be placed on hold. Further information about this particular process is outlined later in the chapter.
Institution Self Evaluation Questionnaire & Needs Assessment Reports
In the third year of the validation process a validated institution will be asked to submit a self evaluation questionnaire, confirming either that they are able to continue with or temporarily suspend their validation to carry out student needs assessment for DSA applications.
The questionnaire will provide the institution with an opportunity to provide information on any changes in staffing which occurred since the institution was validated, progress on ongoing developments and improvements in the needs assessment process and quality assurance processes. For example, one of the key principles of the Toolkit is that institutions should adopt a student-centred approach in conducting needs assessments and in their approach to supporting students with disability-related additional needs. To this end, the quality enhancement and monitoring strategy for each institution must include a mechanism for students to feed back their ideas and experiences of their needs assessment and the implementation of identified support strategies. Evidence of how this feedback impacts on improvement of service and processes should be included as part of the questionnaire.
When institutions submit the completed questionnaire they are requested to include one anonymous needs assessment applications. SAAS will also provide two
anonymous needs assessment applications from that institution, this will ensure that the panel will have an opportunity to consider the quality of a range reports. The needs assessment report must be no more than a year old and have been completed by a member of staff who is currently employed by the institution applying to remain validated.
If the validation panel feel that the information provided in the questionnaire is insufficient or they have knowledge that some of the information presented in the questionnaire may be inaccurate or out of date the panel can request additional information from the institution. If the institution either fails to provide the information or the further information is still deemed to be insufficient then the institution will be placed on hold until the next validation round and their students should be referred to a validated access centre for assessment in the normal way.
Institutions are reminded that while the needs assessment form submitted to the panel will be made anonymous it is important that students are made aware from the offset that their forms may be used for the purposes of Quality Assurance, therefore SAAS will include a section within the report proforma that the form will be used by SAAS for quality assurance purposes.
Examples of relevant evidence and best practice can be found in the Best Practice website
On Hold
As outlined previously an institution may decide that it would be in the best interest of staff and students if their validation status was temporarily placed on hold by SAAS. An institution can inform SAAS, the Scottish Government or the DSSG of their decision at any point during the validation cycle and this decision should be conveyed in writing either by letter, e-mail, in the signed statement or within the questionnaire response.
If an institution on hold wishes to regain their validation status they will be required to submit the self evaluation questionnaire. Within the questionnaire the institution must clearly explain what processes are now in place to ensure that they can provide the level of service for which they were originally validated.
If the members of the validation panel feel that the information provided in the questionnaire is insufficient they can request additional information from the institution. If the institution either fails to provide the information or it is still deemed to be insufficient then the institution will remain on hold until the next validation round and their students should be referred to a validated access centre for assessment in the normal way.
Workshops
The Scottish Government, on behalf of the DSSG, will facilitate annual regional workshops designed for institution staff to share practice and experience and to facilitate communication and discussion on issues relevant to the toolkit. SAAS will also lead a section designed to share best practice on the completion of needs assessment forms and a “Dos and Dont’s Session.
The workshops will be held annually in February or March and will take place in Glasgow and Edinburgh. Further information on dates and venue will be supplied in the letters that will be issued each year in December. Attending workshops will be seen as a necessary part of the validation process and it is expected that institutions who have been validated will contribute to the sharing of best practice which may include presenting on their own practice or facilitating a break out discussion.
Institutional Peer Support
We would continue to encourage those institutions who are applying for validations for the first time or reapplying for validation to take advantage of the knowledge and experience of those institutions that have been validated for some time. Where no existing relationship or networks exist between institutions, we are happy to facilitate and support this happening as requested.
We would encourage the continuing development of regional network as a way of ongoing knowledge and as a dissemination tool between institutions outwith facilitated workshops and specific institutional peer support.
Peer Group Visits
In response to the outcome of the evaluation of the toolkit pilot, the members of the validation panel will carry out a peer visit to institutions within the four year cycle. This approach will enable the validation panel to identify for themselves the work that is being carried out based on the toolkit application submitted by the institution, which forms the basis for its validation. It will also offer institutions an opportunity to share the experience of peers.
The visits will take place between December and March with institutions being contacted in writing approximately 3 months in advance to arrange the visit. While these visits will not take place during the first year of the new Toolkit, it is our intention that they will be developed over the next few years and, as identified through the evaluation responses, should be seen as a developmental opportunity for both the institution and the Panel Members who are undertaking the visit.
