PROJECTS: BENCHMARKING

In addition, you can download the Benchmarking Tool in PDF format to read offline or print.

LEVEL 1

LEVEL 2

LEVEL 3

LEVEL 4

1a

Links between Practice Development  and Research & Development

Practice Development and R&D are explicitly linked in a dynamic way throughout the organisation and reflected in the R&D strategy.

Links between Practice Development and R&D are less clear although structures are in place for their development.

Linking of Practice Development and R&D are not supported by any strategy.

Practice Development is not linked to R&D

1b

Strategy

The R&D strategy is linked to the TIP and national priorities

The R&D strategy may be linked to the TIP and national priorities

The R&D strategy is ad hoc and led by individual priorities

There is no strategy for R&D

1c

Strategy

The R&D strategy is led by a multidisciplinary team

The R&D strategy is led by a unidisciplinary team

There is no formal R&D strategy

There is little or no support for R&D in the organisation

1d

Resources

Structures and resources for R&D are available with fair and equitable distribution

Structures and resources are available but not evenly distributed

Resources may be available with or without additional support

There is no finance or support available from the Trust - funding must be sought from outside bodies.

1e

Staff throughout the organisation are facilitated to critically evaluate research reports, and/or undertake research

Good library facilities available and equality of study leave for all grades of staff linked to R&D

Library facilities and/or study leave available to most staff

Limited library facilities and/or study leave available

No library facilities on site and little or no study leave available

1f

Guidelines are based on good evidence or research

Demonstrable in all relevant areas of practice

All relevant SIGN Guidelines have been implemented

In most relevant areas of practice75% of relevant SIGN Guidelines have been implemented

In some areas of practice

50% of relevant SIGN Guidelines have been implemented

No evidence of research based guidelines in use

1g

Guidelines which have been implemented are regularly audited

e.g. SIGN or local guidelines.

All guidelines are audited at least annually

50 -75% of guidelines which have been implemented are audited annually

30 - 50% of guidelines which have been implemented are audited annually

Fewer than 30% of guidelines which have been implemented have been audited in the last 12 months.

1h

Evidence of multidisciplinary working

50% of research projects are multidisciplinary

30 - 50% research projects are multidisciplinary

Less than 30% of research projects are multidisciplinary in the organisation

There is no evidence of multidisciplinary research

1i

Dissemination

Formal channels exist

Informal channels exist with evidence of action

Left to the individual to create own channels

Sharing of experience not supported by the organisation

1j

Presentation and reporting of R&D

Evidence of more than one multidisciplinary  forum for presentation of R&D projects at local and national level per annum

At least one forum per annum for presentation of R&D projects locally and/or nationally not always multidisciplinary

Occasional presentations locally

and usually unidisciplinary

No evidence of presentations

1k

Publication of findings

Active support and training in publishing R&D projects locally and nationally

Some support available from organisation to publish

Support available from outside agencies locally i.e. Health Board

No support available locally

1l

Collaborative working with external agencies.

The organisation consistently seeks to develop new practices and research in collaboration with outside agencies

Some evidence of collaboration - organisation led

Little evidence of collaboration -

no active approach from organisation

No collaboration

1m

Implementation of research based practice

Implementation has the full support and backing of clinical managers

Implementation has support from clinical managers in some areas

Implementation has no managerial support and is bottom up

Implementation has no support

LEVEL 1

LEVEL 2

LEVEL 3

LEVEL 4

2a

Interaction between Director of Nursing and Practice Development in relation to Nursing Services

The DNS or Deputy meets with Practice Development Nurses on a regular basis - minimum quarterly

The DNS or Deputy meets infrequently with Practice Development Nurses - annually or less

The DNS or Deputy communicates with Practice Development Nurses through other managers

There is no direct or indirect communication between the DNS and Practice Development Nurses

2b

There is a forum for Trustwide (cross directorate) collaboration in Practice Development

A forum consisting of Senior Nurses and Practice Development Nurses from all directorates meets at least monthly to discuss projects

A forum consisting of Senior Nurses and Practice Development Nurses from all directorates meets at least quarterly to discuss projects

There are informal cross directorate meetings on an ad hoc basis

or

There are uni-directorate meetings

There is no forum to discuss Practice Development issues

2c

Links between Nursing Strategy and Practice Development

The organisation has a Nursing Strategy which identifies specific action for practice development

Commitment to practice development is evident in the organisations Nursing Strategy

The organisation has a Nursing Strategy but there is no specific reference to improving patient care through practice development

There is unlikely to be any discrete practice development plans, roles or remits.

The organisation has no clearly defined strategic direction for nursing.

