Group
Number
1
Question 1
Question 2
Question 3

Community Voluntary Engagement

Better spread of specialists

Lack of useable funding

Voluntary Sector Forums

Strong and thriving voluntary
sector

Lack of funding

Ask Groups/Sections how to get info

Resource allocations

Ask at various groups maybe evaluation process

Effective evidence

When reviewing client satisfaction with vol sectors
as questions

Through voluntary sector newsletter – surveys

Make use of voluntary and charitable
organisations where there is trust already

Engage local community groups

Handouts via volunteers – e.g. drivers, befrienders
etc

Routine feedback questions for all services

Methodology

Multi-media access inc face to face

Consistent/ongoing approach

Avoid swamping

Mystery Shopping

Suggestion bins
2

On street questions

Accessible formats

Talk to ‘captive audience’ – airports, blood donors
etc.

Random sample telephone questionnaires.

Get to people while they are using our service

Whilst they wait



Need information to be
accessible to volomgs and COM
groups.

Does JSNA data/
localities reflect PL
areas?
Voting buttons in GP surgeries, CAB etc.

A catalogue of what’s on/in the
JSNA hub.

Understanding PP
geographical boundaries
Gather feedback from people after attending
hospital appointments, including hospital
appointments, out patience etc.

Access to data & basic training,
to do simple analyses

Concern over accuracy of
data available.

Concern that evidence
you read isn’t on the hub

Limited info available on
some conditions which
impeach on identifying
need


Questionnaires and suggestions box at GP
surgery convening GP, PET, NHS, Star seines.

Training to understand the
website & data holds
Knowledge/Training/password

Care workers- 5 minutes with each person they
visit on key topic 3x per year.

Information on what JSNA holds
Terms of information.

Voice pod (videoed in a box??) Like x factor
auditions.

VOICE EVIDENCE

Needs data on adults with
disabilities INC. Deaf (not
currently available) info only on
children

Do manages PP have the
right training/ Comp to
use JSNA data.
Differences / similarities
links to profiling Stockport
Council
Examples of people have used
the data

Volume of data

Do as part of others activities and events.

Go to were pp people are pp.

In outlets which serve public routinely.


Use other networks

Leisure

Comment and disorder

Chamber activities

Consult at pubs, supermarkets.

Targets places people go such as… Pubs,
Cinema.

Use Internet

Likely sights

Blogs

Tapping into professional and volume sector
feedback
Second –hand but still valid
Make better co-ordinate use of
qualities
views which all serve gather-common database?


Tapping in to and using existing information
P.T.A.S to greater effect.

Use Volume and community networks

Complaints data analyse.

User survey over the phone –use local college
structure-higher response rate

Someone at the end of a phone
to query things with.

Analysis’s to support interpreting
data.
intimidating (Where to
start)

People don’t know that
JSNA even exists

People “fear” data – how
do I use/ understand it?

The word DATA is scary
for a lot of people

Not clear what it is &
what/how the data can be
used
3

Annual joint city engagement event –genetic
opinion though

Rip out in local paper-key issues –Plans for future,
all sent to central point

In sensitize responses- volume feed back

Find a mechanism to capture ad hoc comments/
Gut feelings they are often revealing.

Get perceptions of service users and non users.

All services users be resumed invited to feedback
on Training.

Knowledge of what works
elsewhere

Services user individual (questionnaires, focus
groups, planning groups)

Sharing practice and ideas
regionally

Objective user led research on polity of services

Horizon scanning team
Investment of people using
services enriches commissioning
but training and preparation
needed (MH experiences).
Consumer Perspective.

Carers & families to be invited to comment
immediately.

More community development comity and
infraslauche


Recognition that change in
health equality / lifestyle takes
time and long term investment

Help with analysis and
application of data.

Support to use the JSNA data
hub effectively
Use existing community gather information.

Collect feedback at surgery after GP appointment.

Text survey and feedback

Economic Modelling Support

Interactive website.

Good quality data on XXXX

Enchanted role for citizen power

Investment over longer term
Time to think outside the box and
beyond day to day service
needs.
‘Service based’ thinking (i.e. lack
of willingness to investigate).
Evidence base for some public
health programmes not available
(data not collected.
Lack of resources - time, staff,
expertise.
Time and staff resources to
collect evidence based (e.g. user

Public opinion services (needs and attitudes).

Website – accurate at all public locations easy to
update

survey or qualitative research.

Sound procurement procedures.
Fear of overspend / of generating
demand.

Tools for gathering evidence on
quality outcomes, not just data.
Private follow up survey of services users-row was
it for you?

