CASE STUDIES Best‐practice assessment methodology and tool Introduction In the next phase of this project, we explore best‐practice case studies of services provided to older people in rural communities which reflect the principles of rural proofing. Our research into best‐practice case studies identifies services which meet the spirit of rural proofing, as well as those which have been developed more specifically within the principles of rural proofing. We initially identified thirty five case studies and then reduced these down further to twenty. We considered several elements in order to develop the final short‐list of the 20 best‐practice case studies: •
•
•
Identification of approximately 35 national and a small selection of international case studies via a review of the evidence review, policy review, qualitative research, additional desk research and 10 stakeholder interviews. These case studies were recorded using a standardised recording framework see below and a system of RAG rating An initial cut from this 35 down to 20, using the same framework but selecting those case studies ranked as green or amber and which fit the set of design principles set out below Design principles for selection of the 20 best‐practice case studies In order to arrive at a final list of 20 best‐practice case studies, we applied a set of design principles to the selection process: •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Each case study is sufficiently different from other case studies to maximise learning The final set of case studies contains examples (although not exclusively) from the three areas that the research to date has included: Health, Housing and Transport and additionally the theme of Inclusion. There is a good geographical spread of examples The case studies include examples of innovation as well as established best‐practice There is a mix of mainly national and some international best‐practice The mix of case studies include low cost and more resource intensive models of best‐practice As well as the nature of the service, the selection criteria focusses on the process of service development, including the input of older people The final set of studies also provide examples of partnership working between different sectors •
•
Where possible, the case studies also look at the impact of services for older people in rural areas The research also seeks to identify the extent to which a service model is replicable to enable the spread of best‐practice The final set of case studies were selected using a combination of RAG ratings and these design principles. Questions for assessing the long‐list of case studies It was important to strike a balance between the level of detail and too much complexity in assessing the long‐list of case studies. Too little detail arguably limits the spread of good‐practice and too much complexity invariably hinders it. It was also important to assess the range of case studies against one another in a straightforward way to ensure the process of moving from approximately 35 to 20 was fair. To that end, we posed a relatively short set of questions and applied these where possible with regard to finding the evidence to the initial case studies selected. 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
What gap in older people’s provision was the service seeking to develop and how did the statutory body/bodies identify it? Do the statutory body/bodies have a clear sense of what good looks like and can they measure progress? How did the statutory body/bodies engage older people in analysing the service gap and developing the new service? Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before wider roll‐out? To what extent does the service involve partnership working between different sectors, including the voluntary sector and informal care (where relevant)? 6. What scale is the service operating at and how many older people as a proportion of all older people in rural areas are benefitting? 7. How is performance assessed, managed and improved? 8. To what extent does the service appear replicable, including the level of resourcing required? These questions formed part of the framework for recording the assessment of each case study, as set out below. Vivarium Trust, Fife Locality and lead organisation Fife, Scotland – Vivarium Trust, Scottish Charity Nature of the service Vivarium’s objective as a charity is to promote awareness of Co‐Housing and enhance recognition of the benefits it offers ‐ especially for older people. As part of this educational role, Vivarium will set up a pilot Co‐Housing project in Fife. Co‐Housing is a form of housing/lifestyle based on a combination of around 20‐30 individual homes plus shared common facilities. The whole project is planned and managed by the members themselves who remain in control of their own situations. Co‐Housing is about the people as much as the buildings. It has been demonstrated to avoid isolation and to encourage active participation. Originally developed in Denmark in the 1970s, Co‐Housing is now well established in many countries and is starting to make a mark in the UK. Sources http://www.vivariumtrust.co.uk/index.php/news http://communityprideinfife.co.uk/wp/?p=1150 http://www.cohousing.org.uk Q1: Service gap and how it was identified The project sprang from a recognition of the limited and often inappropriate housing options available for older people, where isolation becomes a major concern. The cost of maintaining an unnecessarily large old family home can also become a worry. Older people wish to retain their independence and freedom to choose as long as possible rather than becoming dependent on others, whether family or external service providers. Learning about Co‐
Housing showed that there is a way that these negative outcomes can be avoided and a positive lifestyle achieved. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good The Vivarium Trust seeks to allow older people to continue to be engaged members of society looks like and can progress be measured? Q3: How were older people engaged at each stage from analysis to service development? with dignity and self‐worth. The co‐housing model focuses directly on ‘community’, in that members choose to function as a small group of like‐minded people, who all share a desire to work and live together in co‐operation and mutual respect. With Co‐Housing, members are the main decision makers. Members remain in charge rather than being passive recipients of a ‘service’ provided by others. The intention of the pilot scheme of co‐ housing is to generate an evidence base to help stimulate future co‐housing schemes and replication. The project is run by over 50s for the benefit of over 50s. The basic principle is that members remain in charge of their own circumstances. Vivarium does not ‘provide a service’ to older people; on the other hand, Vivarium encourages older people to ‘do it themselves’. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll‐out? The Vivarium trust intends to create a pilot co‐housing development to demonstrate that such a project is possible in Scotland. They hope that other groups will follow their example and will be inspired to develop similar Co‐Housing projects in other areas. Q5: Was the service developed with partners, including informal carers? Vivarium is working in close partnership with Kingdom Housing Association who are widely respected as a leading Housing Association. Kingdom are able to offer expertise, financial clout, and credibility to the project. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? The initial project will provide 20‐25 homes for 30‐40 members. It is hoped that the pilot development will be constructed and occupied by the end of 2016. Vivarium’s work in promoting Co‐Housing has resulted in many achievements including a members debate in the Scottish Parliament, a successful conference in 2012, mentions in various books, articles and media reports, etc. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Progress can be seen in terms of group development, increased membership, growing awareness and support for Co‐Housing among policy makers in national and local government, and continuing support from their housing association partner in moving towards the construction of their pilot development. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? One central intention of the Trust’s activities is to provide an example which other groups will replicate and adapt to suit their own preferences and circumstances. In the long term, Vivarium hopes to be in a position to advise and support new Co‐Housing groups. Co‐Housing can be funded either by members themselves with their own capital plus commercial finance; or on an affordable basis through a Housing Association partner. Vivarium is following the latter route as they wish their project to be available to all who share their principles irrespective of personal financial resources. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: Vivarium hopes to make use of the common facilities on site as a base for income generation as a social enterprise, for example hiring of the meeting room, bed and breakfast accommodation, etc. Income generated will be put towards running costs, maintenance and repairs, etc. RAG rating
