Healthcare needs in schools guidance consultation: response analysis report

Analysis report summarising those responses received to our consultation on guidance on healthcare needs in schools.

General views on the guidance

Question 12: Does the structure help the reader to follow/use the guidance effectively?

Answer No. of respondents % of all respondents
Yes 45 56
No 18 22
Don’t Know 5 6
No Answer 13 16
Total 81 100

58. A majority of respondents felt the structure of the guidance did help the reader to follow or use it effectively. There were 21 responses providing further comment to this question.

59. Comments suggesting to further improve the guidance included strengthening it by providing examples of best practice in relation to how schools and/or local authorities local policies meet statutory responsibilities; more frequent references throughout the guidance to the Equality Act and the duty to involve young people about the decisions that affect them; and the guidance giving other common health conditions among children and young people the same level of recognition as asthma.

60. There were a number of more general comments about the guidance, including that it is too lengthy making it difficult to find guidance on specific issues. There was also references to duplication stating that the distinctions between chapters 4 and 5 was unclear and the length of it meant there was a risk of duplication throughout, suggestions included more use of bullet points rather than prose or the inclusion of an FAQ section; and the guidance should set out the roles and duties involved in dealing with various types of health conditions i.e. temporary conditions, long-term conditions and disabilities. More specifically it was felt that, in paragraph 79, the responsibilities in relation to the role of schools should be clarified.

Question 13: Is there anything in the body of the document that you would like moved to an annex or anything in an annex moved to the body of the document?

Answer No. of respondents % of all respondents
Yes 13 16
No 45 56
Don’t Know 6 7
No Answer 17 21
Total 81 100

61. Some respondents suggested that parts of the document should be moved, although the majority made no suggested changes in reply to this question. In total, 13 respondents suggested changes in response to this question.

62. There were differing comments about Chapter 1, which included making this chapter an annex whilst other responses suggested incorporating Annex C into Chapter 1. There were also suggestions of creating an appendix, where the links in Annex D could be placed along with a glossary of terms used in the guidance. Comments about Annex A were (a) that it is overly detailed; and (b) that it should be moved into the main document.

63. The only specific reference in this question came in respect of paragraph 72. There are two health conditions listed where staff have to meet certain evidence-based training standards (epilepsy seizures or diabetic hypoglycaemia episodes). One of the professional bodies replied that there are more conditions than those where competency standards are required and a full list should either be provided in an appendix, or the conditions referred to in paragraph 72 removed.

Question 14: Is the guidance helpful?

Answer No. of respondents % of all respondents
Yes 62 77
No 7 9
Don’t Know 0 0
No Answer 12 15
Total 81 100

64. The majority of respondents agreed the guidance was helpful. There were 19 responses providing feedback, although some of them simply were to acknowledge and thank for the work done in producing it.

65. There were some suggestions made by those who explicitly provided positive feedback, including it was quite technical and an easier to understand version was available for parents and/or non-professionals; that it could be shortened; that, in order to reach its full potential, it is promoted among relevant stakeholders including families, policy-makers and staff in schools and local authorities and that its publication will result in a consistent approach towards managing healthcare needs in schools across Scotland.

66. Other comments all referred back to issues raised in response to previous chapters and these will be considered, or requested more clarity across the guidance document.

Question 15: Are there any other comments you would wish to make about the draft guidance in supporting the health care needs of children and young people in schools?

67. This was an open-ended question to which there were 54 responses. Many of these responses covered issues in response to questions on previous chapters, such as mental health needs; the inclusion of palliative care; frequent use of the word “should”; consideration of children with complex care needs; the role of ‘named person’ and of professional staff in schools and health; and consideration of the needs of children with long-term conditions which have not been covered as widely as asthma. There were also a number of comments welcoming the introduction of this guidance.

68. Points raised for the first time include asking whether there are different regulations and practices between mainstream schools and special schools; and public health issues, such as what would happen where a pupil requested help to stop smoking.


Back to top