cv english web

7
©NWREN 2014 Anglesey and Conwy Community Voice A Baseline Study for the Community Engagement and Participation Framework Report written and produced by NWREN as part of Community Voice

Upload: nwren

Post on 17-Aug-2015

59 views

Category:

Government & Nonprofit


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

©NWREN 2014

Anglesey and Conwy Community Voice

A Baseline Study

for the Community Engagement and Participation Framework

Report written and produced by NWREN as part of Community Voice

The Community Voice Programme

Community Voice is a strategic grants programme, managed and funded by the Big Lottery Fund, to support

citizens to have a greater influence over policies and decisions affecting their community, and to build the

capacity of citizens to engage and participate in the planning and running of services and projects that

respond to their communities’ needs and advance community benefit.

In Wales between 2013 and 2017, the Community Voice programme is led by ten County Voluntary Councils

(CVCs). In North Wales, Conwy Voluntary Services Council and Medrwn Môn have developed portfolios of

community projects with fourteen partner organisations. Partners are working jointly to develop skills and

confidence to enable citizens to participate in the planning and delivery of public services.

The CVCs are strongly encouraged by the Big Lottery Fund to include disadvantaged and seldom heard

communities within their portfolio of projects. The Anglesey and Conwy Community Voice projects include

involvement with communities who are ‘hard to reach’, disadvantaged or have the Protected Characteristics

as listed under the Equality Act 2010 of age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race,

religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. The public sector equality duty requires public authorities to

consider the potential impact of any decision on groups of people with each of the Protected Characteristics.

The programme envisages that services will be more effective and sustainable in the long run, if they are co-

produced. This comes at a time when services are facing increasing cutbacks in budgets and are dependent

on the development of mutual partnerships between services and communities. Citizens are being

encouraged to take responsibility for prioritising the services that they feel are most important and services

are encouraged to actively listen to their communities and plan for preventative, as opposed to reactive,

solutions to service delivery.

This is by no means a quick fix and it is a mammoth task to raise the skills and knowledge within communities

whilst on the other hand working with service providers to look for solutions for budget cuts in the immediate

future. Community engagement and participation are crucial vehicles to achieving the goals. Dialogue

between communities, public services and the third / voluntary sector needs to be open and transparent,

ensuring that there is commitment and understanding from all partners to drive this way of working forward.

Index

Introduction

The Community Voice Programme 2

The Community Engagement and Participation Framework Baseline Study 3

The Importance of Community Engagement 4

Key Themes and Findings

1. Level of Confidence of Service Users to Engage with Service Providers 5

2. Barriers to Successful Communication / Engagement 6

3. Methods of engagement / consultation used 7

4. Targeting of participants 8

5. Feedback and Developing Opportunities for Further Participation 9

Reflections 10

Next Steps 11

National Principles for Public Engagement in Wales Poster

21

Anglesey and Conwy Community VoiceAnglesey and Conwy Community Voice

Conwy Community Voice, 5 portfolio partners

Anglesey Community Voice, 9 portfolio partners

The Importance of Community Engagement

The Baseline study starts from the premise that engagement, as an active participative process is important

and productive to both service providers and service users.

This was confirmed by one of the Community Voice Development Officers who listed the factors that made

their best experience of community engagement and highlighted the importance placed on involvement and

ownership:

• That the community were engaged and participated in so many ways

• The fact that the community came up with the idea of holding the Fun Day

• That the community had ownership of the event and actually ran the whole

day with some support from staff

• That funding was already in place!!

• The community came together as one

• That … staff were able to carry out 160 questionnaires that enabled them to work

on the Action Plan … ‘from the community ... for the community’

• The “working group” are still holding community events!

When the eighteen service provider representatives were questioned, they all agreed that community

engagement was very or extremely important to their organisation, and all of them had undertaken some

kind of engagement activity with their service users in 2012/13 whilst nearly three-quarters said they had an

engagement plan.

However, only a third said they had endorsed the National Principles for Public Engagement in Wales and a

third did not know if their organisation had endorsed them or not.

