For All That
  • Home
    • A Man's A Man
    • Ben and The Futurescope
    • Nick - The Real Ben
  • Demystification
    • More On Demystification
    • A Basic Model
    • Winding Up
    • Professional Thought Disorder
    • In The Media >
      • Of Wrongs and Rites
  • Psychiatry
    • Limits of Medical Model
    • Child Psychiatry's ADHD
    • The Sheepdog Technique
  • Psychotherapy
    • Of Rites And Wrongs
    • Possessing The Key
    • Psychodynamic Systemic Compared
  • Systemic Practice
    • Meanings of Systemic
    • Fitting and Teaming Up
    • Potential of SP
  • Family Therapy
    • FT: The Rest of the Picture
  • Philosophy
    • John Macmurray
  • CAMHS
    • The Peripheries of Excellence
    • Making a Team
    • Live Teams
    • 1st Appointment Standards
    • Meeting Audit
    • Who Needs An In-Patient Unit?
  • America Again
  • Dropped Jaws and Unbatted Eyelids
  • Children Resisting Contact
    • Scotland's Children Resisting Contact
  • Scotland's Couple Therapy
  • Aspens
    • Aspens Resources
    • 5 Year Celebration
  • Poems
  • Extras
    • AFT List Guidelines
    • AFT Lists Team
    • MFTJC Aims
    • MFTJC Guidelines
    • MFTJC Presenters Guidelines

MOTHERWELL CFC
MEETINGS AUDIT 


At Motherwell Child and Family Clinic our small multi-disciplinary CAMHS team was keen not to waste any more time in meetings than was necessary. None of us liked meetings that were a waste of time. That is the kind of meeting you come out of saying, in common Scots: "That meeting was mince". Duncan Clark and Nick Child developed this jokey but serious questionnaire that, when totalled up, gave your meeting a rating on the "Clark-Child Mince Rating Scale". Here it is. Download the PDF below for actual use.



For any formal (especially staff) meetings, one or all participants rate these categories:
 
DATE: . . . . . . . . . PLACE MEETING HELD: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
MEETING (brief description to typify if not identify it and the participants):
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A.  OVERALL AIMS:  Circle a number.
1. Were the aims clear?   Most unclear  0 . . . . 1 . . . . 2 . . . . 3 . . . . 4  Very clear
2. Were aims achieved?  Not achieved  0 . . . . 1 . . . . 2 . . . . 3 . . . . 4  Completely achieved

​B.  ORGANISATION:   Tick each ok item. Ticks x 2 = Total between 0 to 4:            . . . . . . 
1. Right membership?       2. Notification?                     3. Preparation?  
4. Best location?                  5. Chairing/timing?             6. Notes/minute-taking?
7. If cut short, was this reasonably done with damage awareness?
8. Was there a good fit with the participants’ diary for that day / week?

C.  FOLLOW THROUGH: Tick each item. Total ticks = Total between 0 to 4:          . . . . .
For issues, decisions and consequences considered at the meeting:
1. Attempts made to identify them and plan for follow through?
2. Successfully identified, agreed and planned for follow through?
3. Actually been (or confident that they will be) followed through since the meeting?
4. Actually been (or confident that they will be) resolved since the meeting

​D.  BY WHOSE EFFORTS?  Circle one number: -3 to +3. Subtract or add this to your total.
Is this description of the meeting the result of your efforts or other people's efforts? It may be brilliant because someone else made it so. Or it may be awful despite your massive efforts.

You were ‘a lazy B’     -3 . . . -2 . . . -1 . . . 0 . . . +1 . . . +2 . . . +3      All your own efforts

E.  REVIEWED?  Has the meeting been reviewed & improved recently?  Yes? Score:    1

        TOTAL:    . . . . .     FINALLY, GIVE YOUR ‘MEATING’ AN OVERALL RATING:
0 = Mince ↔ 5 = Haggis ↔ 10 = Stovies ↔ 15 = Steak ↔ 20 = Cooking with gas

For wider or management interpretation, note whether this meeting was needed or essential:
1. For your own organisation’s work.     2. For the worker as an individual (eg for training)  
3. External purposes, eg maybe required by other organisation, but with benefit for own organisation.


motherwell_meeting_audit.docx
File Size: 161 kb
File Type: docx
Download File

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.