The Efficacy of the Commonwealth Respite Care Centres of the Australian Red Cross - Research Paper Example

Commonwealth Carer: Meta-evaluation report Name: Details: Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Executive Summary 3 Introduction 3 Methodology 4 Findings 5 Conclusions & Recommendations 13 References 14 Executive Summary This paper is based on the evaluation of Commonwealth Carer Respite Centres managed by the Australian Red Cross, Perth Western Australia (Commonwealth Carer project) which assessed the efficacy of the Commonwealth Respite Care Centres (CCRCs) of the Australian Red Cross (ARC). The evaluation focused on a small sample of carers who had earlier participated in the survey conducted in the Commonwealth Carer project. Data gathered from the evaluation indicated that the central statement made by the Commonwealth Carer project regarding the high satisfaction level in carers about ARC CCRCs was indeed true. Data also showed that despite a smaller number of survey participants in the current paper, the results for both the papers were similar in nature, with very minor differences in results. The paper concludes with recommendations on how to improve the research and make the data more accurate. Introduction This paper discusses various issues related to carer satisfaction at the ARC Commonwealth Respite Carer Centres that were discovered during the evaluation of the research paper “Commonwealth Carer Respite Centres managed by the Australian Red Cross, Perth Western Australia”. The research paper had found that the carers were ‘extremely satisfied' with the CCRC of the ARC. They also praised the professionalism of the ARC CCRC staff members and stated that the centres had positive impact on their lives. The report also stated that the carers were not dissatisfied with the Australian Red Cross. It was also stated that the ARC was able to meet the guidelines specified by the NRCP. Carers in all the four CCRCs analysed for the study expressed satisfaction about the workings of these CCRCs. Even individual data from each CCRC revealed that the carers had positive image about the centres. Methodology The evaluation of the Commonwealth carer project by Edith Cowan University was put into the perspective of a theoretical platform as the aim of the paper is to understand the requirements of carers and provide a comprehensive analysis on how to fulfill all the needs of carers. For this paper, data was collected to make comparative analysis by collecting sample data from the four selected CCRCs that were analysed in the University project. The data from the four centres expected to prove whether the conclusions and recommendations made in Commonwealth carer project were true or not. Further, it would also help in finding out if there had been any anomaly in the results of any of the centres and whether the carers in every centre had similar opinion (Denzin et al., 2005). This paper undertook qualitative method to collect data by conducting interviews through email and over the telephone (Patton, 2002). The major participants for this report were the carers at these four centres. For this report, 10 carers were interviewed from each centre. This also helped in finding out their perspectives from each centres and analyse them with the collective responses (Loseke et al., 2007). Although, such a method of sample survey helped in evaluating the data of the Commonwealth carers project, it was not able to provide any trends due to the limited number of participants (Fischer, 2005). However, the analysis of the data collected for this paper did indicate that the central statement of the Commonwealth carers project i.e. carers at ARC CCRCs are indeed satisfied with the centres is indeed true. In order to conduct the sample survey, the same questioner was used that was employed in the Commonwealth Carers project. This helped in providing a common base for the questions and analysing the answers in an efficient manner (Babbie, 2005). Further, for this paper, approvals were also received from the Edith Cowan University Human Ethics Committee as per the guidelines laid down by the National Health and Medical Research Council about ethical conduct while undertaking a research. Findings All the carers interviewed in the Commonwealth carer project shared some or the other relationship with the care recipient. Therefore, for this paper as well, the relationship between the carer and the care recipient were clearly defined. Out of the forty carers, 15 were taking care of their spouse, 10 of their child, 7 of their parent, 3 of their friends, 3 of their grandchild and 2 of their siblings. Some of the major findings that came out from this paper and their comparison with the Commonwealth carer project are as follows: Carer support planning: The Commonwealth carer project had stated that majority of the participants were happy with the quality of services provided by the CRCs that met all their requirements. As per the Commonwealth carer project, around 54 per cent of the participant stated that the services were very good, while only 5 per cent were not satisfied with the services. In the current paper, despite the lower number of participants, the result was almost similar with 55 per cent ranking the services very good and 6 per cent expressing dissatisfaction. Figure 1: Rating quality of CRC in meeting carer requirements Commonwealth carer project No. of participants: 172 Figure 2: Rating quality of CRC in meeting carer requirements Current paper No. of participants: 40 Information on respite services: The Commonwealth Carers project indicated that ARC CCRCs were able to provide the required information to the carers and the carers also rated that the services provided were of good quality. In the Commonwealth Carers project around 77 per cent respondents were satisfied with the information provided on the respite services. However, 8 per cent (15 participants) were also expressed their dissatisfaction. With regards to the current project, the percentage of people expressing satisfaction remained the same (77%), however, the percentage of people expressing dissatisfaction increased to 11 per cent (4 people). Nonetheless, it cannot be stated that for carers could have been dissatisfied with the information on the various services provided by ARC CCRCs as the number of participants are too low for any conclusions. Also, the percentage difference between the two was only around 3 per cent, and would not have significant impact. Figure 3: Rating quality of information provided by CRCs Commonwealth carer project No. of participants: 177 Figure 4: Rating quality of information provided by CRCs Current paper No. of participants: 40 Promptness in reply: Another important part of measuring the success of CRCs is to find out how prompt the centres were in responding to the request of the carers. Thus, in the Commonwealth Carer project the participants were asked to rate how prompt the CRCs were to respond to their requests. The results revealed that 92 per cent respondents were of the opinion that the centers were prompt in their responses for their queries and the quality of responses was also good. Only 1 per cent thought that the quality was very poor. Similar results were found in the sample survey for the current paper as well. Again 92 per cent stated that they found the responses given by the centers to be good. However, one change in this survey is that, instead of 1 per cent respondents finding the responses very poor as indicated in the earlier survey, 3 per cent respondents said that the information was of poor quality in the current paper. Nonetheless, this does not prove that no one thought of the information being very poor due to the difference in the number of respondents