The Mark of Coproduction

  

The Mark of Coproduction

 

Nothing scoped or suggested below is new, it looks at the current models used and looks at formalizing and improving these for the benefits of all involved.

The principle and ideas behind it are to showcase the work done and promote it by offering a comprehensive system that is understood and followed, to try and achieve the values and dreams of the ideals of coproduction. By offering the Mark, it will promote true personalised coproduction, and ensure people are educated on its values and principles.

Costs

There are no substantial costs involved, apart from the process which a group of contributors with a lead person could be tasked with in leading and running. This plan gives a quick outline.

There will be an element of time and checking, however again I believe peer leaders could be utilised to produce this project with one member of an organisations team. This tends to happen anyway in a uniformalised way at present

A analytical SMART plan detailing component parts can be produced with this brief if required.

Benefits

To make clear what coproduction is and promoting it where it has occurred for the benefit of all parties.

Putting in a system so everyone is clear what is required to achieve coproduction by working with Peer Leaders or people with lived experience, and all the constituent parts to personalisation including link workers, personal budgets holders, and others that fall within the scope of universal personalisation and other similar streams in Health and Care, showing what can be achieved and how this can also be used to show they are meeting their statutory duties under sec 149 of the Equality Act, and the consultation requirements of Health and Social Care act. 

The Marks Criteria

There is an amazing amount of work being done called coproduction, in fact throughout the whole universal personalisation process and through various other means in Health and Care. Though seen and valued by those that participate, it is not seen by external partners, what has or has not been c-produced by the team and all the contributors or what has actually been involved or taken place. There is also no clear process that is understood by both internal and external practioner as to how to achieve proper coproduction. Often a quick meeting is used and members of the public invited to give their views, and this is then promoted as personalised or coproduced. This method has never allowed the true principles of participatory involvement to be followed, thus distorting what might be truly be achieved.

I am proposing that a recognition mark is introduced (logo) which can be displayed to show a project or system has been through the process. Not everyone will want the Mark of approval as some people may just want to be involved with bits and pieces but the Mark will help to show a long term systematic methodology which can showcase and promote the benefits of all involved.

The proposal is based on a three tier system.

1. The commitment
2. Involvement
3. Promotion and continuous development.

The Commitment

Before a team, project, or department wants to work in a more participatory way they have to show a firm commitment by agreeing to set principles on use proper coproduction methodologies which is to work with Peer Leaders, people with lived experience, link workers, personal budget holders and people from protected characteristics (contributors) as appropriate allowing inclusion, independence, choice and control.

Apart from intention and declaration i.e. by promotion via multimedia or other means and internally the commitment must include 50% of their working employees having completed within a time frame to have the coproduction online module offered (to be developed).

The project must include two nominated lead persons, one from the lead team and another from a person picked from the contributors, be planned (documented) in advance and smart planed (see below), specifically including a good amount of time is allocated (12 weeks min) to coproduce with all contributors. Specific people must be named and allocated for responses. With specific time frames including review dates. These plans will be shared with the team, and contributors and can be used to show workload and commitments.

A briefing document will be provided by the team clearly stating what the intention and purpose of the project is. Ideally a small group of contributors with a member of the team will look at the brief and give any initial pointers to help guide the project before it’s started. A contributor should be selected as joint lead with the team member coproducing the project.

Once the report, webpage, or other project has gone through the scoping exercise, an invite will be as sent by the team to all contributors, this will include the project brief. People will be invited on the day to meet up and discuss. However documents slides will also be sent out to all contributors who expressed wanting to be involved. This way people who may not be able to attend will have their views included. Via email or other accessible means should they want to do so. Time should be added (1 week) after meetings to allow people who couldn’t contribute at the time of the meeting to have their say. Any comments made should be added and distributed to all.

After the meet or subsequent to several meets as may be required. All questions whether answered or those in the chat (if teams or other electronic means are used) or even subsequent questions sent in will be answered in writing and a copy provided to the group. All activity must be updated on the plan with clear responsibility and time frames. Time frames can be extended after being set, but clear reasoning’s should be provided and documented on plan.

On completion of the project - a review of the exercise will be carried out by the chairs, a nominated group of peer leaders (1-3) and the project team.

The mark will be awarded and promoted via all means possible as a Coproduced project. A commitment to revisit and go through the project in a years’ time will be made and planned for with nominated people.

Involvement

All parties agree as part of the involvement to understand the pressures put on the organisation and that work must be completed within budgetary and staffing constraints. Everything may not be possible, however involvement is carried out to ensure people’s voices are heard, where something is not possible this will be made clear, but steps will be taken to mitigate and explain any negative factors 9as required under the Gunning principles under section 149 of The Equality Act.

All contributors, will ensure their involvement is based on a duty of service to the organisation. They must not at any time use their position to share any information outside the circle of involvement without permission nor use any knowledge for personal gain.

These rules apply to any external consultants as well, and they should be made aware of such and be in agreement. Subject to adherence to the rules they may seek permission to promote that they helped in achieved the Mark.

All material must be provided in line with Accessibility guidance (Equality Act NHS, RNIB, BSL etc.)

 All contributors will be involved in promoting and highlighting the work they are doing. Their voices and ideas will be used to lead, they must be heard, and included wherever practical or possible.

All contributors will not only be involved in the project but will be involved from inception to its completion and beyond if subsequent checks are required.

Any contributor may pull out of a project at any time, they must also declare an interest in any projects that may have a positive or negative effect on their health or wellbeing.

Contributors must be encouraged to have completed an appropriate training programme (which must include how the orgnisations works and runs) or other to be involved in any projects. Any contributors working or has worked in any project for the Mark will be able to use the Mark on their personal multimedia posts or state their involved.

All contributors may be asked to take on additional training for specific projects that require additional knowledge.

Contributors will work to develop and follow a code of conduct.

All initial project plans will be published and informed of, a contributors may choose, or opt out of any involvement as they choose. An advance warning should wherever possible be given for opting out so additional people with relevant skills will be found.

Involvement will always try to include as many protected characteristics from the Equality Act as possible, where any protected characteristic is not included then contributors’ leaders or the lead team will ensure they will try and seek involvement from someone with the characteristic or involve an organisation externally which represents that characteristic.

If involvement includes any effect on a protected characteristic an Equality Impact Assessment will be included, this will highlight the marks involvement and mitigate where people’s concerns haven’t been reached (legal requirement).


Promotion and continuous development.

On receipt of the Mark all parties will work to ensure they promote that the piece of work has met the standard of the work.

A review date will be set. A short piece will be written in blog or other format detailing the process and used to promote and highlight the achievement.

If after achievement any comments or issue are brought to the attention of any party's involved, whether it’s a complaint, comment, or praise, all parties will be informed. Any complaint will be dealt with efficiently, views of contributors will be included as well as the team and recorded.

Any changes will be made promptly and all parties, will be advice, where not possible to make changes at the times these will be included at review time and people notified. This will ensure continuous monitoring and involvement.

If the original proposer chooses to opt out, or a group of (3) contributors and 1 member of the lead team feels that the project at any time after achievement loses focus on the principles a meeting will be arranged.

If no solution will be found management (co-chairs) will have the final say on whether to remove the Mark from the project. This will be advertised, to show that personalisation is a continuous project.

Each year the project if it keeps to its commitments to personalisation they may either use bronze, silver, and gold according to length in years advertising the Mark or use a number to show reaccreditation for number of years.

 The project, process or other developed project must be reviewed annually, records updated showing its success or improvements made. This will be set at the completion of the project and must be signed off by the co-chairs.

 

 Draft Plan