The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

SECTION 3: THE TELEPHONE HELPLINE

3.1 Introduction

In the following section, we first summarise information about the telephone helpline which was provided by Enquire for the year 2004-05. Subsequently, we present data from the questionnaire surveys of service users and professionals and interviews with members of the Enquire team, SEED staff and external key informants.

3.2 Call statistics

In the periods April 2004 - March 2005, Enquire received 3,034 calls to the telephone helpline. Details of 2,063 calls were recorded on the database, an average of 7.9 calls recorded on the database per working day. This represents an increase of 2.2% on 2003-2004. The remaining 971 calls related to publication requests, signposting to other agencies, publicity calls and other matters. Eighty seven e-mail and two letter enquiries were received. Two contacts were made via textphone. The average time from receiving an enquiry to getting a response back to the person making the enquiry was one hour and nine minutes, and for written queries was one hour. An onward referral was made in relation to 40 per cent of cases.

3.3 Status of caller

The vast majority of calls came from parents or carers, with professionals making up a much smaller group. Over the year, only three calls were made to the helpline by children and young people, although fourteen calls were made by child advocates. The table below provides a breakdown of callers.

Table 3.1: Status of caller to the telephone helpline

3.4 Subject matter of calls

The Enquire database records information on the nature of enquiries and the table below indicates the six areas where questions were asked.

Table 3.2: Nature of helpline enquiries

Note: Other calls were not categorised.

3.5 Geographical spread of calls

Enquire's annual report for 2004 - 05 includes information on the geographical spread of calls per 10,000 population aged 0-19. It appears that a high proportion of calls came from the cities (Dundee City, 10.0; Edinburgh, 13.3; Glasgow, 10.7; Stirling 11.8). Some rural areas also had high call rates (Aberdeenshire, 10.9; Highland, 13.5; Orkney, 12.8; Perth & Kinross, 15.1; Shetland, 10.4; Western Isles, 13.2). Areas with relatively few calls included urban areas on the west of the country (East Ayrshire, 3.7; East Renfrewshire, 5.1; North Lanarkshire, 4.4; North Ayrshire, 5.3; West Dunbartonshire, 3.4). It was suggested by Enquire that the prevalence of calls might reflect recent training activities which had raised awareness.

3.6 Referrals

In 39% of cases, callers were referred to other agencies. The Enquire annual report notes that efforts were made to refer people to a local point of contact, and 110 callers were referred to the local education officer. In addition to local authority services, referrals were also made to statutory or public bodies and voluntary organisations (see table below).

Table 3.3: Onward referrals

3.7 Development of helpline staff

All staff recruited to work on the helpline undergo a training programme, which includes disability awareness training and an input from staff of the Govan Law Centre. Enquire is working towards Telephone Helpline Association accreditation.

3.8 Database development

The database is currently being developed to accommodate a more sophisticated system of monitoring contacts with Enquire. This includes a referrals database and a system for recording new calls, viewing outstanding calls, finding existing callers, recording sending out bulk publications and validating all data entry.

3.9 Views of Enquire/Children in Scotland staff

It was pointed out that the telephone helpline was an important component of a multi-faceted service. Although parents were by far the largest user group, local authority employees and voluntary organisation workers also used the service. Very few calls were made to the helpline by children, although there was an increased use by child advocates (although the reason for categorising a caller as a child advocate rather than a parent or a professional was not clear). There was an awareness that a Parliamentary Question had been asked about the number of calls made to the helpline. However, it was pointed out that the resource was intended to be tightly targeted, rather than a '999 type service', so that only people with a specific question about additional support needs would telephone. In the early days, a deliberate decision was made to begin the operation gradually and then to build up the volume of calls, to avoid the danger of 'trying to run before you can walk'. It was noted that whilst the use of the telephone helpline had increased relatively slowly, use of the Enquire website had increased much more rapidly and in future a decision would have to be made about the extent to which material could be web-based rather than conveyed via the telephone helpline.

The importance of the impartiality and accuracy of information conveyed on the telephone helpline was emphasised. It was noted that the information given to callers had never been found to be inaccurate, and this was important in terms of winning the confidence of local authorities which might initially have been sceptical of the service's value.

There had been internal discussions about the extent to which the hepline should offer more one-to-one support, which parents had indicated they might welcome. However, there were advantages in adopting an impartial position, and indeed advocacy was clearly not part of Enquire's existing remit. There was some disagreement among helpline assistants about the extent to which the transaction should be impersonal, as opposed to impartial. Some helpline assistants said that they never gave their name to callers, for fear of encouraging dependency, and this was in line with the Telephone Helpline Association's code of practice. Others said that they did give their name if requested.

