Evaluating coproduction in a mental health NHS Trust in England
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Exploring, measuring and enhancing the value of co-production for improving health and wellbeing: a case study of coproduction in We Coproduce and the Innovation Wards project in a mental health NHS Trust in England
IRAS ID
268842
Contact name
Glenn Robert
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
King's College London
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 5 months, 16 days
Research summary
The study aims to explore and improve ‘co-production’ in health and wellbeing services. Co-production is seen as a way of using the experience and knowledge of patients, carers and staff to improve care by working together to make changes they see as important. The research involves a detailed study of an example of co-production - namely a third sector organisation, ’We Coproduce’, explored through their work on ‘Innovation wards’ in a mental health NHS Trust.
Patients, carers and staff at the Trust have been working together to agree standards of care they want to achieve. Two ’Innovation wards’ are currently continuing this work, making the changes needed to achieve these standards.
This case study will address major gaps in knowledge around co-production in the health and social care sectors. In terms of the proposed case study these are:
1) How do people become involved in co-production in the Innovation wards? What is it about the way coproduction is done that makes it more or less effective?
2) (How) are the processes and outcomes of the Innovation wards project measured? Are patients or carers involved in designing these measures and/or monitoring progress?
3) How is the Innovation wards project managed? How do people in different positions of power contribute to leadership of the Innovation wards project? How are priorities and goals set and maintained?
4) How does We Coproduce understand ‘co-production’ and how has this been applied in the Innovation wards project?We will address these questions by: 1) interviewing patients, visitors and staff on the Innovation Wards; other staff at the Trust; and a selection of We Coproduce managers; 2) observing a selection of relevant meetings and coproduction workshops; 3) looking at reports or documents related to the work of We Coproduce and the Innovation Wards project or its outcomes.
REC name
London - Central Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
19/LO/1833
Date of REC Opinion
10 Dec 2019
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion