The co-production revolution

By Rachael Wallach, SCIE trustee and Founder of #HackOnWheels

We’re at the vanguard of a disability revolution. This revolution is about co-producing and personalizing things not just services. I’m going to tell you about one of the first revolts; how a steampunk enthusiast and a carpenter from South Africa co-produced prosthetics. 

In 2011 Ivan, a steampunk enthusiast from the USA, made a functional mechanical costume hand. Richard, a carpenter from South Africa who had lost two fingers in a woodworking accident, saw a video of the hand on the internet. He reached out to Ivan and they adapted the design into a functional prosthetic hand for Richard. They posted a video of their design on the internet, which the mother of a boy who was born without any fingers saw. She asked whether they could make a prosthetic hand for her son. They agreed but quickly realized that the boy would grow out of the hand very soon. So they looked for ways to adapt the design so it could be made more easily. 

The solution they hit on was 3D printing. Instead of copyrighting their 3D printable design they shared it “openly" online so that anyone could freely use, adapt and make it. The design attracted hundreds of thousands of comments. People left messages saying that they needed a hand or that they had a 3D printer and would be happy to make one. Within two years 7,000 people had joined the e-NABLE community and had co-produced customized hands for over 2,000 people in over 40 different countries. 

The real magic is that when people started making the design they adapted and refined it to better meet their individual needs and personal preferences and then shared their improvements and adaptations with the community. 

The adaptations are particularly exciting because they have enabled products to be developed that would never have been developed commercially because they would only be used by a small number of people. Like a hand for holding a viola bow, a hand for holding playing cards, and a Ben10 hand.

e-NABLE is one of the first revolts but it is not unique.

Earlier this year I started #HackOnWheels. We’re co-producing an online library of open source designs for fully customizable wheelchairs. We’re doing it with hackathons where people who use wheelchairs and people who don’t come together to design and make collaboratively.       

In the Making brings disabled people and designers together in local maker spaces to identify individual access challenges and 3D print solutions. At “Hackcess” young people with disabilities, designers, and hackers make personalized aids and tech. Ability Mate is an online open source library of designs and instructions for making co-produced assistive tech and TOM Global have a co-productive innovation challenge, with a prize of $10,000.

So why not celebrate co-production week by joining the revolution: download some free software like 123D Design, visit your local maker space or come to our Makathon on 16 July. Because co-production is about more than services; it is about disabled people co-designing, co-making and co-producing things. 

Co-production: Children, young people and their parent carers

Caroline Bennett, Senior Development Officer, the Council for Disabled Children (CDC)

Social innovation young people event, March 2016

We're excited that the Children and Families Act 2014 enshrines in law the Section 19 principles in relation to the involvement and participation of children, young people and their parent carers.  This has created a number of opportunities for meaningful co-production at both a strategic and individual level. In some areas this has included disabled children and young people and those with special educational needs being part of local authority work on the Local Offer or the development of Education, Health and Care plans and processes, as well as more person-centred approaches to individual assessments and planning.

CDC have been focusing on co-production with a range of audiences through a number of our ongoing projects in Social Care and transition.  As part of the Social Care Innovation Programme we have been working with five local authorities to explore challenges and potential innovative solutions in relation to assessment of disabled children, young people and their families.  

The programme has four key principles that have underpinned our work and one of them was meaningful co-production with children, young people and families but also with all professional stakeholders across education, health and care; children’s and adults services; and the voluntary and community sector.  You can read more about our work in Transforming culture and practice in children’s social care assessment.

One of the initial outputs from this work is a postcard we have co-produced with young people to share some top tips for professionals on how young people would like to be engaged in their own assessments. You can download it here.    

During co-production week we will be delivering interactive training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and supported decision making with Face Front Inclusive Theatre, a group of learning disabled artists, who we have worked with to develop and deliver the performance and training workshop. You can find out more information about the events, which are happening in the first week in July, on our website. 

Co-production: Practicing what they preach?

By Anonymous 

I am one of many service users who are concerned about the increasing adoption of co-production as a term whilst not really practicing it at all. These are the organisations who might bring in someone to do co-production on a project or for a short time, make lots of noise about it through their publicity, and then revert back to the normal hierarchical way of working with just token service user involvement. 

They really do not get it. 

I am wary of naming organisations, but I recently went to a meeting in an organisation that has claimed it has co-production at its heart. But when they were challenged about some recent examples of where they had done things without telling us, let alone consulting us, the manager said that they had not done so because co-production was too expensive! 
We are in this terrible situation of having been engaged to co-produce and yet we are being ignored. 

But because they have kept us loosely engaged, in that we are on an email list and get notified of meetings, they still claim they are co-producing! When we go to the meetings it is usually a surprise to find out what decisions have been made about us and without us. Our influence isn't really there, as shown by the manager's response to the query above. 

I appreciate SCIE asking for our experiences because it is important to learn from our bad experiences as well as the good ones. Sometimes pointing out what co-production is not can prevent other organisations new to the concept from making the same mistakes.

Co-production conference

By Jim Leyland and Ben Deutsch of Touchstone, which provides a range of innovative services that improve health and wellbeing.

Delegates at the Leeds event 

Touchstone is a wellbeing and mental health charity based in Leeds, working with diverse communities. We wanted to share our leadership principles with partners and worked collaboratively with them and people who use services to host a coproduction conference.

The day offered a mix of formal presentations, great examples of coproduction and workshops. The key note speech focussed on building on citizenship and promoting democratic professionalism.

Examples included redesigning recruitment policies and procedures with people who use services, effective support planning and designing training for organisations.
The workshops focussed on asset based approaches, reciprocity and developing social networks.

Delegates gave their suggestions for a deeper development of co-production, both in Touchstone and other organisations.

• Challenge language used to make it more accessible and less about “them” and “us”.
• Embed coproduction values into tenders we submit for contracts.
• Set up a coproduction network that would meet regularly and include service commissioners in network events.
• Develop agreed standards on coproduction (and do this in a way that still allows diversity and difference).
• Encourage funders and commissioners to employ asset based approaches – particularly looking at assets of the most marginalised communities.
• Identify and target areas where coproduction would have greatest impact.
• Develop a coproduction toolkit.
• Run a similar conference in other regions and also conferences for more targeted areas – neighbourhoods, rather than cities.
• Coproduction needs to involve a diverse range of people – respecting that their will be a range of opinions and points of view both among people who access services and also among those who provide them.
• Avoid lecturing or colonising communities.

The day was closed by a local poet with lived experience of accessing services, who composed and performed a poem summarising the various views of coproduction that had been expressed by delegates.

“Services need to be available, enthusiastic and keen,
Valuing clients input, helping develop goals and a shared dream.”

“How do we develop awareness and use language accessible to all? Coproduction is essential for everyone and should not be tokenistic or small.”

“Changing traditions, challenging status quo and people with their own agendas; Think about the language we use – everyone’s a value remember.”

Hear the full poem here

Experiences of co-producing new routes into social work

By Ziaul Choudhury, a member of the Think Ahead Service User and Carer Reference Group

For about a year I’ve been involved with Think Ahead, the charity running a new programme for graduates and career-switchers to become mental health social workers. The Service User and Carer Reference Group has been shaping the development of the programme since its inception.

As well as attending regular meetings of the group to offer my opinions and experience, I have been part of the assessment centres used to determine who is accepted onto the programme. I interviewed candidates alongside a qualified assessor, asking questions from a service-user perspective. I also wrote a blog to help interested graduates understand how a social worker helped me through my psychosis.

I feel that input from me, and the other Reference Group members, really makes a difference and is an integral and important part of the Think Ahead set-up. The staff take my involvement seriously and see it as a valuable part of the programme. A service user has experience and skills (of recovery, managing their illness, personal strength, and so on) that are vitally important in helping others who are going through similar things, and I believe the Think Ahead team really understand this and value these qualities. No one is judgemental and everyone is personable and approachable.

My involvement with Think Ahead has also helped me in many ways. For instance, I’ve been able to gain new skills and experiences. It has been helpful in building my confidence to know that I am part of doing something which is positive and valued. I feel I am being listened to and helping to make a real impact within mental health.

