Page 53 - WCEN Dr Rochelle Burgess evaluation report\ Baloon

As such, our recommendations are as follows:

1. Streamlining focus

We suggest that over the next five years WCEN should not aim to develop a wide range of new
activities, but instead focus on developing and supporting sustainability around existing areas of
strength: coproduced mental health services and lifestyle or CVD conditions. In doing so, this would
ensure sufficient attention to the complex arenas to be navigated around enabling network
organisations to be able to deliver specific programmes in one or two key areas, which can be
monitored and evaluated effectively. If new programme areas were to be developed (i.e. new health
focuses, or engagement with new community groups into coproduction processes), it is imperative
that WCEN maintain ample space for phase 0 to occur and support any new ventures, as this phase
has been critical to successes seen thus far. If any new sites begin the development of the
coproduction cycle, we also advise longitudinal evaluation of this process at key stages of
development in order to provide a stronger evidence base for its coproduction work.

2. Developing mechanisms of accountability to specific outcomes – in particular health
improvement and patient outcomes

For WCEN and its community level partners to participate in new opportunities such as the
Multispecialty community provider framework, the network will need to be able to produce ‘hard’
forms of evidence in relation to the delivery of care, in particular evidence related to improved service
user outcomes. Given the absence of this to date, we suggest that WCEN consider over the next
five years, financing the delivery of TWO service delivery programmes, run by community sites,
which are monitored and evaluated along the course of the intervention. Any evaluation processes
should be linked to statutory sector outcome measures, so that they can speak to the evidence
needs of commissioners.
Beyond this, we suggest that these programmes be linked to network groups with the highest level
of capacity at present, in particular the family therapy programme. Furthermore, as part of this new
programme, we suggest attention to avoiding the burnout of key volunteers who deliver services,
and as such consider the establishment of formal paid roles linked to service delivery.

3. Evening out capacity across sites: distributing leadership

Our third and final recommendation seeks to redress the issues around leadership and uneven
capacity. Firstly, capacity could be increased through the provision of training that enables
organisations to participate in the wider health economy in more formal ways. In doing so, community
groups will be better insulated against shifting priorities of the wider health economy, as they will
have the baseline skills needed to deliver services in formalised settings, and be more responsive
to priority shifts as they arise. For example, training in areas such as applications for funding and
commissioning contracts, budget management, and navigating the health sector discourse, would
help to ensure that the work of community groups would be sustainable even in the absence of
WCEN.

53