What are we planning, exactly? The perspectives of people with intellectual disabilities, their carers and professionals on end-of-life care planning: A focus group study.

BACKGROUND: Deaths of people with intellectual disabilities are often unplanned for and poorly managed. Little is known about how to involve people with intellectual disabilities in end-of-life care planning. AIM: To explore the perspectives of people with intellectual disabilities, families, health and social care professionals and policy makers on end-of-life care planning within intellectual disability services. DESIGN: A total of 11 focus groups and 1 semi-structured interview were analysed using qualitative framework and matrix analysis. The analysis was conducted inclusively with co-researchers with intellectual disabilities. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 60 participants (14 people with intellectual disabilities, 9 family carers, 21 intellectual disability professionals, 8 healthcare professionals and 8 policy makers) from the UK. RESULTS: There were differences in how end-of-life care planning was understood by stakeholder groups, covering four areas: funeral planning, illness planning, planning for living and talking about dying. This impacted when end-of-life care planning should happen and with whom. Participants agreed that end-of-life care planning was important, and most wanted to be involved, but in practice discussions were postponed. Barriers included issues with understanding, how or when to initiate the topic and a reluctance to talk about dying. CONCLUSIONS: To develop effective interventions and resources aiding end-of-life care planning with people with intellectual disabilities, clarity is needed around what is being planned for, with whom and when. Research and development are needed into supporting intellectual disability staff in end-of-life care planning conversations. Collaboration between intellectual disability staff and palliative care services may facilitate timely end-of-life care planning and thus optimal palliative end-of-life care.

Co-designing resources to support older people with intellectual disabilities and their families plan for parental death and transitions in care.

BACKGROUND: Older people with intellectual disabilities and their families report a lack of support for planning for parental death and transitions in care. This article aims to demonstrate the process of co-designing resources to support older people with intellectual disabilities and their families to plan for the future. METHODS: Following interviews and focus groups with older people with intellectual disabilities and their families, we used an adapted experience-based co-design process to develop planning ahead resources. This included a 'trigger film' summarising findings from the earlier interview study, 12 co-design workshops and a user feedback phase. RESULTS: The co-design group developed a set of 102 'Planning Ahead Cards' to help families to talk about the future and prepare for meetings with social care professionals. The group made decisions about the content, format and design of resources, and how co-design workshops would run. The user feedback phase led to changes to the cards, and families and stakeholder groups suggested that they would be useful for planning ahead. CONCLUSION: The Planning Ahead Cards may facilitate planning for parental death and transitions in care for older people with intellectual disabilities and their families. The co-design approach was key to ensuring that the resources were useful and accessible for families. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: People with intellectual disabilities and their families contributed to the design of the resources through the co-design workshops and feedback phase. The research team includes a research assistant with intellectual disabilities who co-facilitated co-design workshops and co-authored this article.

The All Together Group: Co-Designing a Toolkit of Approaches and Resources for End-of-Life Care Planning With People With Intellectual Disabilities in Social Care Settings.

INTRODUCTION: Support staff within social care settings have expressed a need for resources to facilitate end-of-life care planning with people with intellectual disabilities. This study aimed to co-design a preliminary toolkit of end-of-life care planning approaches and resources that can be implemented in adult social care services for people with intellectual disabilities. METHODS: An adapted Experience-Based Co-Design process was applied to develop a toolkit for end-of-life care planning with people with intellectual disabilities. A co-design group (the 'All Together Group') met six times from January to October 2023. The group comprised nine people with intellectual disabilities (including four researchers with intellectual disabilities, who also co-facilitated the workshops), five family members, five intellectual disability support staff, two intellectual disability service managers, and five healthcare professionals. RESULTS: The All Together Group tested resources for and approaches to end-of-life care planning with people with intellectual disabilities, based on findings from a scoping review and a focus group study. Easy-read end-of-life care planning forms were deemed overwhelming and complicated, whilst visual and creative approaches were welcomed. Three new visual resources to support illness planning and funeral planning with people with intellectual disabilities were developed: (i) 'When I'm ill' thinking cards; (ii) 'Let's Talk About Funerals' conversation-starter pictures; and (iii) 'My funeral' planning cards. These three resources, alongside three positively evaluated existing resources, were included in a new toolkit for end-of-life care planning with people with intellectual disabilities. CONCLUSION: Through an iterative, flexible, inclusive, and comprehensive co-design process, a toolkit of three newly developed and three existing resources was created to facilitate support staff in doing end-of-life care planning with people with intellectual disabilities. Following a trialling process with support staff, the final toolkit was made freely available online. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The research team included four researchers with intellectual disabilities (A.C., D.J., L.J., and R.K.-B). Researchers with intellectual disability have been part of every step of the research process; from study design to data collection and analysis to dissemination of study findings.Intellectual disability service provider representatives (M.W., N.P., and S.S.) were part of the co-design group as well. Two of these representatives were also co-applicants in the overall project (N.P. and S.S.). The co-design group included people with intellectual disabilities, families, intellectual disability support staff and health and social care professionals. The study was supported by a Research Advisory Group comprising a variety of stakeholders, including people with intellectual disabilities families, intellectual disability researchers, representatives from intellectual disability organisations, and policymakers.

'There's a timebomb': Planning for parental death and transitions in care for older people with intellectual disabilities and their families.

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of older adults with intellectual disabilities are living with ageing parents. These families need support to plan for the future to avoid crisis interventions following parental death. METHOD: Interviews and focus groups were conducted with people with intellectual disabilities (aged 40+) (N = 9), parents (N = 11) and siblings (N = 16) to understand their perspectives about living with parents and future planning. Data were analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: 'What matters to me', 'When should we plan', 'What are the options' and 'Who will help'. Participants knew they needed to make plans but did not feel supported to do so. While they viewed moving as an opportunity for independence, they feared there were no viable alternatives. CONCLUSION: Person-centred resources and support are needed for families to plan for transitions in care, including proactive approaches from social services and help to prepare for conversations with social care professionals.