between both the surveys. Further, although the 3 per cent said that the information was of poor quality in the present survey, this 3 per cent only translates to one respondent. Figure 5: Rating quality of promptness in responding to request Commonwealth carer project No. of participants: 177 Figure 6: Rating quality of promptness in responding to request Current paper No. of participants: 40 Helpfulness of respite centre staff member: In order to understand the professionalism and the commitment level of the ARC CCRC staff members, the respondents were asked to rate how helpful the staff at the centres were to solve the issues of the carers. In the Commonwealth Carers project, it was found that the staff was very professional and committed towards their work and helped the carers in every possible manner. As the question asked to the respondents were a bit subjective in nature and was perspective based, it was natural to find some deviation in the results. It was found that in the Commonwealth Carers project, 74 per cent respondents stated that the quality of help provided by the centre staff was of very good quality, while in the current research, the percentage decreased to 62 per cent for the same parameter. The percentage of respondents stating that the help provided was of average nature increased considerably in the current research. Although, it may be inferred that the people who participated in the current research may have biasness against the ARC centres, the issue still should be looked at in-depth and emphasis should be given on the people who had expressed their dissatisfaction at the level of help provided by the center staff. Figure 7: Rating quality of helpfulness of Centre staff members Commonwealth carer project No. of participants: 177 Figure 8: Rating quality of helpfulness of Centre staff members Current paper No. of participants: 40 Meeting specific needs: The findings from the report had established that the centers were able to fulfill most of the requirements of the carers and they were satisfied with the generic information provided by the center staff members. However, in order to establish that the centers were able to address all the issues of the carers in a proper manner, it was essential to find out whether the centers addressed the specific needs and situations of the carers in the similar manner as they did for any generic situation. In the Commonwealth Carer project, it was found that 85 per cent of the respondents stated that the quality of solutions provided for their specific requirements were good. But, 5 per cent also stated that the quality was bad. Similarly, in the current research, the respondents stated that the quality of solutions for specific needs was good (84 per cent). Here as well, 6 per cent found the quality poor. Thus, both the survey results point out that the ARC CCRCs were able to provide quality services to carers and fulfilled even their specific requirements in an efficient manner. Figure 9: Rating quality of services to solve specific needs/situations Commonwealth carer project No. of participants: 170 Figure 10: Rating quality of services to solve specific needs/situations Current paper No. of participants: 40 Although, the entire questioner that was used for the Commonwealth Carers project was repeated in the current research as well, it would be too difficult to analyse every single result. Thus, only a few selected results were discussed above. Further, most of the results discussed provided direct correlation to the satisfaction levels of the carers with the ARC CCRCs. This also helped in finding out and validating whether the data analysed in the Commonwealth Carers project and the current research were similar in nature or not. The report also focused on provided individual CCRC centre results however, such a comparison would not be possible in this paper due to the limitation of length of the paper. However, giving a larger perspective it can be stated that the individual CCRCs provided the same level of service as seen in the collective centers. As the sample survey only considered 10 respondents per center, it was not extensive for formulating a result or generating a trend. The overall analysis of the interviews for the current research found the ARC CCRCs are indeed giving quality and efficient services to the carers. The satisfaction level among the carers was found to be high in most of the survey results, which was similar to the earlier report. Only some minor differences in per cent were reported, which were too low to have any impact on the final results. The carers were especially happy with the quality of information provided by the CCRC. They also stated that the CCRC were prompt in their response time and gave them relevant information. Further, the CCRC staff was as apt in giving specific information as they were providing generic ones. Thus, on an overall basis, the current research was able to evaluate that the results provided on the satisfaction level of carers regarding ARC CCRCs as well as validate the results. Conclusions & Recommendations The evaluation of the Commonwealth Carers project found that the satisfaction level among the carers regarding ARC CCRCs is quite high. This was also validated in the current project as well. However, there were also a few issues that could be found from the evaluation. First and foremost, the evaluation found that there was discrepancy in the number of participants in the Commonwealth Carers project. It was seen that in some figures, the number of participants were indicated as 177, while in some it was 170 or 172. Although, the report had stated that there were a total of 177 respondents, not all were accounted for in every question. This might mean that not everybody had attempted to answer all the questions and had left some of them blank. However, such a practice may skew the results and would not be able to provide a common platform for analysis. The base for the qualitative analysis i.e. the number of participants should remain constant for the researcher to conduct further queries. Therefore, it is recommended that in case of any blank answer, the researcher should go back to the respondent and ask for an answer to the question, even if the respondent replies with a no response. Incomplete questioner should not be included in the analysis and only fully filled in forms should be the part of the analysis in order to get a complete picture. The evaluation also found that in some questions, the percentage difference between the answers given in the Commonwealth Carers project and the current one was not much. Most provided similar percentage level. However, with regards to the quality of helpfulness of the centre staff members, there was a difference of 12 per cent between the respondents who said the quality was very good in the Commonwealth Carers project (74 per cent) and the current project (62 per cent). This should be investigated and further research should be conducted to find whether there have been any changes in the mindset of the carers regarding the helpfulness of the centre staff. References Babbie, Earl R. (2005).The Basics of Social Research. Thomson Wadsworth, 174. Denzin, Norman K. & Lincoln, Yvonna S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research”. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.), 1-32. Fischer, C.T. (Ed.) (2005). Qualitative research methods for psychologists: Introduction through empirical studies. Academic Press. Loseke, Donileen R. & Cahil, Spencer E. (2007). Publishing qualitative manuscripts: Lessons learned. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative Research Practice: Concise Paperback Edition, 491-506. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Read More