Use social marketing approach to service
development not just for social messaging
Use resources of large services…(Tesco
Morrison’s)
Support for positive risk taking,
think outside the box and act –
leadership.

Comparative investment info
and standards for similar
organisations. e.g. across PCTs
Identify & pay represent of population to complete
survey using technology (like Make Research)

Knowledge of ‘market’

Local free-views /channels / radio phone in’s

Agreed on what are the priorities
(and what has to go)

Community competitions

Pilthy data and statements of
what it means.



4
Strategic Commitment.

Using public to do mystery shops.

Have an interactive quiz in health centre and local
government waiting rooms, on computer screens

Informal info to be corrected - at the bust stop and
in shops.

Visit pubs and ask people drinking there their
views (with reward vouchers).

Market surveys in public areas – e.g. shops, public
events.





“Topical Events”
- free transport
Division of culture xxxx / ASC
Need to show quick results e.g.
in year change in health status.

Time

Outcomes are long term

Input / outcomes models
have rules (culture)
Acceptance that it takes time to
think about what the data is
telling us

Mass of evidence – time
to be familiar with it and
find right bit.
The right evidence – e.g. who
are the key GP to be targeted .
what GPs they want.

Lack of evidence of some
key things .e.g. what this
population want and will
respond to.

Data rich analysis poor.

Skills
Better understanding of needs
(by locality)
Curiosity (is wide spread of
interest in best practice xxxx)

Benchmarking is about
impairment is the outcome
Have a message in a bottle postcard for people to
send in if they have a suggestion / complaint they
want to raise (free post or boxes everywhere to put
them in

Evidence of what works.

More familiarity with what
commissioning is in practice.

Get out to local markets and collar shoppers for
their views (and give a reward e.g. for a free
swim).

Public (patient / client)
understanding and commitment
(expectations).

Text number / ask questions - get immediate
feedback.

Tracking approach to identify to
identify progress on outcomes

Kooth.com


Tap into existing forums r.e. school councils PTA.
Children’s school councils.
Team approaches without
automatic dominance by single
professions.

“Rise Employees volunteered and members to
understand”

PO closures

Analysis complaints / compliments to inform lines
of enquiry

Select committee

Social networking. Online discussion forums.
Focus groups.

Provider forums to get ideas of what works.

Simple Language – avoid professional jargon

Qualitative rather than pure number crunching

How to combine quantative and
qualitative data.

Support to interpret / understand
data.

Help to make best use of data soft and hard by having
analysts as pieces of work.

More people with time to talk
over evidence with.

Comparisons to national trends
- it is Stockport issue?

The interest of in-house
providers to maintain the
status roles. Needs to be
more clarity about role
difference / similarities
between providers /
commissioners.

Cross organisational
aspects (consistency –
Children and Young
People Community
Safety Adults.

Culture – don’t
understand data.

Lack of impact evidence
to join up with ‘needs’
evidence.

Lack of cost effectiveness
evidence.
5

Avoid research stance

Pilot / pre test topics

Be clear about purpose / use

Keep professionals away

Ensure co-ordinated approach

Decision making authority

Face to face discussion

Access to data from Vol. sector

Service user feedback questionnaires.

Detailed local data.

One to one interviews with users.


Questionnaires postal

Use evaluation more consistently

Give qualitative data equal status with static’s

Ensure parts of qualitative data in JSNA (not an
A00-07)


Resources – lack of
money

Habit – “we’ve always
done this”.
Increase data analyst resources
within PCT.

Lack of people with key
skills

More joint working and joint
funding.

Limited perspectives of
what constitutes
evidence.

Allowing creativity and risk
taking.

Lack of clear service
specs based on evidence
of need.

Lack of clear strategy and
resources for public
consultation.

Flexibility in service design and
provision

Clear and detailed service
specifications with evidence
base.

What’s considered ‘evidence’

Investment
One to one doctors surgeries (practice managers)

Go to where people are

Local meetings

Nurse home visits.

Go to where people are (community’s workplaces).
6

Use or target supermarkets

Street interviews (precinct)

Adopt an open attitude. Be interested.

Use existing channels and media – local press,
radio, school etc.

Build data collection into existing programmes and
activities.

Use technology – web and text messages.

Feedback and action.

Informal mechanism valuable .

Complaining takes energy so capture informal
comments

Fear of complaining / commenting affecting
service. Need anonymous routes.

System for staff to report informal feedback for
clients.

Go behind health issues to ‘real’ issues.

Anonymous and independent for honest answers.

Use charter for involvement “good practice”

Avoid over consulting

Test the info. Go back and ask if we got it right.