Amber. Information based on desk research and feedback from project. Village Agents in Gloucestershire Locality and lead organisation Gloucestershire – Gloucestershire Rural Community Council Nature of the service Village and Community Agents are local people who work ten hours a week, from their homes. They are all trained and knowledgeable about local services. Their key objectives are to help older people in Gloucestershire and older members of the BME communities across the county to feel more independent, secure, more cared for, and to have a better quality of life; to promote local services and groups, enabling the Village Agent to provide a client with a community‐based solution where appropriate; to give older people easy access to a wide range of information that will enable them to make informed choices about their present and future needs; to engage older people to enable them to influence future service planning and provision; and to provide support to people over the age of 18 who are affected by cancer. Sources http://www.villageagents.org.uk/Default.aspx?page=234 Q1: Service gap and how it was identified The County Council, commissioned GRCC to carry out research to find out how people wanted to access services. They found that while helpdesks are popular, they were not receiving many calls from rural areas and it emerged that residents in these areas preferred to access advice from someone they knew and trusted. The NHS were keen to improve advice to these people to help keep them out of hospital and able to live independently at home. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? The Agents are extremely passionate about what they are doing. Progress can be measured by expansion of the scheme and increasing numbers of village agents. Q3: How were older people engaged See above regarding initial research. Not clear precisely how older people have been involved at each stage from analysis to but scheme revolves around meeting their needs. The Village Agents are trusted members of service development? the community. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? Yes, it began as part of the DWP’s LinkAge Plus scheme in 2006 in 96 rural parishes with limited access to services. The Institute of Local Government at Birmingham University carried out the external evaluation of the Village Agents project at the pilot stage. The County Council provided additional funding to introduce Community Agents working with BME groups in 2007. Q5: Was the service developed with The scheme was developed in partnership with a wide range stakeholders including service partners, including informal carers? providers carers and potential users. It is managed by the Community Council – a charity – and funded by Gloucestershire County Council and Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group. The Village Agents work with all statutory and voluntary organisations across the county. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? It covers the whole of Gloucestershire, both urban and rural areas, and employs 1 scheme manager and 39 village and community agents working 10 hours per week. Some Village Agents have additional hours each week, depending on the size of their parish clusters. Eleven Agents have also received additional training and hours to work with people over the age of 18 affected by cancer across the county. These Specialist Agents are funded by Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Agents are required to record their activities using a secure online form known as a gateway. This collects demographic data where possible, the nature of the issues and other information relevant to any follow up visit. Where required, the gateway is submitted to an agency or agencies by the Village Agent, with the client’s permission. It also captures details of community solutions which may not require input from statutory services, visits to social groups, parish council meetings, lunch clubs, coffee mornings, Agent‐led surgeries or information events, training events, etc. Agents have an annual appraisal, and there is on‐going monitoring of performance through analysis of the gateways, which are also used to collate statistical data for the quarterly reports on the scheme. Training is on‐going through monthly meetings by district, and quarterly meetings of all Village and Community Agents. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? The scheme has already been replicated across fifteen other areas. No information on costs available. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: An excellent scheme to harness the energy and expertise of local people. Simple but very effective. Building social capital. RAG rating Green Information based on desk research and feedback from project. Swifts and Night Owls in Norfolk (TNS­sourced) Locality and lead organisation Norfolk – Norfolk County Council
Nature of the service Swift and Night Owls has a responsibility for, and aims to assist:
- People living in the Community over the age of 18 years old - People with a Physical Disability - People with a Learning Difficulties - People with Mental Health - People with Dementia - People with Sensory Impairment - People who need assistance due to illness or following a hospital admission - Carers of these people Swifts and Night Owls is a free service to help older people who have unplanned needs anytime during the day or night. They can respond to routine health needs such as changing simple dressings or catheter bags as well as personal care tasks. The service is funded by the local authority and NHS. The service is an alternative to calling a GP or an ambulance as a first resort, although project staff might decide to call an ambulance or to refer an older person to another service. In many cases this will not be necessary. The service aims to prevent unnecessary hospital admittance and they will provide support and practical help in a crisis. Sources http://www.norfolkcarershelpline.org.uk/Downloads/CarersHandbook.pdf
http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/view/ncc080642 Q1: Service gap and how it was Swifts and Night Owls are designed to fill the gap between calls that are urgent but not identified emergencies. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? The service has a clear aim to prevent emergency admissions and provide better support to older people. Q3: How were older people engaged Not clear. at each stage from analysis to service development? Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? The service was piloted and evaluated as part of the Partnerships for Older People Project (POPPs). Q5: Was the service developed with The service can signpost and refer on as necessary and is promoted in leaflets for carers. partners, including informal carers? The service was recently redesigned in April 2013, for which the Older Peoples Partnership and other partner agencies were consulted. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? Across Norfolk. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? The initial POPP pilots were evaluated. Performance is now assessed through regular customer surveys and the production of reports of visits ‐ which outline trends, types of visits, where the referrals have come from, response times, care received and onward referrals. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? It does appear replicable. The POPP evaluation estimated net costs (minus savings) of approx £180k over two years. Swift and Night Owls are also beginning to calculate the amounts that the service saves for other partner agencies. Deleted: Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: This looks like a valuable service that would provide peace of mind to older people and carers.