Overall, I have found being involved with Think Ahead to be very exciting, and I look forward to each meeting and event that I attend.

What co-production means to us at a mental health support organisation

By Anna Lewis, Senior Consultant on behalf of the team at ImROC

In support of SCIE’s Co-Production Week in July 2016

When I asked my ImROC colleagues to express what co-production means to them, these were some of the words people used – partnership, equality, strength, humanity, humility, discovering, sharing, learning, giving, receiving, growing, collaborating, appreciating, exploring, innovating, fun. And for me, hope.

What is ImROC? The Implementing Recovery through Organisational Change (ImROC) programme is a new approach to helping people with mental health problems.

While each of us has a uniquely personal journey, we share common co-productive experiences with each other and with many more who are embracing new ways of meeting challenges in our ever-changing world. We are part of a global effort to change the nature of conversations, to rebalance power and to mobilise our energy and talents around our shared aspirations.

In our work supporting recovery for all, co-production is something we try to model as well as champion in others. What matters most to us is that we are true to the values and principles of co-production. As a diverse group of people with both professional and lived experience, we thrive on our collective wisdom, talents and skills. Our community of extraordinary individuals is united by our shared belief in the power of recovery. Our culture and identity are built on a belief that we can inspire more, achieve more and falter less when we work together in equal partnership. 

Power is shared, strengths are drawn out and nurtured, and improvement celebrated. Together we see new possibilities, we challenge, we make mistakes, we learn from each other. Through this, we break down barriers, we share responsibility, and we try to contribute to healthy and happy communities.

Co-production is a way of life for us in ImROC. Like life, it can be as difficult as it can be rewarding. This summer ImROC will be publishing a briefing paper about co-production, in which we will share more of our experiences and encourage you to do the same. Keep an eye on our website for more information.

ImROC works in partnership with communities in the UK and abroad to develop systems, services and cultures that support mental health recovery and wellbeing. Our mission is recovery for all.

Co-production is personal and political

By Pamela Fisher, Senior Research Fellow, University of Leeds 

Co-production involves a redistribution of power. In the first instance, this requires respect for people’s choices and preferences about their care.  For this reason, policy initiatives such as the introduction of personal budgets and the personalisation agenda constitute progress – they help to re-instate marginalised people as self-determining citizens. Choice is a cornerstone of co-production, but, equally, it should be about much more than this. People sometimes wonder how personalisation differs from co-production. My response is that co-production supports people’s choices but recognises that they do not make choices in circumstances of their own choosing. Many people in mental distress are caught up in complex and oppressive entanglement of powers which severely constrain choices. 

What about a person who can’t face getting out of bed because of the emotional, mental, social and material challenges which they face? ‘Fine’, some would say, ‘that’s their choice’. After all, it’s a key liberal principle that people can make choices as long as they don’t harm others.  And, anyway, co-production should provide freedom to get up and go to bed when you want. What tends to get overlooked is that identity is a relational, not an individual, achievement or process. Everything we remember, think and feel is a co-creation.  It has long been argued that personal autonomy is embedded in relationships of interdependence. A feminist ethic of caring potentially offers the basis for a way of thinking about citizenship that recognises everybody as interdependent and having the potential and responsibility to be caring and cared for. We are all dependent on each other for our sense of self.

A person’s sense of self is undone by injustice and isolation, and it can be repaired through solidarity with others. The survivor identity emerged as a result of a political and collective response to institutional oppression. The breakthrough occurred when mental distress was no longer regarded as a personal tragedy but as political issue which demanded collective action. A liberal understanding of identity risks turning back the clock by once again by placing all the emphasis on the individual and their personal choices. This is why the expression ‘user led’ should be used with caution. If it’s all down to people’s choices then they can easily be written off as unable or unwilling to appropriately manage their lives. The unwell person can be left in bed all day without consideration of the relations of power and powerlessness that make staying in bed the most appealing option.  

Co-production should be about solidarity and engagement, not neglect justified by a rugged individualism which fails to challenge the social relations which hold people in situations of despair. Co-production should enhance and extend personal choices but it should do so whilst resisting the political and social conditions in which those choices are made. 