The service providers were asked about their consultations during 2012/13 and all agreed that consultation

was very or extremely important to their organisation. The topics they consulted on varied from changes in

the NHS to improvements to the coastal infrastructure and involved people from age 19 to pensioners.

Key Themes and Findings

The key findings are presented in five thematic areas:

1. Level of confidence of service users to engage with service providers

2. Barriers to successful engagement / communication

3. Methods of engagement / consultation used

4. Targeting of participants

5. Reporting back and developing opportunities for further participation.

The Community Engagement and Participation Framework Baseline Study

Throughout the project, one of the Community Voice partners, the North Wales Regional Equality Network

(NWREN), will be monitoring the progress of citizen engagement and participation across the two local

authorities of Anglesey and Conwy and developing a Community Engagement and Participation Framework of

tools and principles. The Baseline Study was undertaken in the first half of 2014 and questioned people from

three different perspectives.

‘To effectively communicate, we must realize that we are all different in the way

we perceive the world and use this understanding as a guide to our communication with others.’

Tony Robbins, Life Coach

Eighteen representative employees in the public sector gave the service providers’ perspective by completing

a questionnaire that asked for their views about their organisation’s community engagement and consultation

activities during the full year of 2012/13.

For the service users’ perspective, 662 people were asked how they felt about dealing with the public sector.

The number of respondents needed for a proportionate response across Anglesey and Conwy (with

respective populations of 69,751 and 115,500) was calculated using a Creative Research Systems sample size

tool. This concluded that a minimum of 195 responses were needed in each authority however, this study

involved a robust sample of 662 people.

The third perspective came from Community Voice partners who gave their specific perspective on achieving

effective Community Engagement. They also helped select service providers and access to their project

participants, who became our non-random sample of 662 service users.

All the North Wales CVCs and portfolio partners have endorsed the National Principles for Public Engagement

in Wales and their definitions of Engagement, Consultation and Participation will be used through-out the

document.

43

Anglesey and Conwy Community VoiceAnglesey and Conwy Community Voice

2. The Barriers to Successful Communication / Engagement

SERVICE PROVIDER

SERVICE USER

DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

1. Level of Confidence of Service Users to Engage with Service Providers

SERVICE PROVIDER

SERVICE USER

DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

65

The 662 service users were

asked how much confidence

they had in dealing with the

public sector:

63% - said that they had tried

to talk / engage with the

Public Sector

57% - said that they were very

or fairly confident talking to

people in the public sector

50% - said that they had little

or no confidence that their

voice would be listened to by

the public sector

52% - said that they were very

or fairly confident they knew

who / where to go to make a

complaint about a service

more often than not they

make up their mind before

you’ve said anything

find it hard to express myself

I wonder if my views are going

to be listened to or taken

seriously

Community Voice

Development Officers

described an important

element in their best

experience of community

engagement as:

to see how their confidence

increased, & enthusiasm to

make sure young people have

the same equal chance as

everyone else

Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual

people felt their experiences

were valued and their

opinions had a chance of

being acted on as a result

The 18 service provider

representatives were asked

how they increased the

confidence of the general

public that the latter’s point

of view matters:

13 - said by providing evidence

that their opinions matter

12 - said by providing the

opportunities for people to

give their opinion

2 - said by making changes as

a result of the consultation

we encourage greater

engagement by celebrating

the success of our

engagement activities so that

customers can see the ‘value’

in their engagement and the

direct outcomes as a result

...how to engage properly as

well as adequately with

communities. It is quite easy

to engage with

representatives of groups but

do we actually manage to get

to the public as we should? –

Probably not. So we could do

better around that

The 662 service users

were asked what makes

it hard to talk to the

public sector.

The top answer themes

were:

1. Don’t know who to

contact / no-one takes

responsibility

2. Language /

Bureaucracy / access

issues

3. Lack of confidence in

official situations

you never get the same

person dealing with a

query

passed from pillar to post

cultural difference, trust

I do my best but whether

they listen is another

matter

would like public sector

to be more transparent

most seem to have a

bureaucratic outlook,

and don’t seem to realise

that it’s your money

giving them a wage

only available Monday -

Friday, 9 to 5 (I work).