RAG rating Green Information based on desk research and feedback from project. Swanage Transport, Action Group Locality and lead organisation Swanage, Dorset – Grass roots, voluntary initiative Nature of the service Improve the transport needs of local residents. Ran from 2001 ‐2006 until it developed into the larger, Purbeck Transport Action Group in 2006, covering a greater geographical area. Sources Swanage Transport Action Group (STAG): Meeting the Transport Needs of an Ageing Population in Rural Dorset, available at: http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/files/extranet/docs/HSW/Musselwhite_Swanage.pdf Interview with Professor Charles Musslewhite. The Swanage Town and Hinterland Community Plan (2003‐2006) utilised a consultation phase in producing the final documented plan, which outlined the rural challenges in providing effective public transport. The group acts as a conduit between residents and policy makers, providing the local rural population a voice in the development of local transport services, so that they are adaptive and improve access. Adaptive transport services that meet the needs of older people in rural areas. Measurement of progress not clear while project ran. Q1: Service gap and how it was identified Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? Q3: How were older people engaged Older people were involved from the outset in terms of being part of the formation of the at each stage from analysis to group. The group hosted regular meetings in which local people could attend and outline their service development? needs to service providers such as bus companies, taxi operators and local authorities. Surveys and questionnaires were also employed. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
Not clear. out? Q5: Was the service developed with Through engagement in consultation with Dorset County Council and bus companies, the partners, including informal carers? Swanage Transport Action Group was successful in procuring the STAGBus, an accessible, door‐to‐door service that used a specially adapted minibus. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? At town level initially, within Swanage. However, it was subsequently developed into the larger, Purbeck Transport Action Group in 2006, covering a greater geographical area. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Not clear. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? Very replicable model of public engagement with planners and transport providers. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: Very much a community model, older people were encourage to pay £1 for joining the group, and £1 per trip, but this was not obligatory, and for those unable to pay, they were not excluded from the service. RAG rating Amber. Information based on desk research and feedback from project. Suffolk Good Neighbour Scheme Locality and lead organisation Suffolk – Community Action Suffolk (charity) Nature of the service A network of sustainable Good Neighbour Schemes across the county, designed to tackle rural social isolation. A Good Neighbourhood Scheme coordinator oversees schemes across the county and organises a team of volunteers get schemes up and running; they are open to any resident although focused on frail older people. The aim is to fill in the gaps in current provision of care and support and to help residents reach the services they need. The volunteering opportunity is also valued by local people. Sources https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6248/2044122.pdf Q1: Service gap and how it was identified Approximately twenty percent of residents experienced social isolation, mainly as a result of the high cost of living, low incomes and poor access to services. Parish plans identify demand for a Good Neighbour Scheme, although direct approaches can also be made by parish councils or other community groups. Q2: Is there a clear sense of The aim is for older people to remain living in their own homes as long as possible, reducing pressure what good looks like and can on hospital and care home beds. progress be measured? Q3: How were older people engaged at each stage from analysis to service development? Not clear Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­out? Not clear Q5: Was the service developed with partners, including informal carers? The service operates with many strategic and operational partners and helps to forge better links between services in the county. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? There are 21 schemes across the County overseen by one coordinator Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Not clear Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? Very replicable. The Suffolk Toolkit has already been sold to 12 out‐of‐county organisations. A start‐up grant of £500 is required for each scheme, which pays for a mobile phone, insurance, CRB checks etc. Once up and running schemes are self‐sustaining through donations and fundraising. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: A simple scheme to help people feel safe and secure at home. RAG rating Amber Information based solely on desk research as no further information was provided by the project. Shared Lives Scheme, nationwide Locality and lead organisation Nationwide – Network model Nature of the service An alternative care scheme to home care or care homes in which carers are recruited and trained by Shared Lives, who then encourage a long‐term relationship between a Shared Lives carer and the individual in need of care. Such relationships are delicately forged through a period of familiarisation, and often result in a living arrangement between the carer and individual needing care. Sources http://www.sharedlivesplus.org.uk/ Q1: Service gap and how it was identified The care service provided by Shared Lives is based on a long‐term, family‐like bond – the gap was to provide an alternative form of residential care for vulnerable adults that is more person‐centred than others. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? Providing cost‐effective and human form of residential care for vulnerable adults is the ethos of the organisation. Bespoke measures of progress unclear, but continual organisational growth stated as success. Q3: How were older people engaged Unclear as to how older people fed into the formation of the programme. However, Shared at each stage from analysis to Lives does run a number of consultations to improve the services they provide. Local groups service development? that allow carers to come together and share their experiences are also undertaken. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? Not clear in terms of original piloting and review – although recently the scheme was successful in obtaining government backing for the development of small community services in two pilot areas. Q5: Was the service developed with The Shared Lives Scheme is active in two partnerships: The Social Impact Bond and Care partners, including informal carers? Provider Alliance. Not apparent to what extent these partnerships feed into the approach of the scheme, and not clear as to whether they fed into original development. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? The Shared Lives Scheme has 129 Shared Lives scheme members and over 3,500 Shared Lives carer members. The scheme operates on a national‐scale. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Not clear. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? A replicable model that, as stated on the Shared Lives Schemes’ website , ‘…outperforms other forms of residential care over and over again.’ Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: RAG rating Collaborating with Improvement and Efficiency South East, Shared Lives Scheme produced a business case that shows: ‐10 new long term arrangements generate pa savings of between £23,400 (older people) and £517,400 (learning disabilities). ‐A new scheme for 85 people costs £620k over 5 years, with savings of nearly £13m (reduced use of more costly alternatives). Amber/Green Information based solely on desk research as no further information was provided by the project. Rural Coffee Caravan Information Project (RCCIP) Locality and lead organisation Suffolk – multi‐agency partnership, established by Reverend Canon Sally Fogden. Nature of the service Rural communities; information provision and signposting and social opportunities for lonely isolated people. Sources http://www.ruralcoffeecaravan.org.uk/ RCCIP Annual report, 2011: http://www.ruralcoffeecaravan.org.uk/assets/2011‐agm‐
