(CAMHS) and Schools - London Health Programmes

emphasised the importance of this, as it led to better communication, especially
informal communication.
‘I can catch (CPN) as he walks down the corridor. I'm a huge believer in multidisciplinary
teams. Everyone has limited expertise. Children have multi- disciplinary
needs and we have here multi disciplinary knowledge.’ (LEA manager)
One of the advantages of sharing offices with people from other professions was that
it increased learning. Although this might seem simple, creating joint teams in the
same location also had its difficulties (often about allocating space) and could be
hindered by external policies. For example, in one case study an EBD advisor talked
very positively about sharing an office with a clinical psychologist, and the learning
experiences this gave him. This was disrupted when budget allocation meant that
phone lines could not be shared between the two services, and they were subsequently
relocated for administrative reasons. Simply putting people together in the same
office is not enough in itself however.
Linked to being in joint teams was the issue of having the same geographical
boundaries for the CAMHS service and the LEA or school pyramids. This was
identified as helpful in Portsmouth and Cornwall. In North Shields, this issue was
resolved by placing staff in the LEA support service. Having teams based in area
localities also facilitated a closer match to school catchment areas or pyramids.
In every case study, the work conducted with schools has been a Tier 2 or Tier 2/3
service. This tiered structure has facilitated this work and made appropriate CAMHS
staff accessible to schools. In Portsmouth and Cornwall these tiered approaches had
been applied to other services in the area (Education and Children’s Services Plans
respectively).
In all case study areas the importance of having strong commitment to the process
by senior managers was stressed, needing chief officers committed to joint working.
This was facilitated by certain national policies pushing towards joint service
provision (Together We Stand., HAS, 1995). In three of the case study development
plans (either CAMHS strategies or Behaviour Support Plans) there were stated aims
to work jointly with other services.
Joint training was also important to facilitate joint working.
‘If we were to do this again I think we should have put more emphasis on helping
people define what they do and what’s unique about their role and how it differs from
others so that we’re all really clear who does what.[…. Joint training helps – for the
whole service once a term’. (EBD adviser)
Three of the case studies identified the tradition of working together in their regions
as being important. This meant that staff had experience of joint working themselves
and a personal commitment to it. Working jointly is facilitated by a better
understanding of each other’s priorities and pressures.