Too many departments

who do you contact?

Community Voice

Development Officers

sent the following

messages to public

service providers:

Give more notice &

time to complete

consultations & to finish

questionnaires. Over

50's groups meet up

once a month &

therefore need good

preparation/time to

complete

lack of understanding of

the participants’ issues,

lack of accessibility,

poor engagement (body

language, us and them

set up in the physical

environment), not

recording what people

are saying, using

language which is

clearly confusing and

obstructive to the

process, no

participative activities,

no information about

how outcomes will be

fed-back/ influence

decisions

The 18 service provider representatives

were asked to name the barriers to

consulting which they had experienced

and their top three were:

1. the need for resources

2. the apathy of those being consulted

3. the access needs of those being

consulted (‘hard to reach’, second

language, age)

More than half agreed or strongly agreed

that their organisation had a process for

sharing lessons learnt to improve

engagement.

Sixteen representatives were considering

new methods of consulting to address the

two most difficult barriers:

7 - said face to face

6 - said social media

4 - said joint work to increase resources,

prevent duplication and save cost.

The same sixteen representatives judged

the success of a consultation:

13 - by the results of the consultation

leading to a change in policy / action

11 - by the content of the response

8 - by the attendance at events

8 - by the number of respondents

One voice can make a difference

The quality of response

we need to do better than that at getting

to people – but how to do that for

someone who sits in the office and

doesn’t get out and do that? We need to

use our staff better….because some of our

staff have better contact with people

Anglesey and Conwy Community VoiceAnglesey and Conwy Community Voice

4. The targeting of participants

SERVICE PROVIDER

SERVICE USER

DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

3. The methods of engagement / consultation used

SERVICE PROVIDER

SERVICE USER

DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

87

The sample of 662

service users were

asked how they would

prefer to talk to public

service providers.

92% - said they

preferred human

interaction methods,

this breaks down into:

62% - preferred to talk

face to face

30% - preferred the

phone

8% - email / post / other

loop & T systems don’t

work, staff not deaf

aware

communication

problems as partially

deaf

face to face

communication

always best

everything geared to

computers, never talk

to a human being. 7

days to a get response

if face to face you can

read them

Community Voice

Development Officers

sent the following

messages to public

service providers:

Always involve your

target audience in the

design of engagement

processes / activities,

pilot first then tweak

and seek advice

from a critical friend

(maybe Community

Voice staff) before

rolling out across the

board. Community

engagement is an

ever changing task

which needs to be

designed to meet

the needs of those it

aims to engage.

Something that works

in 1 place, may not work

in another, each

engagement process

needs bespoke design.

make it fun, relevant

and appropriate.

Advertise, Advertise,

Advertise!

Cooperation with other

agencies

The number of 18 service provider

representatives who agreed or strongly

agreed their engagement was:

17 - planned and delivered in a timely and

appropriate way

15 - engagement was given sufficient

resources and support to be effective

12 - engagement encouraged and enabled

everyone affected to be involved.

Of the 18 representatives, the methods of

consultation used in 2012/13 were:

11 - used surveys / questionnaires / survey

monkey, but only 2 said they were very

successful

9 - used panels / focus groups / forums, and

of those 7 said they were very successful.

8 - used events and community

engagement, 4 said they were very or fairly

successful.

Almost three-quarters of representatives

agreed or strongly agreed that the

information they provided was jargon free,

appropriate and understandable.

Representatives gave the efforts they made

to ensure that their questions were

accessible and easy to understand in three

themes:

1. By ensuring that their text was easy-read,

jargon-free and there was a bilingual choice

of language

2. By using a variety of formats: social

media had the highest score of 4 out of 15

3. By testing the consultation questions

through commissioning specialist services /

using public reader groups

Comments from the

sample of 662

service users

included:

they are not trained

to deal with diverse

clients

young people don’t

get their say

they may not want to

listen to a young

person’s voice

feel our comments

and opinions don’t

count when you get

older

would like older

people to be listened

to more

Community Voice

Development Officers

sent the following

messages to public

service providers:

information and

publicity and the way

in which they consult

needs to be accessible

to people. Need to

look at how other

counties are doing

things and share more

good practice. Get

involved so the local

community can have a

good chance of having

their voices heard

people who were

isolated had an

opportunity to make

new links/friendships.