etc/RCCIP‐Annual‐report‐2011‐Issue‐2.pdf Q1: Service gap and how it was identified The RCCIP targets areas where there is a gap in information provision, focusing on those areas without a village hall (or a hall that is little used and without information resources). Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? The objective of the project (as laid out in the Annual Report 2011) is: “to successfully encourage people living and working in remote rural areas to be aware of, and to take up, services that should impact their quality of life”. Q3: How were older people engaged Parish councils were given a description of the service offered and asked if their village would at each stage from analysis to benefit. The project then responded to invitations. Further developments have been informed service development? by feedback from service users and resulted in additional activities. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? The service began as a philanthropic service. The demand was so great that the pilot kept going and evolved into a full‐time project. All reviewing and refining has become an on‐going and integral part of the process. Q5: Was the service developed with The RCCIP works through collaboration of a number of partners, organisations that they partners, including informal carers? actively sign post older people towards, so that they can make use of the services that they provide. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? In 2011, the project reached 4737 people, with an average of 18.2 visitors per week (spread over 260 visits). The project operates throughout Suffolk. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? The RCCIP keep a record of visits made, place, time, weather, and number of visitors. They additionally keep records of the literature taken from the visits, though this is not reliable as materials lost to wind/rain or those not observed to have been taken will not be included in this summary and confuse stocktaking levels as a method of monitoring. The project maintains a nominal follow up, mainly anecdotal, of actions taken as a result of information gathered through the service (see Annual report 2011). Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? Potential for roll out very high. The project has seen great expansion since inception and reports few problems with every day running (RCCIP Annual report, p.13). Future plans listed in the 2011 annual report include rolling out the service to further areas. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: Potential cost‐benefits include those to the voluntary and other organisations whose information is distributed via the RCCIP; the presence of the project reducing the cost of separate communication to these communities for each of these organisations. Additionally, more effective use of local services by at‐risk individuals as a result of information gathered from the RCCIP may have cost benefits for local health and social care services if they are able to provide more timely and appropriate support having been sought out by better informed individuals. RAG rating Green Information based on desk research and feedback from project. Red Cross Outreach in Norfolk (TNS­sourced) Locality and lead organisation North Norfolk – Norfolk County Council Nature of the service The British Red Cross Older Peoples Outreach Service (OPOS) provides support to older people in North, South and West Norfolk, enabling people to remain safe and independent living in their own home, and not those in residential care or sheltered housing. This is a preventative service enabling independence. Referrals can be made by the individual, family, friends or professionals. This is a planned, non‐emergency service but assistance can be provided so that individuals will be prepared should an emergency occur. Support is provided at no cost to the person for up to two years. OPOS delivered a pilot project in South Norfolk in partnership with the Police in which an area was identified in which to knock on the doors of residents to discuss safety issues and additional support for older people who could benefit from OPOS support. Skilled staff and volunteers provide advice and support in the development of appropriate life skills that will enable the person to build their confidence, self‐esteem, regain independence and to live safely in their own home. Sources http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/News/NCC111567 Q1: Service gap and how it was identified The Norfolk ‘Living Longer, Living Well’ Strategy shows that older people want to remain living in their own home. As part of the preventative agenda the County Council have used Supporting People funding to enable this to be achieved for older people in Norfolk. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? British Red Cross provides the outreach service across three areas in Norfolk. A housing association and borough council provide outreach service in the other two areas. Across the whole of Norfolk, the outreach service aims to reach 1,000 people in the first twelve months. Q3: How were older people engaged Variety of Older People Forums that fed in to the development of the Norfolk ‘Living Longer, at each stage from analysis to service development? Living Well’ Strategy. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? A housing service and Borough Council piloted the service in two areas of Norfolk demonstrating need ‐ following which a county proposal was submitted. Q5: Was the service developed with The British Red Cross OPOS is based within premises at a Police Service, Fire Service and partners, including informal carers? Health Centre. OPOS ensures they are linked in with the local CCG in each area contributing to discussion and development on service provision and replication. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? Across North Norfolk. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Progress reviews with Commissioners. Evaluation of service via feedback form and telephone discussion with people supported by OPOS. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? It does appear replicable. The service is free to use for up to two years and has been funded by the County Council for a three year period with potential for additional 2 years funding thereafter. Other areas could consider user charges for some people if this was appropriate i.e. payment via personal budget, self‐funders or other source such as district councils. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: An excellent project, making use of a well‐known brand that people trust. RAG rating Amber . Information based on desk research and feedback from project. Public Transport Ambassadors in Netherlands Locality and lead organisation Rural Netherlands – Province of Zeeland Nature of the service Public Transport Ambassadors are over‐55s who are recruited and trained to help familiarise older people with public transport. The aim is to help them learn how to use Public Transport in a positive, enjoyable way to prevent older people becoming isolated and inactive. Ambassadors are recruited, trained, and publicised (including a large public event with 200 older people) before they become active. They then organise ‘test rides’ in local areas with individuals or groups of local people to familiarise them with public transport in the context of a positive day out. The Ambassadors also attend existing community groups to give presentations and educate older people about public transport. Sources http://www.eltis.org/index.php?id=13&study_id=3208 Q1: Service gap and how it was identified It was recognised that when older people could no longer drive, they were not familiar with public transport and hence tended to become isolated. The introduction of an e‐ticketing system meaning that paper tickets would no longer be available was the driver for this project, and it was recognised that older people found e‐ticketing complex and confusing. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? Progress is monitored by user and volunteer satisfaction with the service and the volunteer training. Q3: How were older people engaged A qualitative survey was carried out before the project began to understand the needs of the at each stage from analysis to target group. A user needs survey is recommended before implementing such a scheme. service development? Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
There was a pilot, and several lessons were learned, including the importance of training and the need to build in time to make the scheme known to the public. Level of funding is unclear. out? The ambassadors are reimbursed for their costs but receive no other payment. Q5: Was the service developed with Not clear. partners, including informal carers? Q6: What scale is the service operating at? Not clear, within Province of Zeeland. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? The days out are evaluated by questionnaire. Telephone interviews are conducted with ambassadors after the training event. Detailed evaluation results will be available in the future. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? It is replicable, and advice offered to others attempting a similar scheme is to use community organisations to help recruit ambassadors and to use a role model e.g. politician or well‐known person to act as the face of the campaign and help to publicise it. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: An interesting scheme to educate older people about public transport and help them to stay active. More info needed about the impact it has had. RAG rating Amber Information based solely on desk research as no further information was provided by the project. Men in Sheds in Cheshire Locality and lead organisation Cheshire – Age UK Cheshire Nature of the service Men in Sheds is a project that began in 2008 to support older men (over 55) who want to get together, share and learn new skills ‐ all in the welcoming space of a ‘Shed’. Activities include woodworking, skill sharing and socializing. The aim was to reduce social isolation among rural older men who often did not engage in other social groups, as well as to promote active ageing. Sources http://www.ageuk.org.uk/cheshire/our‐services/every‐man‐needs‐a‐shed/ http://menssheds.org.uk/index.php/our‐charities http://www.itsnever2late2.com/men‐in‐sheds.html Q1: Service gap and how it was identified The movement began in Australia in response to the realisation that were a large number of men living alone. Age UK have reported that there are 500,000 men over the age of 50 living alone in the UK. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? All the sheds have a different character based on the interests of the men and the skills of the coordinator but the vision is simple – for men to come and socialise and be active at the shed. Q3: How were older people engaged The men who use the sheds decide what activity they want to do so they shape the project. at each stage from analysis to service development? Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? Yes, Age UK backed three pilot sites but this project in Cheshire grew independently based on experiences in Australia. Age UK Cheshire set up the first Men in Shed project in the UK. Q5: Was the service developed with Sheds have strong links with local communities, including third sector, corporate partners, partners, including informal carers? older people’s groups, carers, health and social services. The participants themselves are at the heart of designing the character of each shed and the activities that are run there. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? There are four sheds in Cheshire with 400 members and thought to be around 30 in the UK in total. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Performance is managed using a range of qualitative and quantitative measures, which gather personal and profile data and testimonials from shed users and carers, as well as assessing change in wellbeing through Warwick‐Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale and Wellbeing Model produced by the New Economics Foundation. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? There are already many sheds around the country, backed by a mixture of public and private funding, with more and more becoming self‐financing. It is a highly replicable model. Enthusiastic volunteers are vital for the running of each shed, but a paid co‐ordinator in place is essential due to high level of health and safety issues and the range of long‐term conditions that participants present with. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: This is a simple scheme tackling the challenge of engaging men in social projects. It is highly replicable and can be cost neutral or even revenue raising once it gets going. RAG rating Green. Information based on desk research and feedback from project. Intergenerational Housing in Wallonia Locality and lead organisation Wallonia, Belgium – Walloon Housing Fund (a cooperative company) Nature of the service This scheme creates financial incentives for intergenerational housing. Loans are provided to families who want to renovate their homes so an older relative can move in with them, or they can build a separate dwelling close by. Interest rates vary according to the composition of the family (number of dependent persons, e.g. children and older relatives) and its disposable income. The aim is to bring young and old people together as neighbours. Each group forms part of the solution for the other group, creating a truly intergenerational solution to the challenges both groups face in living in rural or urban areas. Sources http://www.age‐platform.eu/images/stories/EN/CoverAGE/EN/21879_brochure_age_2010_en.pdf http://www.housingeurope.eu/www.housingeurope.eu/uploads/file_/Preparing%20the%20future_web.pdf http://www.flw.be/prets‐aux‐parents‐ages Q1: Service gap and how it was identified There was concern over severe marginalisation of older people in rural areas and the risk of segregation when housing solutions were aimed specifically at older people. The service is focussed on families and their dwelling needs. Therefore, there is no risk of segregation, because everybody is directly concerned: older relatives, children, grand‐children. Acceptance is based on the family means‐tested analysis. In others words this is a social loan. The measure is available everywhere, in both urban and rural areas. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can Few loans have been provided so far although the scheme has been operational since 2008. It is thought to respond to needs that are growing. progress be measured? Q3: How were older This new service was designed from the families loan demand. So, this new form of social loan grew from people engaged at each those cases. The goal was that older relatives could live near (or with) their children and grand‐children. In stage from analysis to this way, participation of older people was achieved. service development? Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? The service was based on demand and was reviewed and refined before roll‐out. Q5: Was the service developed with partners, including informal carers? The scheme has been shared with Limousin in France where it will also be rolled out. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? In geographical terms, the service covers the Walloon territory, including both rural and urban areas. Q7: How is Take‐up of loans. performance assessed, managed and improved? Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the As a model this could be replicable in England however potential for major roll‐out could be hampered due to the complex regulatory environment surrounding building new homes and a current culture that tends away from families living with older relatives (though this trend is somewhat changing, for example with the multigenerational household). associated costs? Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: A very interesting use of financial incentives. More evidence is needed as the scheme grows. RAG rating Amber Information based on desk research and feedback from project. Intergen in Caerphilly Locality and lead organisation Caerphilly – Caerphilly County Borough Council Nature of the service Free lunch and activities provided to 70‐90 older people every Wednesday at a local boys’ school. Older people are drawn from surrounding communities, which span both affluent and deprived areas. Key stage 3, 4 and sixth form students serve and tidy up after lunch and then socialise with the older people as they play games including using a Wii console. There is also support to use the internet. There are also regular events, music, book readings, charity days etc. held every term. The intergen club also runs regular trips to the cinema, concert hall, Ilfracombe and an overnight trip to London to visit Parliament and the theatre. The pupils and pensioners have also engaged in a joint literacy project and a theatrical performance held in school. Sources http://www.olderpeoplewales.com/en/Ageingwell/EY2012event.aspx http://citizensonlineprojects.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/get‐caerphilly‐online.html http://www.lewisschoolpengam.org.uk/ Q1: Service gap and how it was identified The school was looking for a way to engage the younger generation and older people both in and out of school, they noticed there was very little provision for this so decided to augment their monthly sequence dancing provision, which is now in its seventh year with the lunch time club. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? The older people mix with the younger people, which is said to have resulted in greater mutual respect between generations and benefits to society as a whole. The school reports a recent inspection of the service described the intergenerational activity as exemplary. Q3: How were older people engaged Regular consultation and informal meetings take place. At the beginning of the service a at each stage from analysis to questionnaire was undertaken to inform design. service development? Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? The service was introduced to a smaller group at first but as the numbers grew the activities and provision changed. This is due to the contribution from pupils, staff and over 50 guests. Q5: Was the service developed with The Council had to work closely with the school management and Age Concern as well as other partners, including informal carers? local initiatives and the Welsh Government. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? 70‐90 older people are involved at one school every Wednesday. Among the other seven schools the number is between 20‐25. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Consultation with all parties involved, mostly informal but the pensioners do discuss the programme among themselves and several speak on behalf of the others. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? Very replicable. The key barriers have centred on the organisational requirements around the school days and lunch times ‐ and the logistics of having so many older people visit the schools (e.g. caretakers needed to be on hand to operate the lift for older people who could not manage the stairs). Costs are minimal as the schools already have the required equipment. Due to the popularity of the clubs in the community however, funding has been secured from the Safer Caerphilly Community Partnership – with each school receiving grants of up to £500 which has enabled purchase of additional resources including music equipment. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: A simple but effective idea to combat social isolation and increase activity among older people and build social capital between generations. RAG rating Amber. Information based on desk research and feedback from project. First Contact, Lincolnshire Locality and lead organisation Lincolnshire – Age UK Nature of the service
First Contact offers people aged 60 and over living in Lincolnshire advice and services to help them carry on living independently. The idea behind First Contact is to provide a single gateway signposting service through which older people can access services. Sources http://parishes.lincolnshire.gov.uk/CherryWillingham/section.asp?catId=33379
http://www.ageuk.org.uk/lincoln/our‐services/first‐contact/ http://www.firstcontact.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage&Itemid=1 Q1: Service gap and how it was identified A working group was established, including Senior Staff from Lincolnshire County Council and local Age UK’s, where they identified older people were having difficulty in accessing a range of different services. It was recognised that a single point of contact was required to assist older people with ease of access to these services. Older people were involved in developing the service design through a range of engagement events hosted by Lincolnshire County Council. This information was used to draw up the service specification which then went out to tender. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? Q3: How were older people engaged at As a sign‐posting service, First Contact Lincolnshire would consider that older people receiving correct information on services is a marker of success. There are some early indications of success including: County Council figures show 3,222 checklists have been completed. This generated 9,072 referrals, with 80 per cent of these providing an older person with the service required. Not clear.