Improving support and planning ahead for older people with learning disabilities and family carers: a mixed-methods study.

Background: People with learning disabilities are living longer. Despite government policy to encourage people to lead supported lives in their community, family carers often maintain support due to dissatisfaction with services. This can lead to people moving from the family home in a crisis. Objectives: (1) Find out what is known about health needs and resources for older people with learning disabilities (aged ≥ 40 years); (2) identify exemplars of good services for older people with learning disabilities; (3) explore service exemplars through ethnographic case studies; (4) evaluate support for older people with learning disabilities and their families through co-producing and testing future planning tools and (5) co-produce recommendations and resources. Design and methods: Work package 1 rapid scoping reviews - three reviews focused on the health and social care needs of older people with learning disabilities and 'behaviours that challenge others', and family carers, and the co-ordination of support for this group. Work package 2 scoping and mapping exemplars of good practice - analysis of published service standards to assess excellence criteria, by mapping services, interviews (n = 30), survey (n = 9) and informal discussion with commissioners. Work package 3 ethnography of case studies of exemplar provision; independent supported living (n = 4); residential/nursing home (n = 2); day activities (n = 1), Shared Lives (n = 2). Fieldwork (20 days per model), interviews (n = 77) with older people with learning disabilities, family carers, support staff and commissioners. Work package 4 - co-producing and testing resources for older people with learning disabilities and their families involved interviews and focus groups with 36 people with learning disabilities, parents, and siblings, and experience-based co-design with 11 participants. Eight families evaluated the resources. Work package 5 - three stakeholder workshops co-produced service recommendations. Findings: The reviews confirmed an inadequate evidence base concerning the experiences and support of family carers and older people with learning disabilities and 'behaviours that challenge others'. Criteria of excellence were produced, and a shortlist of 15 services was identified for consideration in work package 3. The ethnographic work found that environmental, organisational and social factors were important, including supporting independence and choice about who people live with, matching staff to people, consistent relationships and adapting to ageing. Practices of institutionalisation were observed. In work package 4, we found that families were worried about the future and unsupported to explore options. 'Planning Ahead' cards and a booklet to record discussions were produced, and the evaluation was positively rated. Finally, formative discussion informed recommendations. Outputs include training packages, a carers' forum, a film, a podcast and academic papers. Conclusions: There is little focus on older people with learning disabilities and family carers. Services vary in their approach to planning for older-age support. Families are unsupported to plan, leaving people without choice. 'Behaviours that challenge others' was found to be unhelpful terminology. Recommendations: A new strategy is recommended for older people with learning disabilities and family carers that encompasses commissioning practices, professional input and peer learning, proactive support in ageing well and excellent service design. Limitations: The COVID-19 pandemic created recruitment challenges. Reliance on providers for recruitment resulted in a lack of diversity in work package 3. Families' plans, and therefore change, may be frustrated by insufficient service resources. Future work: Given the lack of focus in this area, there is a range of future work to consider: experiences of older people with learning disabilities from diverse ethnic backgrounds; supporting people to age and die 'in place'; best practice regarding designing/commissioning services, including housing; the role of social workers; access to nature; accessing mainstream support; and evaluation of the 'Planning Ahead' cards. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN74264887. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR129491) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 16. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

People with learning disabilities are living longer, but most live with their families, who are also getting older. This is because there are not enough suitable places for people with learning disabilities to live, and family carers worry that the person will not get the right support and have a good life. Our research aimed to improve support for people with learning disabilities and their family carers to plan ahead for a good life. We focused on people who are labelled with 'behaviours that challenge others'. We read what has been written about this area. We looked for and found examples of excellent support for older people with learning disabilities. Researchers and people with learning disabilities and family carers spent time hanging out with people where they live or spend their days to see what support they get. Then we had three meetings with everyone involved and discussed our research findings with people with learning disabilities, family carers, and professionals. We found that people can be supported to live good lives as they grow older. This can be living alone or with people they choose, and it means having staff they like and who like them and being supported to be active. However, we found that ageing of people with learning disabilities is often ignored, and some people were not living good lives. We also found that the label of 'behaviours that challenge others' is unhelpful. We worked with people with learning disabilities and family carers to make a set of cards with pictures and questions to help people plan ahead for a good life. We produced resources and made recommendations to create a new plan for older people with learning disabilities to support people to lead good lives. This is very important because there is a lack of attention to and support for people with learning disabilities as they age.

'Internet is easy if you know how to use it': Doing online research with people with learning disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic changed the way we live, work, interact and do research. Many activities moved online, and digital inclusion became an urgent issue for researchers working with people with learning disabilities and other groups at risk of exclusion. This has generated new questions about how we conduct research and what it means to go into 'the field'. Methods: We discuss our experience working across four qualitative research projects involving 867 participants with learning disabilities, conducted during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Findings: Moving research online resulted in often-swift adaptations to research designs and practice, bringing new insights and benefits to our studies. The changing circumstances fostered innovation and greater flexibility and contributed to research becoming more accessible to many. However, doing research online also posed new challenges as well as amplified existing ones. Conclusions: The pandemic has made it easier for some people with learning disabilities to participate in research, but more needs to be done to improve the reach and quality of that participation. Researchers should make the process of participation as accessible as possible. It is also their job to question and challenge the conditions that create barriers to participation in research and to look for ways to change these. We make some recommendations on how this can be achieved.