People who are not

mainstream had an

opportunity to voice

their option

Of the 18 service provider representatives, over

three-quarters agreed or strongly agreed that

their engagement was designed to make it easier

for a diverse range of people to take part

effectively.

Their top three definitions of ‘hard to reach’ were:

1. Disengaged (people who can’t be contacted

easily or who are not active in society)

2. People with disabilities / learning difficulties /

mental health issues

3. Homeless people

The top three most difficult to reach or consult

with were people who were:

1. Young

2. Full-time workers

3. Ethnic minorities

Two thirds of representatives knew that their

organisation monitored the equality categories of

their respondents.

Not all were directly involved in monitoring, but

more than a half used the following equality

monitoring categories: age, disability, ethnicity,

gender, religion and sexual orientation.

A third said the consultation findings had

informed their internal Equality Impact

Assessments.

The top purposes of monitoring were:

1. To ensure that they did not discriminate

against anyone

2. To understand issues that face particular

communities / Protected Characteristics

3. To ensure needs mapping

Intrusive questions can become a barrier so only

ask if have a purpose

Do we have sufficient people for equality

monitoring?

Anglesey and Conwy Community VoiceAnglesey and Conwy Community Voice

Reflections

The Baseline study starts from the premise that engagement, as an active participative process is important

and productive to both service providers and service users. The findings uncover some fundamental

differences around objectives, the perceived meaning and value of engagement and the best method to use.

The following are some reflections on the findings and the perceptions behind the findings.

1. Level of Confidence of Service Users to Engage with Service Providers

Three-quarters of the service provider representatives said that they provide evidence that service users’

opinions matter and yet half of service users said that they had little or no confidence that their voice would

be listened to by the public sector.

The criteria of the service users for such a low confidence judgement becomes clear in their comments; they

judged by how close they came to achieving their service needs, how they were listened to, valued and

involved. The criteria used by the service provider representatives seemed to relate more to promotion and

providing opportunities for engagement / consultation activities.

Communication and engagement is a two way process. Only when people feel confident and empowered are

they able to offer service providers constructive information and only when service providers are confident

and effectively engaging will they get service user input.

2. The Barriers to Successful Communication / Engagement

The three barriers to successful consultation listed by the service provider representatives were a lack of

resources, the apathy of those being consulted, and their access needs. The service users’ answer to what

made it hard to talk to the public sector highlighted a disconnection that they put down to bureaucracy,

access needs not being addressed and a personal lack of confidence in official situations.

Here the main difference seems to be in the perception of who they are communicating with, but there was a

general agreement on the nature of the barriers themselves. Interestingly, the solutions being considered by

the representatives of using face to face, social media methods and joint work did chime with the users’

preferences as expressed below.

3. The methods of engagement / consultation used

Half of the service provider representatives rated human interaction methods of engagement / consultation

such as forums, panels and focus groups as their most successful. Ninety-two percent of service users said

human interaction was their preferred method and gave examples of how technical problems had slowed or

impeded their communication.

The findings also uncovered that whilst over three quarters of service provider representatives agreed or

strongly agreed that their methods of engagement were given sufficient resources, earlier the lack of

resources was cited as the top barrier to successful engagement. This seems to imply that more is needed

than resources to achieve successful engagement.

5. Feedback and Developing Opportunities for Further Participation

SERVICE PROVIDER

SERVICE USER

DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

109

However, a

significant

number of the

comments from

service users do

not indicate

satisfaction in

this area:

If you bring new

ideas they never

seem to be

implemented

Quite often left

confused as to

whether I have

been understood

or valued

when you want

our views, they

don’t advertise

very widely! You

find out

afterwards that

there has been a

consultation or

event.