each stage from analysis to service development? Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll‐out? The First Contact project, commissioned by Lincolnshire County Council, was launched countywide following a successful pilot in the East Lindsey area. Q5: Was the service developed with partners, including informal carers? The scheme is coordinated by Age UK Lincoln and Lincolnshire County Council, and involves a wide range of public and voluntary sector partners. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? County‐level. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Performance is assessed in several different ways. Monthly figures are collated by the Central Coordinators and they monitor aspects such as outstanding referrals, customer satisfaction, partner engagement and training and number of checklists completed. There is a Touchstone survey completed quarterly and bi‐monthly, the key referral partners meet as a group with Age UK Lincoln (provider) and Lincolnshire County Council (Commissioner). Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? Very replicable scheme. Relies on local knowledge, to sign‐post effectively. Does require the buy‐in of service providers however, customers go through a ‘checklist’ of needs/information, checklists generate referrals to the required agency prompting them to contact the customer and deliver the information and advice required within 28 days. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: RAG rating Amber/Green
Deleted: Information based on desk research and feedback from project. 1. Falls Prevention in Herefordshire (TNS­sourced) Locality and lead organisation Herefordshire – Wye Valley NHS Trust Nature of the service A decentralised falls prevention programme that offers home visits and clinics in the city of Hereford and more recently in the surrounding market towns (Bromyard, Ledbury, Leominster, Kington, Ross) on a weekly basis to address patient accessibility issues. Older people can self‐refer and the trust works with local health and charitable/voluntary organisations to raise public awareness to encourage early referrals. Patients are signposted to other services where a need is identified. The Service also works closely with other health and social care teams in the country. Sources http://www.herefordshire.nhs.uk/docs/information_for_professionals(1).pdf Q1: Service gap and how it was identified The trust carried out auditing and consultation on their rehabilitation service to investigate missed appointments and low take‐up of services. As a result they repositioned the service as falls prevention with the elements described above. Self‐referrals were also introduced as a result of patient feedback which cited difficulty in visiting health professionals to be referred to the service as another problem to accessing the service. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? The service has a website with accessible information available to download for professionals and the public including its aims, which are: Promote independence, quality of life and a healthy active lifestyle among older people; prevent falls and falls‐related injuries; prevent hospital admissions and facilitate early discharge from care settings; provide a service to meet the need of an ageing and growing population. The service is strongly developed on evidence‐
based practice and progress can be measured by monitoring falls admission rates, hip fracture rates, the referral rate and through audit. Q3: How were older people engaged Older people were consulted to identify why the take up rate for the service was lower than the at each stage from analysis to service development? referral rate and to understand what they needed. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? It does appear to have been developed and refined with feedback. Q5: Was the service developed with The service was developed through consultation with service users and through evidence‐
partners, including informal carers? based practice and following relevant guidelines and locally developed strategies. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? Across Herefordshire. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Performance is assessed through audit and patient satisfaction questionnaires. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? The specific elements of a falls prevention programme that make it a success in a rural area (decentralised, with home visits) appear replicable and while there are would be upfront costs, these would be offset if falls were reduced. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: This sounds like an impressive service that could provide useful learning for other rural areas. RAG rating Amber. Information based on desk research and feedback from project. Extra Care Housing in North Yorkshire Locality and lead organisation North Yorkshire ‐ Esk Moors Caring Nature of the service Esk Moors Caring and Lodge is a development of 12 extra‐care apartments and a local domiciliary care service, which serves residents and the wider community. The apartments are available for rental only; residents must have a care need and strong local connections to the valley. The facilities also benefit the local community, with art classes, a fully equipped gym and a range of social events open to all. Sources http://www.overthehillcampaign.org.uk/casestudies.php Q1: Service gap and how it was identified Meals on Wheels volunteers noticed that older people were leaving the area, although they wanted to remain in the valley they love for their whole lives – families were not staying together to provide care. People needed somewhere to live, care, and things to do. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? The local people who set up Esk Moors Caring are very passionate about providing an excellent service to local people and are very clear about what good looks like. Progress is measured through various means including: •
The results of inspections by the care regulator, CQC, and NYCC •
Customer satisfaction surveys •
Quarterly service reviews by The Board of Trustees Q3: How were older people engaged Before anything began, a house to house survey of nearly 500 people was carried out. All the at each stage from analysis to people who work in the project are local and they know the residents and service users, so service development? their views are constantly reflected. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? Not applicable. Q5: Was the service developed with The project is a partnership between the housing provider, Abbeyfield, Esk Moors Caring and partners, including informal carers? the County Council. Local people were fully involved. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? The service has 12 apartments at present and has a strong focus on sustainability. The service has continued to grow as the domiciliary care business has expanded. It was also identified during the original survey that many local people would benefit from somewhere that could provide temporary respite accommodation to aid family carers. Working with the landlord, Esk Moors Caring have now made one of the apartments a respite flat to meet this need, and are in discussion with health commissioners about its use to reduce hospital admissions during the winter months. Abbeyfield and Esk Moors Caring are in the early stages of discussions about the possibility of increasing the number of apartments on site, using a different tenure model. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Unclear Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? Very replicable. The housing provider pays Esk Moor Caring to run the Lodge on their behalf. Esk Moor Caring receives statutory social care funding from the council or from individuals who are self‐funding. They charge for the activities they run and these break even. They carry out fundraising e.g. their Nostalgia group produced a book that they have sold locally to generate £8k profit. It is the wide mix of funding and areas of work which provides the stability and sustainability of the business. The key to ensuring the on‐going viability is ensuring that all funders, statutory, charitable and business activity are aware of not only what services they are commissioning, but how their service fits into the whole picture. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: An extremely impressive and inspiring project improving the lives of older people in a rural area. RAG rating Green Information based on desk research and feedback from project. Dorset POPP Locality and lead organisation Dorset POPP is primarily a partnership between Dorset County Council, Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group, the Third Sector and older people. Nature of the service The vision of Dorset POPP is 'to build supportive communities to enable older people to remain living in their own homes for as long as they wish, by developing responsive, appropriate services and activities at a localised level. Dorset POPP is primarily a partnership between the above agents, however the programme has developed a working partnership that extends beyond this and includes a range of other service providers, including Dorset Fire and Rescue, Dorset Police, libraries, community matrons, community pharmacies and others. Sources http://www.dorsetforyou.com/popp Q1: Service gap and how it was identified All of the POPP projects were established with the aim of improving health and wellbeing among older people, and reducing social isolation and exclusion. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? The Dorset POPP was underpinned by a clear vision of what success would look like, as measured for older people, and included: that older people are socially integrated and not isolated, enjoy suitable housing and have dignity and control over their life. Q3: How were older people engaged at each stage from analysis to service development? The Dorset POPP includes Fiftyplus Forums, which provide a social network for older people, and enable older people to engage in partnership and planning meetings. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll‐out? Dorset POPP originally began as a pilot, as one of 29 POPPS across the country funded by the Department of Health, as a way improve to the health and wellbeing of older people. Q5: Was the service developed with A number of partners are involved in the programme, including: Dorset Older People’s Forums, partners, including informal carers?