A criticism made of the telephone helpline by an external organisation was that it was too impersonal. This organisation said they had plans to use conferencing facilities when speaking to people in distant locations, so that the caller could connect a face to the person who was giving them advice. A member of the management committee provided a slightly different angle on this debate, suggesting that advice had to be both 'emotionally supportive and comprehensible'. This was particularly the case for the most socially disadvantaged people, for whom picking up the telephone to ask for advice might be a major ordeal. Parents of children with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties were unlikely to call the helpline, and might need particular encouragement and empathy. As a general rule, the least socially enfranchised needed the highest degree of support. The management committee member pointed out that in order to gain real insight into the quality of the telephone helpline, it would be necessary to monitor the nature of the query and the quality of the response, and this was clearly beyond the remit of the evaluation.

3.10 Views of SEED staff

SEED staff also pointed out that the telephone helpline was only one aspect of Enquire's activities. The helpline had a rather slow start, and efforts had been made over the years to increase the volume of calls. An out-of-hours service and a local call rate number had been introduced. The unit cost of calls was quite high, but this was something which had to be lived with. The great strength of the service was its independence and impartiality. It should be a supportive, but definitely not an advocacy service.

3.11 Views of service users

Service users were also asked about the frequency with which they used the telephone helpline, compared with other aspects of Enquire's services. As expected, the telephone helpline was used less frequently than publications (see table below).

Table 3.4: Frequency of service use (service users)

The service user questionnaire asked respondents to indicate their views of the quality of the range of services provided by Enquire (see table below).

Table 3.5: The quality of services provided by Enquire (service users)

Of those who expressed an opinion, a very high proportion considered the helpline to be very good or fairly good, although about 45% of respondents reported that they had no opinion or did not respond to the question. A higher proportion of parents (47.3%) compared with professionals (38.7%) rated the helpline as very good, reflecting the greater use of the helpline by the former. It is important to note that 63.5% of parents, and 51.6% of professionals, reported that the person dealing with their enquiry was friendly, and similar proportions felt they were knowledgeable, helpful and provided a response relevant to the query.

An analysis was conducted of the comments written on the questionnaires. Seven respondents commented on the importance of the service provided by Enquire, and indicated that they felt empowered by the knowledge gleaned. Comments were also made on the competence and friendliness of the staff, coupled with their objectivity.

• After speaking to Enquire I felt stronger in approaching the head teacher about my son's rights and although I didn't get the result I wanted I felt empowered to change the situation and my son has moved school now.
• I phoned Enquire at a time when I really didn't know what to do. I was impressed that they took time to reassure me that I was right to be concerned and gave excellent advice as to what to try next with school management. They also made it clear that I was welcome to call back at anytime. Knowing that I had this support and knowledge behind me was invaluable.
• Very satisfied UNDERSTATES the help. Helped enormously in providing information and advice to help me deal with problems in my child's school.
• Very competent and friendly service
• I feel that Enquire has offered extremely valuable advice and help to my problems/questions.
• It was good to speak to someone with an overview but not involved in the particular case
• I found the service to be very efficient.
• I was very grateful to hear a friendly voice who was on my side when I was really up against the professionals involved with my son, they sent me out only relevant publications and encouraged me to phone back with follow-up info good or bad.
• Very good service/ accessible.

Three respondents suggested that the helpline could be more efficient in distributing publications, and another commented that publications ordered via the helpline took a long time to be delivered.

The issue of co-operation with other organisations and local authorities was raised. It was suggested that helpline assistants should have access to up-to-date lists of local solicitors specialising in additional support needs, but should also be more willing to refer on to other organisations such as ISEA, family advisers and carers support groups (see above for list of Enquire's most frequent referrals). A few comments referred to the need for access to more in-depth information about educational provision and more direct intervention:

• My specific enquiry, for a list of residential special needs schools could not be answered. I was specifically and helpfully supplied with a list of special needs schools throughout Scotland, and am having to trawl through each school to find out whether or not it is residential. It doesn't seem too big a task to interrogate the database in a number of different ways and it would be helpful if Enquire could supply this facility.
• A comprehensive checklist could be provided for parents looking at schools/nurseries. Parents don't know what to ask about to know how good the school would be for their child.
• Parents with children who have complex needs would benefit from a service where the enquiries are made on their behalf. I do not have time to make 10 phone calls to my local authority where one is passed from one person to another and no one seems able to deal with your issue.
• Enquire act on a neutral basis and reluctant to give direct advice. Parents sometime need more direct guidance on what steps to take or other agencies who can support your issue.