Sometimes

events are not

accessible or not

very friendly

we have lots of

ideas but they

don’t want to do

anything

I don’t think I can

influence

decisions

When the Community

Voice Development

Officers were asked

what message they

would like to send to

public service providers

about achieving

effective community

engagement and

participation, two

suggested:

feedback is essential it is

central to giving value

and opening [up]

further discussion. It

can take the form of

“you said...so we did...”

people are doing you a

massive favour, make it

worth their while. Work

with people, do your

consultation far enough

ahead to work with the

info / opinions they give

you, be prepared to

change as a result of

their comments and

then make sure they

know that what they

said made a difference.

All too often it appears

that providers just want

approval of what they

are going to do (have

already started to do)

anyway. Give value

Two thirds of service provider representatives

agreed or strongly agreed that consultation

participants were told of the impact of their

contribution.

Nearly two-thirds of representatives said that when

they published the final decisions made by the

board / council they referenced the contributions

made by the consultation participants.

Over three-quarters of representatives said they

encouraged further opportunities for feedback /

interaction once the concluding document / report

had been published by:

• Providing feedback / sending an update to

contributors.

• Inviting participants to continue consultation

links with them.

• Providing an open access to communicate with

an appropriate officer.

Over three quarters of representatives said they

encouraged citizen participation in influencing local

decisions and policy making by setting up focused

panels / committees / groups which provided:

• Representation opportunities

• Citizens panels

• Boards /committees

Nearly a half of public service representatives had

developed citizen panels and the top three criteria

used for membership were:

1. Role specification (e.g. housing tenant)

2. Having appropriate qualifications for the Terms

of Reference

3. Representing minorities groups

We have a residents’ communications group that

we can run consultation questions past.

We have specialist staff (Communications Team

and Community Development Staff) that are

available to assist with developing consultations

and surveys in order to ensure they are accessible

in both English and Welsh

Anglesey and Conwy Community VoiceAnglesey and Conwy Community Voice

4. Targeting of participants

Over three-quarters of service provider representatives agreed or strongly agreed that their engagement was

designed to make it easier for a diverse range of people to take part effectively.

When asked what ‘hard to reach’ meant to the representatives they listed the seldom reached, disengaged,

disabled and homeless and as the most ‘hard to reach’ for consultation listed young people, ethnic minorities

and full-time workers. Although their answers recognised the need to identify specific needs and issues they

did not cover the full diversity or Protected Characteristics.

However, individual comments like “do we have sufficient people for equality monitoring?” may indicate a

lack of drive to target the diversity of participants. Could this indicate a need for further employee training on

the value of equality monitoring and the legal requirements of the Equality Act and Equality Impact

Assessments?

5. Feedback and Developing Opportunities for Further Participation Reflections

Two thirds of service providers publish how participant responses have influenced their decision-making, and

over three-quarters encourage further feedback and offer representation and individual contribution roles.

The findings show that the public service providers are very active in this area however the service user

comments do not indicate satisfaction in this area.

There is a perception that feedback is not given and there are few opportunities to sit on citizen panels /

forums / focus groups. If this is not true then there is a need for greater publicity. As one Development

Officer said “Advertise, Advertise, Advertise!”

Suggestions for Next Steps

1. All public service provider organisations to endorse and proactively implement the National

Principles for Public Engagement in Wales.

2. All public service providers to increase the confidence of service users that their needs and

opinions matter by ensuring that they are listened to, valued and involved.

3. All public service providers to recognise and accommodate that service users most favoured

method of communication is face to face.

4. All public service providers to recognise the value of equality monitoring and ensuring

communication with the full range of diversity, this includes people who are in marginalised

minorities, have Protected Characteristics and are ‘hard to reach’.

5. Public service providers should increase feedback to participants and widely promote

available opportunities to sit on citizen panels / forums / focus groups.

AcknowledgementsThank you to the Big Lottery Fund for developing Community Voice and

Conwy Voluntary Service Council and Medrwn Môn for managing the

two local Community Voice projects.

Appendices available on request1. List of Community Voice partners in Anglesey and Conwy projects

2. Copies of Questionnaires used

3. List of service provider organisations questioned

4. Equality monitoring data and comments of service users.

11

Anglesey and Conwy Community Voice