Skip to Content

Guide to Develop the Personalised Support Project in the User's Computerised File

✍️ High Authority of Health (HAS), adopted by the Commission for Strategy, Professions and Healthcare Organisations (CSMS) on 12 May 2026.
27 June 2026 by
Guide to Develop the Personalised Support Project in the User's Computerised File
Daniel Oberlé - Pratiques en santé Oberlé
| No comments for now



🔦 🔍💡 Personalised Support Project: a HAS 2026 guide to put the person at the centre, clarify the steps of the PSP and concretely include it in the CIF, without losing the ethical and relational dimension. #PSP #UserComputerisedFile
🧩💻 Digital Shift in ESSMS: structure the PSP in the CIF, share only what is useful to the person and secure the data, with concrete benchmarks for field teams and publishers. #DigitalInHealth #SelfDetermination



📌 📌 For a director of ESSMS or a head of service, these documents provide a clear operational framework to revisit the PSPs in the era of the CIF, articulating user rights, pathway logic and digital constraints. For an educator, a CESF, a nurse or a coordinator, they provide a structured step-by-step approach, concrete examples and a national template that can be used immediately with teams and the people supported. For CIF publishers and digital referents, they precisely indicate the functional expectations (structuring, sharing objectives, authorisations) within the framework of the digital health roadmap 2023-2027 and the Framework for Digital Health Ethics (CENS)


Source :     📒 Guide – Develop the Personalised Support Project in the User's Computerised File » (method)
« Argument – Develop the Personalised Support Project in the User's Computerised File »
« Synthesis – Guide to Developing the personalised support project in the electronic user file


📜🔗LINK to the source


1. ANALYTICAL SUMMARY

From the “flat document” to the dynamic process outlined in the DUI. The PPA often remains static when it should be cyclical and re-evaluable (p. 6). Against the backdrop of the digital Ségur, which has massively equipped ESSMS with interoperable electronic user files, the HAS responds to a request from DGCS/DNS/CNSA to clarify the use of the DUI in the development of the PPA (p. 6, 11). The target audiences are all individuals supported in ESSMS — protected children, people with disabilities, elderly people, people in precarious situations (p. 27) — and the central tension identified opposes the managerial logic of traceability to self-determination, which implies areas of confidentiality (p. 10, 64).

An operational framework and a framework for information sharing. The guide structures the approach into nine steps, from information/consent to co-evaluation (p. 15-16), proposes a PPA template field by field with mandatory mentions (p. 53-56), and clearly distinguishes between individualisation (residential contract) and personalisation (PPA) (Annex 2, p. 68). It establishes a precise legal framework for consent, exchange, and sharing — four legal purposes, presumed consent within the care team (p. 39-40) — and a key principle: the PPA is not shared in its entirety but only the objectives selected by the individual (p. 57). It adds training axes (p. 59-60) and perspectives, including the idea of a unique PPA linked to the individual (p. 61).

2. KEY POINTS OF THE DOCUMENT

  1. Nine structuring steps of the PPA. The process is illustrated as a cycle: inform/consent, collect, centralise, analyse and co-construct, develop and programme, validate and formalise, revise, exchange and share, co-evaluate then update (p. 15-16). Each ESSMS adapts these steps to its audiences and its organisation.
  2. A PPA template ready to configure in the DUI. The expected content is detailed field by field with indications of mandatory blocking data (INS identity, person responsible and guarantor of the PPA, areas of intervention, context, expression of the person, objectives, actions/means, validation…) (p. 53-56). This template aims for interoperability and automatic pre-filling (p. 51).
  3. Distinction between individualisation / personalisation. Individualisation relates to services formalised in the accommodation contract or the DIPC based on a professional assessment; personalisation concerns the life project and relies on the voice, choices and active participation of the person (Annex 2, p. 68-69). Confusing the two reduces the PPA to an administrative procedure.
  4. Framework for sharing: the objectives, not the entire PPA. The person receives their complete PPA; with respect to third parties, only the objectives they have consented to share are communicated, the area of intervention never appearing during the sharing (p. 57-58). Four legal purposes frame the exchange/sharing and consent is presumed within the care team (p. 39-40). The DMP should only receive what is strictly necessary for care (p. 44).
  5. Guidelines on objectives, indicators and co-evaluation. The guide clarifies the objective trio (benefit for the person) / action / means (p. 32-34), does not impose any single indicator but cites the SMART or MALINS methods (p. 47), and makes co-evaluation a regulatory and ethical obligation involving the person (p. 44-45).