In addition, one respondent suggested that there should be a separate Child Helpline.

3.12 Views of local authority staff

Findings from the local authority staff survey confirmed that, in line with evidence from Enquire's database, the telephone helpline was used less frequently by local authority staff than by parents/carers (see Table 3.6 below). Of those who responded to the question of the quality of the helpline, all said it was very good or fairly good. Almost two thirds of those who completed the questionnaire ticked the no opinion box or did not respond, suggesting that local authority staff are not getting much feedback from parents on the quality of the helpline. This might indicate either a low level of use in respondents' local authorities, or a lack of dialogue with parents about sources of information and assistance.

Table 3.6: Frequency of service use (local authority staff)

Table 3.7: Quality of Enquire's services (local authority staff)

Of those who responded to the question about experiences of the Enquire helpline, all said staff were friendly, knowledgeable, helpful and provided a response relevant to the question. About a third of local authority respondents said they had e-mailed Enquire, and were satisfied with the speed of response, indicating that this was another route which practitioners found useful.

Comments written on the questionnaire indicated local authority concerns about being cut out of the information loop and worries about problems escalating through the intervention of a third party.

• Would be helpful when enquiry is made to Enquire, if you asked parents to contact the named person in the Council in the first instance.
• The current publications are very valuable for parents, carers and professionals alike.
• Any centrally based service can give only general advice to enquiries from different authorities. This based on the Act and the Code pf Practice. Any enquiries regarding 'local' services and provision should be referred back to the local authority.
• We had a case this year where a parent with a low level concern approached Enquire, having not raised it at school locally, and was advised to make a Freedom of Information request and copy to MSPs. This may have been a rogue event but it was inappropriate advice.
• Any advice to parents should re-emphasise that for this to work we will all have to have strong partnerships. Given the number of formal complaints routes now it is vital to resolve matter as close to source as possible.

Finally, there was a query about the accessibility of the service to children and young people:

• Are you sure your service is known to children and young people? If you are contacted by mobile phone, can the reply to the enquiry be accessed by text message?

3.13 Views of external key informants

A high proportion of interviewees said that they had not used the telephone helpline recently, and some had never used it at all. Their comments, therefore, tended to be based on what other people had told them. The overall impression from external key informants was that the information and advice provided by Enquire was useful and well-received, and that its impartiality and accuracy was important. It was also noted that, at a time when more responsibility was being devolved to schools, it was important that parents were told about minimum national standards and good practice. An educational psychologist commented:

We as a service have phoned the helpline. We also know of parents who have phoned for advice and we feel from our perspective the advice given was good, balanced and accurate.

However, the other four educational psychologists who were interviewed said that they had not used it themselves and neither had any of their colleagues as far as they were aware. They did not even know of any parents who had sought information and advice through the telephone helpline.

On the negative side, it was felt by a number of support organisations that, although Enquire was good at providing technically accurate information, they did not have enough up-to-date local knowledge to help parents penetrate local systems. In order to have accurate information about key contacts in local education and social work departments, health boards, voluntary organisations and advocacy groups, constant contact with those at the grassroots was necessary since changes amongst staff and voluntary groups were frequent. It was, however, acknowledged that this was likely to be very time-consuming.

One support organisation questioned whether Enquire spent enough time talking to parents about their problem to seek a constructive way forward, suggesting that mediation might be suggested at too early a point in the discussion:

They seem to push mediation, when this may not be the right way forward.

According to this support organisation,, parents often needed support over a longer period of time to identify an appropriate course of action If mediation was suggested as an option before all other avenues were exhausted, this might delay, rather than facilitate, a satisfactory resolution. A principal educational psychologist also said that it was felt in his local authority that Enquire sometimes 'fanned the flames of discontent' rather than encouraging understanding of the local authority's position. Rather than 'propelling parents into a confrontational stance', Enquire should focus much more on dispute resolution, which was the local authority's preferred approach:

Parents can get locked into a dispute which is in no-one's interests and this uses up a lot of time and energy at the local authority end.