2d

The role of Practice Development in development planning

There is a planned programme for Practice Development

Practice development plans have been developed but are not yet implemented.

Developing practice is an integral part of all practitioners job description

Practice development is low priority

There are no corporate targets/roles/remits or planned programmes

2e

Practice Development Programmes

Programmes are formulated, implemented and monitored with the involvement of clinical practitioners

Practice Development personnel co-ordinate, facilitate initiatives alongside appropriate clinical practitioners

Clinical staff involved in implementation have minimal ownership or involvement in the planning and evaluation phases

Practice development activities are developed independently of one another - some may be largely bottom-up or imposed with little workforce collaboration

2f

Resource allocation for Practice Development

Resources, time, IT and secretariat are budgeted for.

Activities are resourced within existing budgets

Resources are haphazardly allocated and not within core budgets

Practitioners utilise existing resources for practice development initiatives - heavily reliant on goodwill.

2g

Support systems for Practice  Development personnel

Practice development personnel are positively encouraged and continually supported to network inside and outside the organisation

Networking for practice developers is active with an in-house practice development forum / equivalent peer group.

Outside networking takes negotiation

Networking both internal and external occurs on an informal voluntary basis.

There is no evidence that networking inside or outside the organisation is encouraged

2h

Risk Management strategic arrangements

Organisation has a Risk Management Strategy which is held at departmental level and is fully implemented and audited.

Organisation has a Risk Management Strategy but it is not held at departmental level.

It is partly implemented but not formally audited.

A Risk Management Strategy is in existence, but not implemented.

There is no Risk Management Strategy

2i

Risk Management

Evidence Based Practice

Risk Management Policies are formulated in line with current research and evidence based practice

More than 50% of Policies are based on current research and evidence based practice

Fewer than 50% of policies are based on research and evidence based practice

There is no indication that policies are based on research and evidence based practice

2j

Risk Management

Consultation

Local Risk Management policies are developed in consultation with Practice Development Nurses.

Local Policies are led by the Trust Board with limited consultation with Practice Development Nurses.

The organisation has a range of policies which include management issues - Practice Development Nurses are rarely consulted.

Some areas of the organisation have policies which include Risk Management - Practice Development Nurses are not consulted.

2k

Risk Management Review -

Roles and Responsibilities

Clinical / Service Managers of each area are responsible for co-ordination and review of Risk Management policies

Responsibility for co-ordinating review of Risk Management policies is not a major part of management roles.

No person is identified as having responsibility for reviewing Risk Management - it is poorly co-ordinated and has low priority.

Risk Management is not given priority and it is assumed that all employees are responsible.

2l

Risk Management- Audit

There is an annual programme of audit for Risk Management with action taken on the results

Audit of Risk Management takes place in some areas or as a result of an incident.

Action is usually taken on the results

There is some audit of Risk Management but few changes are made as a result.

Audit of Risk Management is rarely carried out

2m

Risk Awareness

There is a system in place to assess staff awareness of risk in their area - the system is multidisciplinary

There is a system in place to assess staff awareness of risk in their area - the system is unidisciplinary

There is a system to assess awareness being planned

There is no system in place, and no immediate plans for one

2n

Skill Mix - links

The organisation has a skill mix strategy which involves practising nurses in development and review

The organisation has a skill mix strategy but may not have involved practising nurses in development and review

Skill mix strategy is being developed - but not yet implemented.

The organisation has no overall skill mix strategy.

2o

Skill Mix - client group

The strategy is flexible/realistic and meets the changing need of the client group

The strategy does not always allow for flexibility to meet the need of the client group

Some areas of the organisation have skill mix recommendations which are inflexible and do not always meet the needs of the client group

There are no recommendations for staffing levels and grades - no consideration of skill mix is made or there is no strategy.

2p

Skill Mix - evaluation

Skill Mix has an agreed annual evaluation with action taken on results.

Skill Mix has an annual evaluation but action is not always taken on results

Irregular monitoring of skill mix - action may not always be taken on results

Monitoring and evaluation of Skill Mix does not occur in the organisation

LEVEL 1

LEVEL 2

LEVEL 3

LEVEL 4

3a

Links between practice development and enhanced patient care

A minimum of 90% of practice developments are primarily focused to enhance patient care.

• A record of practice

• development initiatives are kept centrally within the organisation.

Aims and outcomes are audited annually.

A minimum of 75% of practice developments are primarily focused to enhance patient care.

A minimum of 50% of practice developments are primarily focused to enhance patient care.

Less than 30% of practice developments are focused to enhance patient care.

3b

Evaluation of practice development

There is a well developed and formal programme in operation for the evaluation of nursing practice development in operation.