local housing providers and Dorset Police. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? County‐level. As of 2012 there were 300 community initiative projects, 63,000 older people either received sign posting, support or were directly involved in a project. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? The Dorset POPP programme includes a systematic evaluation programme, impact is assessed on the extent to which the Dorset POPP programme has improved services for older people, evaluation is essential to improvement of the programme (There was also a national evaluation of the POPPS project) Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? The overwhelming majority of POPP projects have been sustained with only 3% being closed. Highly replicable however Dorset is an affluent area, with generally high levels of health and a strong tradition of engagement and partnership working, therefore it does not imply this exact model would be completely applicable, though similar models could be adapted. No cost benefit analysis or SROI for Dorset POPP. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: RAG rating
Green. Information based solely on desk research as no further information was provided by the project. Debenham Project, Suffolk Locality and lead organisation Debenham village, Suffolk – Community led initiative Nature of the service Providing support to family carers of people with dementia and the individuals they look after, so that they can continue to reside in their community and remain active participants in all aspects of village life. This is achieved through the provision of a range of services, including: running of a confidential telephone support line, lunch clubs, medication support, the running of an advice and information centre, an exercise club, memory support services, a Carers Club and information Café, a volunteer emergency respite service, and professional carer support. The longer term vision for the project is to provide community‐led, person‐centred and integrated health and social care for all elderly frail members of the community which meets their individual needs irrespective of their degree of frailty. These services are in the main provided by volunteers drawn from throughout the community and their skills are supplemented by professionals when specialist help and advice is required. There is also a project co‐ordinator. Sources http://www.the‐debenham‐project.org.uk/index.html Case Study from Joseph Rowntree Foundation report: Widening Choices for Older People with High Support Needs, available at: http://www.the‐debenham‐project.org.uk/articles.shtml Q1: Service gap and how it was identified It was recognised by a group of elders in the local parish church in February 2009 that dementia presented a major concern for the community and the individuals in the parish. At that time they were unaware what the major health care and support sectors (the NHS, the Local Authorities and the Charities) were doing to respond to the challenge of dementia. Services were subsequently developed organically by the community on the principle of “if it seems like a good idea, let’s get on and do something”, in liaison with current service providers. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? The ‘This is: The Debenham Project’ as published in 2012, states as a governing principle, ‘If it is not good enough for my mother, it is not good enough’. Person‐centred care with high levels of support is used as an overarching guide as to what good performance looks like. While the charity has not established measures of effectiveness and does not systematically gather data to evidence outcomes, they do have some small scale research to demonstrate their reach. For example, in a recent progress report they stated that the total number of families to whom they have provided some level of support, ranging from advice and information to regular participation in one or more activities, is 65. This is almost 60% of their current estimate of the number of people (110) with dementia in their catchment area and should be compared with a guideline average of 36% across Suffolk (and for the UK nearer 30%). for the percentage of those with or seeking a diagnosis. Since then, the number of enquiries and referrals to the project has continued to increase. Overall, though they believe success is measured by the impact on the quality of life for carers and those they care for and to a large degree they measure ‘what good looks like’ by direct feedback from people they provide services to and the wider community. The project appears highly responsive and flexible to community needs. Q3: How were older people engaged at each stage from analysis to service development? The project is community led and community inspired‐ there was an initial public meeting at project inception, regular meetings are held to check the aims of the project reflect the needs of the community. Services are also shaped by regular one to one conversations with users, volunteers and wider members of the community. No. The Debenham Project is unique in rural UK as a provider of a comprehensive range of local dementia support services. Review and refinement is a continuous process. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? Q5: Was the service developed with partners, including informal Partnership working is presented as one of the strengths of this project and all aspects of this project are developed in partnership with a range of organisations and bodies including AGE carers? UK, Alzheimer’s Society, GPs, NHS, Local Authorities, community groups, etc. Informal carers are also regularly consulted and engaged with. Partnership is on the basis of collaboration in which the “costs lie where they fall”. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? Aimed at those living in Debenham or within roughly a 4 mile radius, despite requests to expand to wider areas, they feel part of the strength of their model is due to this targeted community led approach. The catchment population is approximately 6,500. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? While there are no formal assessment measures or outcomes, the service appears highly responsive and flexible, and a couple of services have not been continued as suggested by working so closely on the ground, they are very much aware of when a service may not be working or delivering. They are currently approaching the completion of a major research project to capture the experiences and perceptions of primarily family carers and those they care for, but also volunteers, professional support workers who are working directly with the project, and experienced senior health care professionals who have knowledge of it. Q8: To what extent does the Very much a replicable model in that it is a community owned and led initiative. The project service appear replicable and what leaders state that similar models could flourish elsewhere and this project has many regional are the associated costs? and national supporters who also believe the service is highly replicable. As with all small scale projects of this nature, they are largely reliant on the support of volunteers and grants. JRF identified that a future challenge for this project will be to generate core funding. Such a funding model however is still highly replicable in other rural areas. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: The Debenham project was successful in creating strong partnerships and good relationships with statutory bodies that have underpinned much of the project’s achievements. RAG rating Green. Information based on desk research and feedback from project. Community Radio in Penwith Locality and lead organisation Penwith – Penwith Radio (a social company) Nature of the service The radio station was set up to help address identified high incidences of rural loneliness and isolation particularly among older people. Initially, the station was run by older people for older people – through the Penwith Older People’s Forum – but it now includes the whole community. It includes a community correspondent programme that trains individuals to actively reach out to their communities and make local connections. This provides a mechanism by which the needs of communities are well served by the station and their voice is heard. Sources http://licensing.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/radio/community/apps/2011/Penwith_Radio_applicat
ion_f1.pdf Audit Commission – don’t stop me now