SAAS Student Satisfaction Survey
In addition to any student survey conducted by institutions SAAS will also continue to undertake their DSA focused student questionnaire. The results of which will be conveyed to institutions and published on the SAAS website at
CHAPTER SEVEN [top]
The Toolkit of Quality Indicators
The Toolkit of Quality Indicators comprises of the following elements: • The Guidance Document
• The Quality Indicators
• The DSA Assessment Forms • The Toolkit Application Forms
• Ongoing Quality Enhancement Procedures The Guidance Document
This Guidance has been produced to assist institutions and those individuals involved in the assessment process to effectively and appropriately assess the needs of students with disabilities to ensure that they are appropriately assisted to compete on a level playing field with their peers.
The Quality Indicators
We have revised the order of the Quality Indicators hoping to provide clearer links between the indicators and the assessment process from start to finish.
Starting with the adequateness and appropriateness of resources for undertaking the assessment and leading on to considering the knowledge and skills of the assessor responsible for the assessment, it is only then appropriate to consider the learning environment and the requirements upon the individual student within it. This then leads to consideration of the support aids and strategies that may be appropriate to each individual student and then to consider how these aids and strategies will be adapted throughout the period of the course. The student should be made fully aware of what to expect in terms of the assessment process, kept informed throughout and also after the assessment in terms of the progress and outcomes of the recommendations.
Having taken all these considerations into account the assessor should then be in a position where an accurate and appropriate Needs Assessment can be undertaken and the results can then be communicated to both the student and all relevant stakeholders in a timely manner. Finally, opportunities should be available to the student for a review of support at any time if appropriate, but at least on an annual basis. This should be sought from both the student and all others involved in each specific situation to inform service development and encourage continuous improvement.
Clarity of assessment process and expectations of that process will enable students to fully utilise complaints/appeals procedures in place, should that be necessary. Within each Indicator we have tried to give examples of Good Practice and this will be reviewed and updated as the Guidance is updated annually.
The revised Quality Indicators are:
1. The needs assessment process is adequately resourced.
2. The assessor(s) have the knowledge and skills to make well-informed decisions about study aids and support strategies.
3. The tasks the student will be expected to perform and the learning
environment(s) in which the student will be operating, are always taken into account.
4. When study aids and support strategies are considered, the focus is on their appropriateness for the individual student on a particular course.
5. A continuum of study aids and strategies is explored.
6. Decisions regarding the support needs of the student are made in a timely manner and communicated to relevant stakeholders.
7. Feedback about the appropriateness of the assessment recommendations is routinely sought and this data is analysed.
Evidence Requirements
Applications should provide evidence to demonstrate how they are meeting each of the seven indicators.
For example, in order to demonstrate that the needs assessment process is adequately resourced an application could describe the time and resources allocated for the conduct of assessments (plus associated preparation and follow-up) and how they reflect the level of the responsibility and complexity of the task. More detail might be provided about what rooms, equipment and other resources will be used. With regard to the assessor(s) having the knowledge and skills to make well-informed decisions about study aids and support strategies, the applications should provide detail about who will be participating in the needs assessment process ie members within the Disability Services, technology advisers, other internal institutional staff and external practitioners/organisations. Furthermore it will be important to highlight who has overall responsibility for assuring the quality of the needs assessment process, including the reports.
One way of demonstrating that the institution has taken into account the tasks the student will be expected to perform and the learning environment(s) for this would be to include a description or a flow chart to show how information about the student's course including mode(s) of delivery, demands, and content is gathered and used to inform assessment recommendations.
When study aids and support strategies are considered, and complex or unfamiliar aids and strategies are to be provided, the application should explain how students
will be given the opportunity to trial the equipment before assessment recommendations are finalised. This may involve the loan of equipment from a third party.
To show how a continuum of study aids and strategies is explored, institutions should provide information on how the institution will monitor whether or not the student’s support aids will need to change during period of study to enable the student to become more independent.
To demonstrate how decisions regarding the support needs of the student are made in a timely manner and communicated to relevant stakeholders institutions could consider that previous successful applications have included timelines which indicate when applications will be processed; acknowledged; and the actual assessment appointment.
One of the main methods for highlighting how feedback about the appropriateness of the assessment recommendations is routinely sought and how this data is analysed, is to include results from student surveys and from surveys conducted by other stakeholders which have gauged satisfaction and degrees of success with recommended study aids and strategies. Best practice would also be to include an action plan of what activities have been undertaken as a result of feedback, to improve the service provided.
Other examples of evidence include the following, however please note that this is not intended to be an exhaustive list but should be used as a starting point for preparing an institution’s application:
• Students must have received information about their rights and responsibilities in connection with the application for support.
• Clear procedures and examples of service level agreements should be evident
• Facilities for assessment comply with, or exceed, minimum standards.
