Guide Dogs Queensland Volunteer Peer Support Program

The 71 clients included 15 males and 56 females aged between 23 and 94 years (M=57). All clients were initially referred to the rehabilitation counsellor for an assessment of needs. The rehabilitation counsellor identified clients who might benefit from the support program and invited them to join. Clients were matched to a volunteer based on gender, age, eye condition, and personality. For example, if a client wanted information about RP, then the client was matched with a volunteer with RP. Client confidentiality was maintained through the rigorous monitoring of contact notes and associated reporting processes, as well as volunteer training.

Volunteers received three days of training that included extensive role-play scenarios based on typical topics that the client might wish to discuss. Annually, volunteers were required to partake in a three-day refresher training course that included mental health, note-taking, approaches to difficult conversations, volunteer code of conduct, and client confidentiality. Volunteers were also coached about the way to complete progress notes detailing the content, concerns (if any), and follow-up items for each client. Feedback from volunteers repeatedly reported the benefits from being involved in the program (Ambrosetti & Dekkers, 2010).

Seventy-one clients who participated in the Peer Support Program were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with the program once completed. The evaluation tool consisted of four questions with responses provided on a four-point Likert-type scale. The four questions included:

(i)

How satisfied were you with the information you received about the program? (Figure 2)

Figure 2.

(ii)

How satisfied were you with the support provided by your Volunteer Peer Support Person? (Figure 3)

Figure 3.

(iii)

How satisfied were you with the information provided by your Volunteer Peer Support Person? (Figure 4)

Figure 4.

(iv)

Would you recommend Guide Dogs Queensland to a friend or an acquaintance who is interested in receiving/using its services? (Figure 5).

Figure 5.

An administration officer phoned each client after the conclusion of their support program and administered the evaluation form. The completed evaluation was then reviewed by the program coordinator and stored in a locked filing cabinet. The ratings were not discussed with volunteers, other clients, or co-workers with the exception being when a client requested further contact with a volunteer, or requested further service from GDQ. In these instances, the coordinator made the appropriate referral.

The resource information sought from clients included adaptive technology agencies, community transport options, sporting and recreational organisations, and information about pensions and subsidies. A small percentage of clients also requested miscellaneous information such as vocational assistance, study advice, or IT support. Clients also asked for ADL advice about cooking, cleaning, parenting, and grooming.

The mobility information proved invaluable to clients. Being matched with a volunteer who is a competent and confident traveller, has contributed to many clients overcoming their reluctance about the cane, and increasing their confidence to travel independently. For example, a client disclosed during an O&M class that she would:

“More than likely put [her] cane in the cupboard when [she] get[s] home.” After being matched with her volunteer, a comment in her evaluation was “I no longer feel embarrassed to use my cane.” Another client commented, “My volunteer gave me confidence to use my cane and get out of my comfort zone.”

Another client considered making an application for a Guide Dog. Previously, she was indecisive after talking with Guide Dog Mobility Instructors, though was connected to a volunteer who was a proficient cane and guide dog user. This client reported:

“She gave me both sides of the story, without being pushy.”

The volunteers were responsible for many clients attending further GDQ residential classes after telling them about their own experiences using electronic travel aids such as the Trekker Breeze, Ultracane, and Miniguide. As a result, one client went on to learn the Ultracane after saying:

“It was a Godsend to discover GDQ and your services, and this program is no exception.”

Clients often looked for emotional support when their vision loss was recent. In many cases, clients benefitted from hearing the volunteer’s story which validated their situation and grief. Other situations where emotional support was sought by clients was when they felt isolated, misunderstood, or had limited family support. For example, a client’s husband and carer did not fully understand his wife’s need for independence given her vision impairment. In her evaluation the client commented:

“If I hadn’t had this opportunity, I would have probably let my vision problems take control of my life.”

This study identified that several clients needed more clarification about the program during the initial assessment. Whilst data captured the types of support and information that the client was seeking at the time, it did not capture secondary conversations between the volunteer and client.

It was also evident that the post-program evaluation form needed revision. A new evaluation form might ask the client a question such as “in what other ways has this program assisted you?” also having the client rate in number priority order, some other topics discussed such as ADL, mobility, adaptive technology, resource information etc. Whilst the evaluation feedback appeared to indicate a correlation between emotional support and mobility, a further targeted study might reveal whether or not a significant correlation exists between clients receiving emotional support and increasing mobility confidence.