De l'innovation au changement - Gouvernement du Québec

Projet 40
Élaboration d’outils de dépistage et d'évaluation auprès des aidantes
process, leading us to conclude that efforts need to be made to organise their intake procedures in a such way that caregivers can be
screened for risk since this would better target interventions; 3) the tool standardises and objectives screened appreciation of caregiver
situations and targets caregivers at risk; 4) the tool works for a variety of caregiver situations.
Asssessment tool :
The results of the inter-rater reliability and internal consistency tests suggest that, for the most part, this comprehensive tool is a valid and
reliable instrument to understand caregivers’ needs and situations.
The assessment tool was able to both achieve its functional aims of identifying key concerns and at the same time had a positive impact o
assessors and caregivers. The tool changed assessors’ attitudes, and occasionally their practice with caregivers, while for caregivers, a
noted by both assessors and administrators, the tool gave them recognition and validated their concerns and everyday efforts.
According to assessors, the research process resulted in an increased understanding/awareness of the concrete reality of what it means to
be a caregiver on a daily basis. Repeatedly throughout the research sites, workers discussed their shock or surprise upon discovering the
widespread difficulties faced by caregivers and that for many caregiving was not a choice. In this sense, the project gave workers access to
the meanings and everyday realities behind the facts of caregiving and gave them a different perspective on caregiver concerns. Workers
indicated that probably over time they would get similar information, but it would take them much longer to do so. However, this
appreciation is mitigated by the fact that many assessors found the tool to be very long and the average evaluation took 90 minutes, as
noted in their written comments.
Thus, despite the one site which had difficulty adjusting to the tool, we can conclude that, in general, the assessment tool has great
potential for improving the quality of services to caregivers, and indirectly, to care recipients.
It was evident through discussions with assessors and administrators that participation in this research project had several impacts on
practice and raised, in a dramatic way, the current lack of access caregivers have to evaluations and services. The assessment tool aided
caregivers, practitioners and administrators alike to identify the quasi-absence of resources aimed at modifying caregivers’ situations and
those services and resources which would be essential to develop to meet the needs of caregivers.
1.1.3.1 The first way the tool is relevant to agency practice is that it legitimises giving time to caregivers to hear their stories.
This is relevant because it provides room for a new perspective within service provision and the larger context of policies related
to families, and it legitimises caregivers to identify their own needs as distinct from those of the person they are caring for.
Indeed of the 168 caregivers assessed, 60% reported that this was the first opportunity they had to discuss their situation and their
comments suggest that it was meaningful experience for them.
1.1.3.2 Going through the process of assessing and documenting caregiver issues helped workers to understand why the
caregiver is burnt out, determine appropriate services and provide a rationale for intervention.
There were several unanticipated positive outcomes of the project. First, we were surpised to what extent participating practitioners and
supervisors felt their participation was perceived as a form of training. Many spoke of how they had been privileged to be part of the project
because they are now better trained on caregiver issues. Second, we had not forseen the impact the assessment tool would have on
current practice given the research nature of the project and the stipulation that information gathered during this process should not impact
on service delivery. However, the testing of the assessment tool enabled a majority of participating practitioners to identify problematic
situations which required immediate intervention but which otherwise might have gone unrecognised. Finally, we were unprepared for the
overwhelming interest shown by the majority of agencies and researchers contacted during Phase I and which continued throughout the
life of the project.
205