Q1: Service gap and how it was identified The Older People’s Forum needed to think creatively about how to tackle social isolation in very rural areas and decided to set up a radio station. A survey was conducted in 2011 when they applied for the Community Radio license and the responses showed that 82% of people felt the existing radio services were less than adequate and did not deliver radio programming that was representative of the voice of Penwith, 87% of people felt that existing information about services and organisations in Penwith was less than adequate. 85% of people believed that they were less than adequately informed of local events and community news. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? The application for a Community Radio licence clearly sets out the vision for the station and what has been achieved in terms of creating new volunteer opportunities, training, linking communities together etc. Q3: How were older people engaged The station was developed by the Older People’s Forum. Older people are involved in at each stage from analysis to everything to do with the station – it is led by the community for the community. Presenters at service development? the station range from 10 years to 80+. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? The station began as an internet service, but only 5% of people surveyed in the Fiftyplus Forum had access to the internet. The station has now been granted a license to broadcast as a Community Radio station. Q5: Was the service developed with The station works with schools, colleges, chamber of commerce as well as the older people’s partners, including informal carers? forum. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? A core volunteer group of 60‐80 individuals and active engagement with many more. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Audience feedback shows that the station is delivering significant local community benefit and social gain. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? It is a complicated project, requiring a great deal of energy, drive, persistence and probably specialist skills. It could be replicated in some places but this would not be straightforward. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: A very successful project that has grown beyond its original scope. RAG rating Amber Information based solely on desk research as no further information was provided by the project. Call Connect in Lincolnshire Locality and lead organisation Lincolnshire – Lincolnshire County Council Nature of the service A demand responsive bus service. Open to all, passengers can book online or over the phone and request a curbside collection at the time they want, going to where they want. This has replaced fixed routes and timetables. There is also a more intensive service that will help people who need assistance getting from their house to the vehicle. Sources http://www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/residents/transport‐travel‐and‐roads/transport‐planning‐
and‐development‐control/local‐transport‐plan/4th‐lincolnshire‐local‐transport‐
plan/102070.article http://www.overthehillcampaign.org.uk/casestudies.php Q1: Service gap and how it was identified The Council recognised that older couples were moving to Lincolnshire to retire, but women who became widowed were often unable to drive. There was a great deal of unmet need for better transport to combat isolation and support independent living. Call Connect was designed to improve rural transport links to market towns throughout Lincolnshire and to provide connections to main Interconnect bus network. The first service was implemented in 2001. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? The drivers, booking centre staff and others involved see the service as much more than just a bus service, e.g. they check up on passengers they have not heard from for a while. Passenger numbers have grown and feedback is positive. Expansion during 2010 and 2011 saw a 52% increase in the number of passengers carried over these two years with further growth demonstrated in 2013. Biannual customer surveys are carried out and in 2013, over 98% of passengers who responded stated that they were satisfied or wholly satisfied with the service. Q3: How were older people engaged Not clear, but the very nature of the service puts control with people in the community. They at each stage from analysis to service development? decide when and where the bus runs instead of being told. The service was designed for all members of the community however it is known that over 70% of passengers are aged over 60. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? The Call Connect service was trialled in two areas along one main Interconnect bus corridor as part of the wider Interconnect project. The growth in passenger numbers compared to the limited fixed route services they replaced was clear within six months. The service has evolved over the years in reaction to passenger feedback and trends. Q5: Was the service developed with Call Connect was developed as part of larger project to improve transport links in Lincolnshire. partners, including informal carers? The network has slowly been expanded as funds allow. Operators, District Council`s and other partners were involved in development. Q6: What scale is the service operating at? County‐wide although limited at evenings and weekends. Some services are part‐funded with District Councils and neighbouring local authorities such as Rutland County Council, Northamptonshire County Council & Peterborough City Council. Northamptonshire have recently set up a similar scheme, the management of which is provided by the call centre in Lincolnshire. Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Passenger numbers and feedback are monitored. Marketing, promotion and maintaining a good reputation is important as well as being creative and responding to customer feedback to improve and develop the service further. For example, booking centre opening hours were extended in 2013 and a trial pre‐Christmas Sunday service is planned. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? Appears replicable in similar rural areas – see above regarding roll‐out to Northamptonshire. The council cross‐subsidise with funding from school buses and others. They note the challenge of expanding the service in light of significant cuts. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: A very impressive, responsive service tailored to rural communities and the needs of older people. RAG rating Green Information based on desk research and feedback from project. 95 Alive Road Safety in North Yorkshire (TNS­sourced) Locality and lead organisation North Yorkshire – North Yorkshire County Council Nature of the service 95 Alive is a partnership between County and District Councils, the police, fire and rescue, the local Highways Agency, public health organisations and community safety partnerships. It aims to reduce road deaths and injuries and promote road safety via publicity, education and training ‐ supported where appropriate by coordinated police enforcement. The project has three target high risk groups – the young, motorcyclists and older people – with tailored approaches for each. Their aim for older people is to safely keep them on the road and promote independent car use by providing free extra training via a register of enhanced trained driving instructors, support and information. They proactively identify potential older users who are at risk of losing transport mobility via publicity and attendance at local events. They also receive referrals – e.g. from the police, fire and rescue, local community safety officers and organisations such as Age UK. They are currently looking at new ways to offer the service via GP referral when their current funding runs out in 2014. Sources http://www.roadwise.co.uk/adults/about‐us http://www.northyorks.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=10225 Q1: Service gap and how it was identified The original aim of the campaign was to save 95 lives over five years by making the roads safer. A literature and best practice review was conducted, as well as analysis of accident data and a policy review of all partners. Q2: Is there a clear sense of what good looks like and can progress be measured? Yes – the original target was to save 95 lives and this has been exceeded. Q3: How were older people engaged Focus groups were consulted about materials, content of resources and approach. Feedback is at each stage from analysis to sought from each participant and the representative Citizens Panel is also used to provide service development? information about awareness and take up of the offer. Q4: Was the service piloted, reviewed and refined before roll­
out? The Road Safety Partnership formed in 2004 and began with the 95 Alive campaign, which aimed to save 95 lives between 2005 and the end of 2010. The campaign officially ended on 31st March 2011 by which time 126 lives had been saved (measured against the government set targets and baseline if the average annual numbers between 1994 and 1998). The campaign was successful and exceeded its targets and the partners decided to continue working together. Q5: Was the service developed with The partners are: North Yorkshire County Council, North Yorkshire Police, North Yorkshire partners, including informal carers? Fire and Rescue, City of York, Harrogate Borough Council, Scarborough Borough Council, Highways Agency, North Yorkshire and York Primary Care Trust, Yorkshire Ambulance Service, Yorkshire Air Ambulance Service. Q6: What scale is the service Across North Yorkshire and the City of York. operating at? Q7: How is performance assessed, managed and improved? Not clear. It would be helpful to see the impact on numbers of older people who are able to continue driving because of this extra support. Q8: To what extent does the service appear replicable and what are the associated costs? It does appear to be replicable although costs are not clear. North Yorkshire is the largest English County with a sparse and super sparse population distribution, which adds to costs for promotion and delivery of this kind of service. The advertising campaign seems expensive but targeted outreach to at‐risk older people through health services etc. could provide a replicable model. Overall commentary on case study/any additional information: Really interesting project but need more information on the impact on older people. RAG rating Amber Information based on desk research and feedback from project.