• Examples of where the service has been improved as a result of reinvestment of funding should be detailed
• Assessors, and their employers (or contractors) must have relevant qualifications and experience and they must also demonstrate an active commitment to continuing personal and professional development, for example including CVs and CPD logs for all relevant staff in the application
• All assessors must be authorised/ registered to provide assessment services and do so under the auspices of a recognised institution or agency.
• Roles and responsibilities, including those of the student, the host institution and those who participate in the needs assessment, must be explicitly stated in the assessment report and accepted by the relevant parties.
• Student’s permission to consult appropriately and to share information must always be sought.
• Feasibility of implementing assessment recommendations should be confirmed and documented.
• You should provide evidence of reasonable adjustments that have been made in anticipation of students with disabilities and prior to the DSA application as well as examples of the inclusive practices that are used by all students.
• Consultation and direct engagement with the student is an integral part of the assessment therefore you should demonstrate how information relevant to the assessment (student background, history and prior experience, etc) is sought and taken into account.
• Knowledge and understanding of potential barriers to learning should be demonstrated by assessor.
• Permission must be granted by the student for access to relevant reports/results and evidence should be provided that the student signed off the final version of their needs assessment report
• Assessment report must show evidence that the pros and cons of a variety of aids and strategies have been explained and demonstrated.
• With complex or unfamiliar aids and strategies, students must be given the opportunity to trial the equipment before assessment recommendations are finalised. This may involve the loan of equipment from a third party.
• Literature about the purpose and process of needs assessment must be readily available and clear/easy to understand.
• Applications for support are processed and acknowledged promptly. Assessment referrals are made without delay.
• Service providers aim to offer an assessment appointment within an agreed period (on receipt of completed documentation from student) - or to give a legitimate explanation for delay.
• Information about waiting times for assessment appointments is made available by service providers on request.
• Confidentiality is respected at all times and data storage and management complies with relevant legislation.
• Assessors/centres liaise regularly with suppliers of equipment and services and required standards are explicit. Examples of service level agreements: should be enclosed.
QUALITY INDICATORS FOR NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Indicator 1. The needs assessment process is adequately resourced Intent
Service providers acknowledge the importance of consistency and quality in the needs assessment process and this is reflected in the resources allocated to its operation.
Objectives
Assessment activities and assessors are adequately supported by the institution with which they are associated.
The issue of professional liability is addressed, with appropriate protection being given to all parties.
Implementation Guidelines & Best Practice
Judgements about ‘adequacy’ of provision are entrusted to institutions. Institutions must be satisfied that the provision for assessment is adequately resourced before making an application to become an approved provider.
Applications should provide clear statements and practical examples - eg copies of student information leaflets and details about the equipment held by the institution rather than an inventory of all equipment available via the BRITE centre.
Indicator 2. The assessor(s) have the knowledge and skills to make well-informed decisions about study aids and support strategies.
Intent
A reliable process is in place to confirm that all assessors are impartial and have the skills to identify the study aids and strategies needed to remove barriers to student performance.
When a student presents with issues that are beyond the knowledge and scope of the assessor, additional advice from other sources can be sought.
eg – RNIB / RNID etc for external source of expertise
Objectives
Every person involved in undertaking the needs assessment (or contributing to one or more aspect of the same) is appropriately qualified and experienced.
Assessors have regular opportunities to update their knowledge and skills.
Communication between assessors is encouraged and access to specialist expertise is facilitated by appropriate networking.
Implementation Guidelines & Best Practice
It is crucial to the credibility of the needs assessment process that assessors’ judgements are well informed – and not perceived to be influenced by material gain for their institution or themselves.
Assessors listed in any application should be in the current employment of the institution or the validated access centre and therefore be subject to the institution’s or access centre’s quality assurance procedures.
Evidence should be provided on how assessors and or those involved in the needs assessment work together to produce the report and to share practice. For example, regular team meetings.
Indicator 3. The tasks the student will be expected to perform and the learning environment(s) in which the student will be operating, are always taken into account
Intent
Decisions about the most appropriate study aids and strategies for the individual student are always made in the context of the student and their particular course at a particular institution.
The host institution fulfils its legal responsibilities and moral obligations to the student.
Objectives
Students are supported on an ongoing basis in their use of recommended study aids and support strategies.
Support needs are reviewed and updated as required to accommodate changing needs.
Compatibility between assistive aids and other forms of support – and provision made by (or arranged through) the institution is included
Implementation Guidelines & Best Practice
When making an assessment of need, it is important to establish the nature and extent, if any, of support already being received both on the course and in general by the institution. For example the institution may provide IT training such as use of
mind mapping tools etc for all students or the institution may have accessible software available on all their computers as standard.
Assessors should be mindful that recommendations should not be solely or primarily resource driven. Study aids and support strategies should be recommended because they best meet the identified needs. This will not always equate with what is ‘easiest to provide’.
Assessors should consider strategies which will allow the student to become an independent learner and be able to transfer their strategies into employment or post graduate studies.
NB. The student reserves the right to withhold information about his/her disability from the host institution but in doing so should be made aware of the possible impact on the support that can be offered.
Indicator 4. When study aids and support strategies are considered, the focus is on their appropriateness for the individual student on a particular course Intent
Recommendations regarding the need for assistive technology and other types of support are determined by the unique educational needs of each individual student and not based on diagnosis alone.
The student is recognised as a key source of information about how his/her situation impacts on study and learning experiences.
Objectives
To identify what aids and support are most likely to enable the student to achieve his/her potential and to ensure that this is reflected in the assessment recommendations.
To take into account the student’s level of confidence and/or ‘readiness’ to use proposed study aids and supports.
Implementation Guidelines & Best Practice
Need to consider sources of information for example:
• Pre Application information such as attendance at school review meeting, visit to the institution or disability statement.
• Application ie UCAS form or pre entry interview. • Start of the course ie inviting the student to a meeting • Internal referral
• Self referral • 3rd party evidence
Direct engagement with the student is central to the needs assessment process. Typically, this will occur through face-to-face contact. However, circumstances that would make this difficult do occasionally arise, e.g. a student is in hospital at the time of application or unable to make the journey to the assessment venue. Rarely, an assessor may travel to the student – or conduct some aspects of the assessment by other means (videoconferencing, telephone, third party assistance).
Indicator 5. A continuum of study aids and strategies is explored Intent
The assessor considers a range of tools and strategies – including no tech, low tech and high tech – to meet the needs of the student.
There is not an automatic assumption that assistive technology will always have a role in the support plan – or that having a disability necessarily equates with having additional support needs.
Objectives
The assessment process provides opportunities to explore a range of support strategies.
A good match is achieved between the need/desire for assistive technology and support and the provisions made as a result of the assessment.
Where possible, study aids and strategies should facilitate the same range of options and curricular choices for the student as is available to his/her peers on the course. Opportunity exists for updating of study aids and strategies as needs change.
Implementation Guidelines & Best Practice
It is acknowledged that some students will:
a) benefit from more time to try out equipment than the assessment itself allows, or
b) be assessed as needing access to bespoke or highly specialised aids. Assessors may defer final recommendations until after this has occurred.
The institution should regularly review whether the needs of the student are being met or if changes are required. This should be proactively undertaken on the part of the institution and not left to the discretion of the student.
Indicator 6. Decisions regarding the support needs of the student are made in a timely manner and communicated to relevant stakeholders
Intent
The purpose, process and relevance of the needs assessment are understood by all concerned.
Decisions and recommendations are agreed with the student, documented in accordance with relevant legislation and clearly communicated.
Stakeholders have confidence in all aspects of the service.
Objectives
To provide an assessment service which is efficient and effective from the perspective of all stakeholders?
To avoid undue delays at any stage in the process.
Implementation Guidelines & Best Practice
It is important to provide ongoing and realistic information about waiting times for service users and stakeholders.
The length of time from application to assessment can vary according to the time of year and the number of other students waiting to be assessed (and sometimes the nature of the student’s needs – if more complex or requiring specialised assessment).
Evidence should be provided as to how the information regarding the student’s support requirements is shared with other relevant parties.
Indicator 7. Feedback about the appropriateness of the assessment recommendations is routinely sought and this data is analysed
Intent
Assessment services, study aids and support strategies are effective and fit for purpose and value for money is assured.
Students who believe that their experience of the assessment process has been less than satisfactory have a means by which to seek appropriate recourse.
Objectives
Recommended study aids and strategies lead to the levelling of the educational playing field for recipients, without creating (or being perceived to create) unfair or material advantage.
Only suppliers of aids and services who adhere to agreed standards of provision are identified in the assessment report.
Feedback from stakeholders (sponsors, students, assessors and institutions) is gathered and used to inform service development and encourage continuous improvement.
Students can expect that legitimate complaints about any aspect of the process will be handled promptly, courteously and effectively by the relevant agency.
Implementation Guidelines & Best Practice
This framework is intended for use by service providers and by those involved in assuring the quality of the needs assessment process at all stages.
Applications should not contain bland statements but provide specific examples
The DSA Assessment Forms
Guidance and proforma to assist with the undertaking of a needs assessment and reporting to SAAS are contained within Chapter 8
The Validation Application
Guidance on applications for validation can be found at Chapter 5
Quality Enhancement Procedures
Guidance on the quality enhancement process can be found at Chapter 6 and the relevant forms at Appendix 6 and Appendix 7