3. ACTION PATHS FOR LOCAL ACTORS

  1. Include the time of the PPA in the establishment project. Formalise the roles of referent, coordinator, and guarantor of the project and recognise observation, consultation, and co-construction time as working time (p. 29, 31). Unmet need to anticipate: the guide itself specifies that it does not address the question of means, and that some recommendations assume sufficient resources (p. 29-30).
  2. Build and update a list of intervention areas adapted to its audiences. Rely on existing nomenclatures as a common language: SERAFIN-PH for disability, the therapeutic education framework for chronic conditions, the consensus approach on the fundamental needs of the child in child protection (p. 23-24). Include a cross-cutting area "inclusion and citizenship".
  3. Secure validation without overburdening it with a signature. Rather than systematic signing, mobilise other proofs of agreement: minutes, checked box, email, audio recording, electronic stamp, and distinguish the act of validation from its recording in the DUI (p. 36-37).
  4. Equip for the controlled sharing of objectives. Set up, with the editor, a function for selecting objective by objective, with traceability (information given, person's agreement, date) (p. 57-58). Check the authorisation matrix of the DUI and explain it to the person and their entourage (p. 49). Take into account the decision of the Council of State of 15 October 2025 which reaffirms the collection of initial consent for access to the DMP (p. 43).
  5. Adapt the materials to the person's understanding. Plan for accessible formats (FALC, pictograms, illustrated booklet, comic, audio, AAC) for the validation and delivery of the PPA (p. 35, 57). Adaptation to be developed noted by the guide: the integration of AAC tools in the DUIs remains a prospect (p. 64).

4. ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

🔍➕ For more information, see the articles referenced by "Health Practices" on the theme ESSMS ➡️🔗 https://pratiquesensante.odoo.com/medico-social-social-essms

  1. HAS — Supporting the intimate, emotional and sexual life of people in ESSMS (part 1 — cross-cutting foundation), February 2025 (updated in November 2025). Complements the sensitive situations of the guide (emotional life of minors and supported adults) with legal and ethical benchmarks. https://www.has-sante.fr/jcms/p_3590098/fr/accompagner-la-vie-intime-affective-et-sexuelle-des-personnes-en-essms-volet-1-socle-transversal
  2. HAS — Supporting the development of self-determination and the power to act of people in ESSMS — Framing note, March 2025 (RBPP expected early 2027). Deepens the central concept of the guide; the PPA is cited as a lever for self-determination. https://www.has-sante.fr/jcms/p_3598052/fr/l-accompagnement-au-developpement-de-l-autodetermination-et-du-pouvoir-d-agir-des-personnes-en-essms-note-de-cadrage
  3. ANS — The Ségur of digital health for social and medico-social (DUI, wave 2 published on 3 March 2026). Reference technical resource on the referenced Ségur DUI, interoperability and My health space, in direct support of the guide's "editor" recommendations. https://esante.gouv.fr/segur/medico-social

5. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)

  1. Does the PPA need to be signed? No. No text requires the signature of the PPA, unlike the residency contract. The signature formalises the agreement but complicates the revision; other forms of evidence are recommended (p. 36-37).
  2. What to do if the person refuses the development of the PPA? Their refusal is documented and their support continues within the framework of the residency contract, respecting their rights; objectives can continue to be worked on without a formalised PPA (p. 19, 22).
  3. How to obtain agreement when the person cannot clearly consent? We seek assent through verbal and non-verbal communication, adapting the information to the person's pace and modes of communication, with support from those around them if needed (p. 19).
  4. Can the complete PPA be shared with another establishment? No. Only the selected and consented objectives are shared; the full PPA is only given to the person, and the area of intervention does not appear during sharing (p. 57-58).
  5. What is the difference between revision and evaluation/update? The revision adapts daily actions and means, or adds/removes a consented objective, without restarting the entire process; the evaluation/update provides a global assessment and leads to a new PPA (p. 37-38, 47).
  6. Are imposed indicators necessary? Non. Le groupe de travail ne recommande aucun indicateur spécifique ; chaque ESSMS choisit indicateurs et/ou résultats attendus, par exemple via SMART ou MALINS. Ces mesures évaluent l'objectif, jamais la personne ni les professionnels (p. 47).
  7. Quel est le rôle du mandataire (tuteur/curateur) dans le PPA ? L'interlocuteur principal reste le majeur protégé. Le mandataire à la personne peut aider à la décision et participer aux réunions ; le mandataire aux biens sécurise le financement mais ne définit pas les objectifs. Les informations relevant de la vie privée non nécessaires à la mesure ne lui sont pas transmises sans consentement (Annexe 3, p. 70-72).