A support organisation for deaf children/young people and their parents suggested that parents of deaf children were unlikely to approach Enquire, but would use a specialist organisation as a first port of call. Some parents of deaf children were deaf themselves, and they might not be aware that a text phone service was available, unless this was very widely advertised. Experience suggested that unless text phones were used regularly, the service might not be known about in the deaf community and those operating the equipment might not use it competently through lack of practice and familiarity, even if they had been trained. In addition, parents of deaf children and others with additional support needs were extremely disadvantaged and might have low levels of literacy. They were unlikely to glean much from a one-off telephone conversation, and there was a need for 'a huge amount of assistance'.

The need for the specialist input of peripatetic staff was also underlined by a development worker in an organisation for visually impaired children:

I do not believe Enquire has the in-depth knowledge to give advice about the education of children with VI or deafness and in relation to teachers in these areas. For example, looking at the Role of Professionals factsheet, there is only a small paragraph about what a Peri teacher does. If you ask any Peri teacher how they support parents and children at home, they will give a long list of services and skills. This information is not fully represented in their factsheets.

A development worker who had herself used the helpline said that her experience had varied. The person taking the call had often not been able to provide an instant response, but had returned the call reasonably quickly with a reply which was generally accurate, and this was to be welcomed. Useful back-up information, such as copies of relevant circulars, had been provided. Other parents known to the development worker, however, provided a mixed picture. A lot, she felt, depended on the attitude of the caller, the extent to which their question was clearly formulated and the experience of the person taking the call.

There was some discussion of what was meant by 'impartial' advice and whether this was desirable and achievable. An educational psychologist expressed the view that, in order for local authorities to continue to make referrals, it was essential to ensure impartiality. Two members of support organisations felt that impartiality was very difficult to maintain and, given the inequality of the parent/local authority power relationship, parents needed to feel that they were being listened to sympathetically and supported.

It was pointed out by a number of respondents that simply telling people what should happen in an ideal world might be of limited value. For example, if parents were told that they should be involved in the production of an IEP, but a local school was reluctant to facilitate their involvement, they needed help in working out ways of encouraging the school to adopt a more constructive attitude. In addition to information which was technically accurate, callers needed to be provided with insight into processes and strategic ways of interacting with local authorities.

Several informants suggested that the turnover of helpline assistants mitigated against building up really useful local knowledge. It was impossible to know what was happening on the ground without considerable experience of the education system, and changes in staffing meant that, whilst the information given might be accurate, the depth of understanding likely to be really helpful to parents might be lacking. This point was also made by a member of Enquire's advisory committee, who pointed out that a one day placement in a school was undertaken by all helpline assistants as part of their initial training, but greater knowledge of a range of educational settings would be helpful.

A respondent from a support organisation indicated that Enquire might deal with calls in a somewhat cursory manner. The organisation, which also provided a telephone advice service, believed that in order to answer a call accurately, it was necessary to take a full case history, going right back to the time of the original diagnosis and early interactions with the health board and local authority. In certain circumstances, it might be good practice to ask parents to send in any official letters they had received to check that these had been accurately interpreted, and organise a face to face meeting with parents to discuss. For example, sometimes parents might assume that a local authority was acting in a hostile manner, whereas they might simply have misinterpreted the content or tone of a letter. Unless all relevant information was collated, there was a danger that a response to a specific question might be of limited value because a vital part of the context had been missed. This organisation also believed that follow-up calls or meetings were necessary to ensure that the matter had been satisfactorily resolved.

3.14 Summary

There was general agreement amongst all parties that the advice and information provided by Enquire via the helpline was impartial, accurate and supportive. Parents were particularly enthusiastic in their endorsement of the support offered by the helpline, describing the knowledge gained from the service as fundamentally empowering. A few suggested that more local information would be helpful. Local authority staff and support organisations, whilst generally positive, were more likely to sound cautionary notes. Some local authority staff felt that enquiries about local matters should be referred back to them, since Enquire was a national service and was unlikely, therefore, to have enough insight into local authority policy and practice. It was also suggested by local authority staff that Enquire might encourage parents to adopt an adversarial stance. Support organisations also suggested that Enquire perhaps did not have enough local knowledge and argued that they should do more to build up contact with local and specialist support groups. Support organisations also raised questions about whether Enquire, in endeavouring to provide an impartial service, failed to empathise sufficiently with individual parents. Concerns were also expressed about the ability of the service to provide an adequate service for parents with communication difficulties or in very disadvantaged circumstances.

« Previous | Contents | Next »