National moderation panel – 19th October 2016

Key messages

The panel would like to express thanks to the NQSWs and employers whose evidence was selected for national moderation. We reiterate the key role of this process in the achievement of national consistency in the assessment of the ASYE.

In total the panel scrutinised28pieces of ASYE evidence and some accompanying internal moderation reports. We also reviewed 19 external moderation partnership summary reports for the first time.

The following key messages have been identified as a result of this process:

ASYE evidence

The panel saw some good examples of how the ASYE framework is now being implemented in its entirety for the first time as reports from NQSWs who had completed ASYE were reviewed. It was very encouraging that the number of evidence sets that were rated good by panel members had increased from 4 in March 2016 to 13 in October 2016. Overall, this indicates that the standard of evidence produced by NQSWs and the standard of employer assessment was improving and the panel felt thatthere was greater consistency throughout the country.

March 2016 panel ratings October 2016 panel ratings

Good / 4
Average / 19
Poor / 3
Total / 26
Good / 13
Average / 11
Poor / 4
Total / 28

Some excellent RSPAs and CRLs were identified by panel members. These demonstrated the skills and capability of NQSWs and assessors and provided a range of evidence of progression over the year through the provision of good support, development opportunities and supervision and rigorous assessment against the Professional Capabilities Framework and the Knowledge and Skills Statement (KSS).The judgement of the assessor was clearly evidenced in the work of the NQSW.

There is still, however, considerable variation in both the quality of assessments and subsequently the capability of assessors. The following observations from the panel are intended to help employers and assessors as they continue to embed ASYE within their organisational practice:

  1. ASYE employers are asked to ensure that all documentation needs to be sent for review by the national panel on request. This includes direct observations, feedback from people in need of care and support and sign off of practice documentation. The panel was disappointed that some key documents were missing, sometimes NQSW critical reflection logs. We would like to remind employers that participation in the national moderation process is a requirement of the KSS and a condition of receiving funding for ASYE.
  1. ASYE partnerships are advised to take care over the use of good practice exemplars as the panel was concerned that this could lead to plagiarism. There was some evidence of cutting and pasting, including a couple of reports which referred to an NQSW by an incorrect name. The formulation of key messages from good practice reports is an alternative approach.
  1. There is still some inconsistency regarding references within the documents to the PCF and the KSS. Again, as highlighted in the messages from the March 2016 panel, there wereonly limited references to the holistic assessment outcomes. It would appear that neither NQSWs nor assessors are making full use of these outcomes, which link both the KSS and the PCF. Skills for Care isconsidering what further guidance is needed to support assessors and NQSWs in order to meet the Chief Social Worker’s requirement to provide evidence against both the KSS and the PCF.
  2. There should be clear links between the CRL and RSPA to provide a full, balanced picture of the NQSW’s capability from both the NQSW’s evidence and reflections and the assessor reports. Professional documentation should also be verified. In some instances the evidence relied too heavily on reports from either the NQSW or the assessor. Assessors and NQSWs are reminded to refer in more detail to the guidance that is contained in the documentation when completing each of the sections. This will help them to ensure that all the necessary information is included.
  3. The NQSW should complete the Professional Development Plan (PDP) in partnership with the manager; sometimes it was not clear how the PDP had been agreed.
  4. The vast majority of employers are now using Skills for Care documentation: critical reflection log (CRL) and record of support and progressive assessment (RSPA). A small number of employers are still using the pre-April 2015 templates without any modifications; these are no longer acceptable as they do not support assessment against the Knowledge and Skills Standards. Employers may use their own ASYE documentation as long as all of the requirements of the KSS are addressed. For the purpose of moderation, it would be helpful if employers utilising their own paperwork would highlight this.
  5. Some ASYE programmes are delivered by employers in partnership with HEIs. Whilst these arrangements can be very positive by providing research-informed development programmes and, in some cases, academic scrutiny of assessments, employers are reminded that they have overall responsibility for the NQSW’s assessment and the role of the HEI in assessment processes needs to be clearly recorded.
  6. Skills for Care are undertaking a “light-touch” review of the CRL and RSPC in consultation with employers to make the materials more user-friendly. Any changes to resources will be presentational only and will not alter the intention or content of the documentation. The revised documentation will be available in March 2017. Please see the social work briefing for further information.

Review of external ASYE partnership’s summary reports

External moderation is key to achieving national consistency of employer assessment within the ASYE (adults). It is therefore a requirement of the ASYE framework that all employers offering the ASYE should be a member of an external moderation partnership, have a current Memorandum of Cooperation (MoC) and submit moderation summary reports on request.We would like to express thanks to all the partnerships who have completed a MoC in the past year and to those who revised their MoC on request from the national panel or Skills for Care

The panel reviewed some excellent examples of external moderation templates which provided constructive feedback to individuals and employers. Some good practice examples of templates and moderation processes will be available through the moderator development workshops taking place in November 2016 and January/March 2017; they will also be available in the Spring on the website.

There was evidence that internal and external moderation processes are starting to have a positive impact on practice and raising standards. Encouragingly, some employers stated on the templates that the feedback from partnership moderation and the national panel had been taken on board by employers and assessors and had contributed to improving practice.

The messages below summarise the panel’s feedback:

  1. The panel decided that in order to gain an overview of ASYE activity and issues requiring further consideration, partnership summary reports covering all external moderation will be requested for review by the national panel. Some minor revisions will be made to the templates before March 2017 to support partnerships in provision of the following information:
  • Confirmation that random sampling has taken place, the number of Adult NQSW evidence sets reviewed and the number from which the sample was drawn. This is particularly important when the external moderation process includes Children’s services
  • Reporting of all fails, borderlines and withdrawals from members of the ASYE partnership with details of the outcomes.
  • Action plans recorded on the template need to be specific regarding timescales and responsibilities
  • All moderators need to be registered social workers
  • The period of time covered by the external moderation summary report
  1. Some private and voluntary organisations are finding it difficult to participate in external partnerships;this needs further consideration.
  2. Whilst it is recognised that the external moderation process is still not fully embedded and that some partnerships have reviewed partial evidence to monitor quality during the implementation stage, it is anticipated that in the future only full sets of evidence will be reviewed by the external moderation panel.

Compliance and promoting consistency

The panel was concerned that a significant number of organisations had not submitted evidence or responded to an evidence request despite reminders.

Employers are reminded that they need to adhere to the process for promoting national consistency of employer assessment outlined in the Chief Social Worker’s Knowledge and Skills Statement.The national moderation panel agreed that Skills for Care need to be transparent in their approach to supporting employers adhere to the KSS and also in the steps they will take when employers are not complying. The panel agreed that a four – step process will be followed in the case of non-compliance. This involves:

Stage / Response
Pre – panel / Email to request evidence again or ask for reasons why it is not available
Post - panel / Formal letter from panel stating KSS requirements and asking for response within given timescales as to why evidence was not submitted and whether support is needed to comply with KSS
Review response (if provided) / Consider whether response is reasonable , explore options for support if requested and agree formal, final response
Final response / Letter confirming response which could include:
  • accepting reasons provided for non-submission
  • providing support and guidance
  • Withdrawal of second stage funding
With all of the above ensure organisation is asked to submit evidence to panel again at earliest possible opportunity