Anne Rabbitte (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will start with the live database. There is an ICT system, 50% of which is functioning as we speak. All the HSE organisations are talking to each other but there is a GDPR issue regarding section 38 and 39 organisations and how they can plug into the system. It is still a paper-based approach. The question is how to then identify those waiting a long time in section 38 or section 39 organisations. The answer is the assessment officer, who keeps a record of it, will be able to identify those waiting for a long time and can feed it in to the disability managers, of which there are only nine. They will be able to feed in all of that reporting. We can capture that data, which is critical to ensuring we get to those waiting for a long time.

On whether we have an entire system talking to itself, the answer is no, we do not. We have a HSE system that talks to itself but the HSE is only 50% of the providers. Enable Ireland has 20 of the teams and after that, it is all of the other teams. There is a data concern. Work is ongoing. Having met with the board of the HSE, it is working to address that data issue but we can capture that.

The next part is the input of families and the structure. When PDS was being rolled out, there was work with the family forum in which there would be family representatives. To be quite honest, they do not meet regularly enough. Some work well, but some do not. They are trying to bed them down. Having the voice of the family and the continuation of needing a service and transition points, having two family representatives might be a bit of a narrow window on a team. They are looking at expanding it more. Without family input, one cannot get a clear line of the needs and frustrations. They have built in a mechanism called the family forum.

On the mismatch, the Deputy is right. When schools were built, the conversations were not had with the HSE. The schools landed and all of a sudden there was no process which stated that we have now moved from 129 special schools to 132, or an examination of how to align them as part of the teams. Parents were not clearly told at the time that they had a choice - closest to home or closest to school. If you were a parent trying to make a decision as to where you would have the best services or where you could get direct intervention, you would assume that attending a special school would be the place of choice. I note in Dublin that 90% of children do not choose closest to home. They choose closest to school to receive therapy interventions. It is the local CDNT that does that.

The Deputy used the example of Carrigaline. There could be ten different teams trying to support children in one school, which makes no sense. You are better off having the closest team supporting all. How does one then ensure that the children coming from all the different areas have access to respite? To be fair to the HSE in CHO, 4, it was the first that did it. It did a regional respite forum, so that everybody was on an even pitch. Regardless of who would have been your provider in the past, you had equity of access to respite. That is important. Getting interventions is one piece but getting access to respite is the other. It is the only CHO that has a process to monitor and ensure somebody is not getting 22 nights while somebody else might only get one night every three months. It is addressing it well in the Cork area but it is down to understanding. Perhaps it is to do with trust and the fact that the teams were not fully staffed. If you got a service previously, why would you walk away from a service if you knew that CDNT nearest to your school did not have enough staff? That is why we are putting more staff closer to teams that have a special school in their areas. We are looking at stepping up more staff on teams associated or aligned to schools.