6. RÉÉCRITURE EN FALC

Qu'est-ce que ce guide ?

Ce guide vient de la Haute Autorité de santé (HAS). Il aide les professionnels à écrire le projet personnalisé d'accompagnement. On appelle ce projet le PPA. Le PPA est écrit dans un dossier sur ordinateur. On appelle ce dossier le DUI.

À quoi sert le PPA ?

Le PPA dit ce que la personne veut faire. Il dit comment les professionnels vont l'aider. La personne décide. Elle est au centre du projet.

Le PPA n'est pas un papier qui ne bouge pas.

Avant, le PPA ne changeait pas souvent. Maintenant, le PPA peut changer. On le revoit quand la vie de la personne change.

Les grandes étapes du PPA :

  • On explique le projet à la personne. Elle dit oui ou non.
  • On écoute ses besoins et ses envies.
  • On écrit toutes les informations au même endroit.
  • On choisit des objectifs ensemble.
  • On choisit les actions pour réussir.
  • La personne est d'accord. On note cet accord.
  • On regarde si ça marche. On change si besoin.

Les points importants :

  • La personne reçoit son PPA en entier.
  • Les autres professionnels ne voient pas tout le PPA. Ils voient seulement les objectifs choisis par la personne.
  • La personne dit oui avant qu'on partage une information.
  • Le PPA peut être écrit avec des images. Cela aide à mieux comprendre.
  • Il ne faut pas faire le PPA trop vite. Il faut prendre le temps.

7. ANALYSE TRANSVERSALE — VALEURS DE PRATIQUES EN SANTÉ

  • Littératie : oui ; le guide promeut des supports adaptés (FALC, pictogrammes, CAA, audio, BD) pour la validation et la remise du PPA (p. 24-25, 35, 57).
  • Empowerment : central, le « pouvoir d'agir » (traduction française de l'empowerment) est posé comme composante de l'autodétermination, soutenu et non imposé (p. 9, Annexe 1).
  • Participation : la personne est co-actrice à chaque étape, de l'expression des besoins à la co-évaluation, avec un travail tripartite possible personne/entourage/professionnel (p. 27, 44).
  • Santé communautaire : partiellement ; la dimension collective apparaît via l'inclusion, la citoyenneté et l'appui sur les ressources du territoire et le milieu ordinaire (p. 24, 28).
  • Éthique : très présente, avec des « focus éthique » récurrents sur le consentement, la confidentialité et la tension gestion/droits (p. 10, 41, 44).
  • Droits humains : oui, l'approche s'ancre dans la loi 2002-2 et l'article L. 311-3 du CASF garantissant dignité, libre choix et participation (p. 6, 17).
  • Intersectorialité : affirmée, articulation médico-social/social/soins de ville/hôpital et acteurs de droit commun (bailleurs, Éducation nationale, missions locales) (p. 6, 28).
  • Partenariat : formalisé via l'équipe interdisciplinaire, les fonctions de coordination et le partage encadré entre structures (p. 28-29, 40-41).
  • Lutte contre les discriminations : abordée indirectement ; le guide insiste sur le non-jugement, le « ne pas infantiliser » et la diversité des publics, mais ne traite pas explicitement des discriminations comme thème distinct (p. 10, 27).

8. ÉVALUATION DE LA FIABILITÉ DE LA RESSOURCE

Pertinence scientifique : élevée. Source institutionnelle de référence (HAS), méthode par consensus simple avec groupe de travail, groupe de lecture, experts DUI et personnes accompagnées contributrices ; déclarations d'intérêts analysées (p. 3, 80-83). Bibliographie de 22 références majoritairement officielles et récentes, intégrant des éléments d'actualité juridique (décision du Conseil d'État du 15 octobre 2025, p. 43).

Pertinence opérationnelle : très élevée. Trame de PPA directement paramétrable, exemples de situations sectorielles complets et tableaux objectifs/actions/résultats, repères juridiques sourcés, axes de formation. Limite assumée : le guide indique que ses propositions ne sont pas applicables en l'état des DUI actuels et nécessitent une feuille de route progressive avec les éditeurs (p. 11), et qu'il n'aborde pas la question des moyens (p. 29-30).

#️⃣  #PratiquesEnSanté #PPA #MédicoSocial #Autodétermination #DUI #NumériqueEnSanté #DroitsDesUsagers #CoConstruction






Sign in to leave a comment