There is a rolling programme of audit related to new developments which should be detailed in an Annual Report.

A formal programme to evaluate nursing practice development is  developed and has been implemented in over 50% of areas

A formal programme to evaluate nursing practice development is  developed and has been implemented in fewer than 50% of areas

There is no evidence of formal evaluation of nursing practice development within the organisation.

3c

Inter-professional communication

Formal multidisciplinary groups meet on a regular basis which facilitate communication between professions and can influence clinical practice at a strategic level

Evidence of the existence of:

Clinical Effectiveness Group

Multidisciplinary Project Groups

Internal and external networking groups

Formal multidisciplinary groups exist which can facilitate communication between professions and can influence clinical practice at a strategic level. The groups do not meet on a regular basis

Evidence of the existence of at least 2 out of the 3 groups listed in level 1.

Informal multidisciplinary groups exist to facilitate communication between professions but meet on an ad hoc basis

Evidence of the existence of at least one of the groups listed in level 1.

There is minimal communication between individual professions but no networking groups.

3d

Quality monitoring co-ordination

All nursing and midwifery guidelines, protocols and standards are developed collaboratively and are evidence based. They are reviewed at least annually.

All nursing and midwifery guidelines, protocols and standards are evidence based but may not be reviewed annually. There is evidence of some collaboration in their development.

Not all nursing and midwifery guidelines, protocols and standards are evidence based. There is minimal collaboration and no formal mechanism for review.

Nursing and midwifery guidelines, protocols and standards are unlikely to be evidence based. There is no evidence of collaboration or formal review.

3e

Auditing of standards

All clinical areas within the organisation have a rolling programme of audit reported centrally to Clinical Governance Committee - this programme should include: SIGN/National/Local Protocols and Guidelines

All clinical audit is reported centrally to the Clinical Governance Committee.

There is no formal reporting of audit. The Clinical Governance Committee may have to request reports.

Clinical audit is sporadic and reactive.

3f

Dissemination of audit outcomes.

There is a structured programme for audit outcomes and feedback.

Outcomes are disseminated but there is no feedback mechanism in place.

Dissemination of feedback is on an ad hoc basis.

There is no dissemination feedback process.

LEVEL 1

LEVEL 2

LEVEL 3

LEVEL 4

4a

Staff education and development

The organisation has, as an integral part of its philosophy, an identified and flexible approach to promoting staff education and development. Demonstrated by the publication of a training plan, which is linked to the organisation's training and development strategy via the TIP or Business Plan

The organisation recognises that individual staff will have different learning needs but offers a limited range of approaches to staff education and development. There is a training plan but it is not linked to the organisation's strategy

Individual development needs are not considered at corporate level. The range of available approaches for staff education and development is limited. There is no organisational strategy  for training and development.

There is no formal mechanism. There are few opportunities for  individual personal and professional development.  Staff education and development needs are addressed on an ad hoc basis.

4b

Support systems for meeting individual development needs

Clinical supervision has been developed in line with recognised models and is widespread across all areas of the organisation.

Clinical supervision is being developed in line with recognised models and is in place within some areas of the organisation

Development of clinical supervision is being considered within the organisation.

 There is no evidence of any plans to develop clinical supervision within the organisation.

4c

Strategy for education and development

There are quarterly meetings between the Director of Nursing and the department head from the College/University  Nursing Department

The Director of Nursing and the department head from the College/ University Nursing department meet at least annually.

The Director of Nursing and department head from the College/ University Nursing Department meet on an ad hoc basis.

There are no links between the Trust and providers of post-registration training.

4d

Executive support for education and development

There is an established Practice Development Department with at least one full-time Practice Development Nurse. The department has the backing of the executive board.

The executive board is committed to continuous development. There is at least one nurse who has a practice development remit within a larger job description.

There is minimal overt support from the executive board. Practice development is currently undertaken on an ad hoc basis by individuals who are not designated practice development nurses.

There is no commitment to practice development within the organisation.

4e

Systematic

Training needs analysis

A systematic training needs analysis exists at grass root level which guides the identification of resources required throughout the organisation. This is linked to the HIP and TIP and the Business plan

There is a systematic training needs analysis which might not influence the allocation of resources.

A form of training needs analysis is carried out on an irregular  and unco-ordinated basis.

There is no training needs analysis.

4f

Personal Development Plans

All staff have a Personal Development Plan which identifies training & education needs for a set period and is reviewed regularly

All staff have a Personal Development Plan which identifies education & training needs but reviews occur on an ad hoc basis.

All staff have a Personal Development Plan but the identified training needs are only partly met.

All staff have a Personal Development Plan but there is no organisational backup and no process in place to ensure that training needs are met