More communication 2 way.
Between commission and
providers. Providers know
clients

More help to understand
and interpret the numbers
– what does it mean.

How or when was the
data collected – is it up to
date?

Need to confirm integrity,
reliability of data and its
analysis.

Overall aim to support
population to improve over
health and wellbeing,

More understanding of
motivation, engagements.

Should be an outcome in itself

Numbers – ruling

Support to link evidence to
practice.

What the data is not able
to tell us. How reliable is
the data over time.

Qualitative data recognised as
important

Outcomes based
commissioning should be
More engaging – better than blank paper.
7

Independent questioner

Not tokenistic

Managing expectations. Honest about what may or
may not be possible.

Ask people what they want, e.g. AOT work.

Contacting prospective and second generation
users.

Co-ordination

Share results

Use LINKS – it’s new but great potential to
develop as VOICE. Links and VOICE., How are
these used together.

Social service QA annual feedback.

Contact centre extra Q’s


Understand balance between
qualitative and quantitative data.

Shared understanding of
definitions.

Capture individual outcomes –
not continue

Development of qualitative data

‘Consent’ from public

Clear outcome measures
experienced in difficult areas.
Feedback via GP surgeries hospitals.

Customer Care

Shadow AOT Board

Individual user feedback

Reflective logs of processes.

a goal – not just
evidence.

How do you reconcile
user, commissioner,
provider relationship.

How do you reconcile
personalisation (individual
budgets) with strategic
commissioning.

Clear definitions

Culture – is this ‘day job’

Conflictive priorities – left
hand outcomes

Not being heard

Confidentiality / data
protection

Too many regulatory
More public health research
evidence rate what works
structures

Self assessment of outcomes post access.

Contracts / contracting

Use existing groups but be careful about I Issue
people.

User organisation, MIND, Age Concern.

Do what co-op does at checkouts – Chip/PIN
points (asks questions with Y/N answer)

What do people want – pubs, gyms and younger
meeting format

Carers Journals

Surveys

Focus Groups

Standardised interviews

Questionnaires generic about quality / outcomes –
Focus groups to unpick issues

Online forums

Innovative: Pod cast and blogs – over forums

Blogs / Websites

Vision – what want
Clarity – Purpose
Objective – what don’t

Capacity to engage

Contentious relationship.
8

Share hard date form JSNA and public to
gauge their views.

Understanding / analysis of
quantative data.

Old / out of date
information

Pro-active approach to quality assure service,
independent of the service provider.

Analyst skills to interpret
capacity / resource


Audit of locality facilities, e.g. involve locality
business forums.

Understand the data – further
analysis.
Capacity skills inability
in terms of time or
knowledge to use /
interpret data.

Is the analysis right?

Resources /
investment/
disinvestment

Lack of budget

The quantity of data
‘only part of the story’

Attitude / behaviours

Resources

Risk of current of
services.






Customer care responses to link into general
feedback perception resourcing.


Support to run focus groups /
engage with groups.

Better quality info from
“mainstream” social and
health care services.
Links to all voluntary sector organisations
standardised perception Q’s.
Contracts compliance collation of data from
users and workers.
Use SP feedback and collate for general
feedback (existing info to feed into hub.

Collect service user views at review stage,
Social worker.


Social worker team meetings – Bi-annual
agenda item – A4 bullet point summary to be
provided

Service user / customer satisfaction.

Use of clear and standardised processes
(make sit easier)

Standard template for all satisfaction type
Analyst support
Good quality data information
/ comprehensive.
Up to date information.
Info from non health and
social care focused activity
(barrier= how).

Evaluation of impact of
commissioning decisions.

Maintain current service
delivery whilst working on
future changes.

Funding
surveys

Use of clickers / other interactive technology in
the community.

Use of the council’s website to gather
information.

Online surveys.

Survey on websites

Better use of good facilitation exercises.

Identify priorities for data needed for JSNA.
Ensure good feedback to promote
effectiveness of collecting data.

Consult with frontline staff as a first step.

Ensure routine opportunities for feedback
when we provide services / engage the public.

Post it note wall – ask for comment on specific
issues.

Public display thoughts on a postcard.

One stop shop / info point – community based.

Information – tick box options and pre-paid
envelopes. Available throughout shops etc.

Understand the resource
implications to shifting focus.

Follow a cohort of real people
and ask them their needs /
views experiences along the
way.

Resources / reinvestment /
disinvestment in order to
commission in line with the
evidence.

Link in with leisure services feedback systems
– expand.

Survey ‘on the street’ e.g. in busy shopping
centres.

Opinion gathering: shops, GP’s, snap shot

Civic review