Work in progress - ratings and comments are still to be finalised
Accessible Information Standard (AIS)
1.1 Stated purpose
The Accessible Information Standard (AIS) aims to make sure that people who have a disability, impairment or sensory loss get appropriate information and communication support from NHS and adult social care services.
1.2 Episodic or relational
2.1 Statutory notification
2.2 Info validated by
Sector
4.1 Personal identifier used
Online portal
Offline alternative
1.3 Data included
Relational
No
Health and social care
NHS number
No
Yes
Full name
NHS number
Communication preferences
Reasonable adjustments
Strengths
AIS's requirements are admirably clear and straightforward, and if they were adopted across health ands social care, would be a significant contribution to people's experience.
Weaknesses
AIS is mandatory for "health and care providers", but there is a curious gap in respect of others within the health and care ecosystem, e.g. local authorities when providing information and advice or carrying out an assessment.
Even among providers (e.g. GP practices, hospitals, community NHS trusts, care providers etc) there is startlingly little evidence of the standard being adopted. A recent Healthwatch campaign has highlighted that even where needs are recorded, they are often not flagged, shared or acted on as required by the Standard.
There is no online portal to let someone create an AIS record, again contributing to the lack of awareness and take-up.
The Standard references the SNOMED-CT value set for Reasonable Adjustments Flag, which contains 348 entries (including several duplicates) and is seen as too cumbersome for most people's purposes.
Further information
Overall functional rating
3. Transparency, choice and control
3.1 Transparency
Purpose is transparent, but no privacy notice to confirm this
3.2 Choice and control
Standard says that consent will be sought but nothing explicit on how consent is provided/applied and whether there can be exclusions
4. Functionality
4.2 Structured data
4.3 Free text
There's a value set in SNOMED-CT (see Reasonable Adjustments Flag) for capturing AIS needs. It contains - wait for it - 348 options, of which 202 are for different language interpreters. Not 100% sure how practical this is.
I think there's an alternative and much smaller value set, developed by one of the ASC system suppliers.
4.4 Carer role
Buried in the SNOMED-CT refset are options such as "Requires communication via their carer", which in theory ought to allow a proxy to communicate on the person's behalf.
4.5 Acknowledgement of receipt
No provision made
4.6 Updates
In theory it should be possible to update an AIS record, but the five mandatory steps (ask, record, flag, share, act) don't include a specific provision to check whether the recorded needs are still accurate. Nor is there an online portal to allow someone to update this for themselves.
4.7 Access to records
n/a - other mechanisms exist which may or may not give access to NHS and care data
5. Reach
5.1 Multi-sector acceptance
Applies to health and care providers (though implementation by health and care providers is extremely limited), but not to others in the health and care ecosystem such as local authorities, nor to other services such as social housing.
5.2 Recipients within orgs/services
Standard requires information to be recorded in a structured format and flagged prominently, but no evidence that this is happening.
5.3 Proactive sharing
Data is captured and held within NHS systems, and there's no means for the person to access or share it.
6. Language and user experience
6.1 Language
There's a value set in SNOMED-CT (see Reasonable Adjustments Flag) for capturing AIS needs. It contains - wait for it - 348 options, of which 202 are for different language interpreters. Not 100% sure how practical this is.
I think there's an alternative and much smaller value set, developed by one of the ASC system suppliers.
Words to watch
6.2 Conditions vs actionable support
Standard doesn't ask for diagnoses/conditions, but there's some anecdotal evidence that some NHS staff believe they should only record reasonable adjustment needs which arise from a clinical diagnosis.
6.3 Online UX
No portal
6.4 Offline UX
UX should be reasonable/good providing the professional asking for information goes about it thoughtfully and sensitively. (Hypothetical rating since there's no portal.)
7. Outcomes
7.1 Actionable support needs
Excellent, provided the professional recording it captures the person's ASNs as they express them. There's anecdotal evidence that some health staff may record ASNs based on clinical diagnosis - this is contrary to the Equality Act.
7.2 Trustworthiness
Trustworthy based on design and intent. Possible reservations due to uncertainty over REACH.
Think Local Act Personal: Data for People
Ratings against the 15 Principles
Overall
TLAP 2
TLAP 3
TLAP 4
TLAP 5
TLAP 6
TLAP 7
TLAP 8
TLAP 9
TLAP 10
TLAP 11
TLAP 12
TLAP 14
Money Advice Trust
Ratings against the 10 principles for designing vulnerable consumer data-sharing programmes
Overall
MAT 1
MAT 2
MAT 3
MAT 4
MAT 5
MAT 6
MAT 7
MAT 8
MAT 10-