Specialist facilities
REASONS FOR LACK OF SUPPORT Why? Lack of evidence, lack of awareness, lack of resources; it is all of these things, and the extensive efforts of a large group of passionate campaign bodies had done little to change the situation since the successful passing of The Autism Act 2009. We had to act, and we were faced with three options:
l Stop our autism services
This was never an option for Caudwell Children, although it was recommended by some third- party marketers, who suggested we ‘simplify our ask’ by only fundraising for the easily explained services like wheelchairs or supported holidays.
l Campaign for policy change Caudwell Children has always supported campaigns which aim to improve the rights and lives of disabled people. With an understanding of the challenges facing policy change for the assessment and intervention of autism, and a passion for providing effective ‘on the ground’ support, we concluded that our resources would be better focussed elsewhere while maintaining our support for the work undertaken by others in this area.
l Add to the evidence base Many of the complex challenges facing the autism community can be boiled down to the lack of evidence. By bringing our own services ‘in house’, and delivering a new approach to autism assessment, diagnosis, and intervention, we could develop robust research to prove that children and families’ wellbeing can be improved in a way that could eventually be adopted by mainstream healthcare.
BOARD BACKING Following the presentation of a robust business case and implementation strategy for the new Caudwell Children Autism Service and the building, the chairman and Trustee Board gave me and the team their backing, which enabled the real design work to begin. It was at this point that my professional experience as a fashion textiles and interior designer began to be called upon once again. Using my personal experience of working with children with autism, and witnessing the challenges other facilities have faced, I began to sketch the layout in a way I thought would offer families clear navigation, multi-functional spaces, and a reduction in environment-induced stress or anxiety.
WIDE, CURVED CORRIDORS Using wide, curved corridors, regular ‘go-to’ calming ‘pods’, accessible outdoor spaces, and an amphitheatre-style stepped design, these early concept sketches were entirely based on how I imagined children and families would use and experience the building. A comment from my daughter, who asked ‘Mummy, why are you drawing a butterfly?’, began the design process for the building we see today. The team I had around me was crucial in this
process, and the innovative vision for the building also meant that we had to share the same passion, belief, and determination, to deliver something that met the needs of the building’s users, delivered on budget, and inspired people to think differently about facility
14 THE NETWORK OCTOBER 2018
Trudi Beswick with her original sketch for the new building.
Evidence supported the charity’s theory that adding curves to the Centre’s circulation strategy was a natural progression.
design. The design team for the Caudwell International Children’s Centre consisted of myself, Garry Medlock and Ben Sutcliffe from the charity; project manager, Rob Hempsall (C4 Consulting); architect, James Pass (C4 Consulting); M&E consultant, Mike Davies (KGA Partnership), and structural consultant, Phil Barlow (Tier Consult), with each of us importantly supported by the wider teams around us in our respective organisations. From this point we journeyed through five steps of design and construction:
STEP 1: CONSULTATION Caudwell Children has been built on the invaluable input we have received from our beneficiaries and stakeholders. In the formative months of the charity, I personally visited every family who applied for support to understand their unique challenges, while trying to establish the most effective way we could help. The design of the new autism service and the
building it would be housed in was no different, and we immediately set about establishing a series of consultation events and activities to establish the emotions and feelings children and families experience, or would like to experience, when visiting a facility for the purpose of clinical intervention.
At the same time we used the time with our beneficiaries to gain feedback on examples of architecture and interior design from a wide range of periods, styles, and uses. The consultation tools which had the most influence on the building’s design were our ‘Cool Wall’ – which gave children and families the opportunity to visibly display design ideas in order of preference, the identification of the feelings they wished to experience when visiting the centre, and the opportunity we provided to highlight the priority issues in their lives which most affected their wellbeing. The data we collected during these consultations was regularly revisited, and referred to at regular intervals throughout the design process; with further consultation activities taking place on particular topics as the project developed. Of the feedback we received, a number of contradicting adjectives emerged which had the most impact on the design, and presented the design team with the most user-focused challenges of the project. For example:
l Free / Secure l Exciting / Calm l Homely / Modern
STEP 2: LOCATION
The ‘Cool Wall’ gave children and families the opportunity to visibly display design ideas in order of preference.
In positioning any public access building, the common paradox of ‘accessibility over outlook’ occurred; i.e., finding a site with excellent transport links in a location that offered the right environment for its users. In our case that was a calm, natural location, with the security of not being overlooked by adjacent buildings. In previous years we had conducted feasibility studies on eight sites for a facility within Staffordshire, and been offered numerous regeneration sites across the City of Stoke-on- Trent, to no avail. In 2012 we identified an opportunity to develop land in partnership with
©C4 Consulting
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36