Blog: Reimagining Professionalism in mental health: towards co-production

The benefits of co-produced services

By Ann Macfarlane, Member of the Co-production Network and former SCIE trustee.

Co-produced services are about professional people and the expertise of those who require services to share their knowledge, plan, develop a strategy and take action to the benefit of all parties. The result of this equality and diversity work is to enable those involved to understand what empowerment means and the choice and control that will evolve. 

Commissioners, managers and front line staff will enjoy their roles and jobs more, those who need and use services will know that their statutory and community providers have a better grasp of an individual’s situation and can identify and prioritise what will enable a disabled or disabled and ill person to gain, retain and/or maintain control in their life as much as they want or are able.

Co-produced work will lead to best practice, provide a new learning experience and job satisfaction. In turn this will mean less time dealing with complaints and cause less misery to those who are dependant on support. Evaluation and outcomes will provide wellbeing, with money and services more appropriately distributed. 

It may even mean less time is wasted, with the same or less money devoted to excellent provision and outcomes. There will be times when co-production may throw up obstacles and usually working on solutions will provide additional learning with further empowerment.

There is nothing to lose and much to learn, achieve and gain for all involved in co-production.

The Co-production Police and accountability

By Kevin Minier, carer. 

Many of us have been heavily involved in ‘co-production’ activities where we were:

1. not involved until the end (rubber-stamp or not as the case may be)
2. the solution has already been decided
3. your suggestions do not fit the current model and so are rejected
4. you thought you were listened to but none of it appears in the final service
5. you were ‘consulted’ and you never hear of it again
6. they did not even offer you travel expenses let alone an attendance fee
7. they gave you two days notice, the times were impossible due to your other commitments, and they would not even provide lunch
8. the venue did not consider physical access or sensory requirements
9. you noticed that key stakeholders were not present or even invited
10. you noticed that key comments were not documented - ignored.

We need Co-production Police.  A best practice checklist for TRUE co-production.  Everybody involved in a ‘co-production’ activity could score against this checklist highlighting to the service provider the effectiveness of their co-production process.

Name and shame – if necessary.

There is a call for better patient and public involvement especially in the health and social care sector.

Now is the time!

Co-production: A one-night stand?

By Laurence Clark, comedian, writer and actor who has cerebral palsy

I’m excited to be performing at SCIE’s Festival of Co-production on 7th July.  I first came across c-oproduction when I was working on a project with Trafford Council for Breakthrough UK about ten years ago.  It was explained to me as follows:

• Consultation is a one-night stand
• Co-production is a long-term relationship.

I’ve used this definition whenever asked ever since!
At the festival I’m going to perform an extract from my new stand-up comedy show Independence which is going to be at the Edinburgh Fringe festival from 3-28 August.

Independence is somewhat of a hot topic at the moment, whether it’s the EU referendum or Scotland.  But this show isn’t about either of those things, because that would be a bit dull.  Instead it’s about what independence means to me.  As someone who has used self-directed support for all of my adult life, for ages I’ve wanted to do a show about my experiences.

Also independence often gets misunderstood by the general public.  It’s not about doing everything yourself because, for someone like me that’s never going to happen.  You might as well ask me to solve world hunger as tie my shoelaces.  Both would take me the rest of my life and end in abject failure!  But it’s not the stuff I cannot do that frustrates me, it’s the myth that it’s not OK to ask for help.  After all, as John Donne once wrote “no man is an island”, except the Isle of Man!

Co-production is a rare and precious thing

By June Sadd, Survivor / Consultant

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times” a much used quote from Dickens ‘A Tale of Two Cities’ seems so appropriate for the current experiences of service users and carers and professionals in social care.  Often conferences and workshops are entitled “From Rhetoric to Reality” where user involvement and aspects of social care provision are discussed.  However the reality of today’s experiences of social care has overwhelmed and subsumed the rhetoric of the past. 

Some time ago I wrote a piece for Community Care as part of an article entitled ‘Blue Sky Thinking’ which was devoted to the development of user involvement.   I feel the fluffy white clouds on the horizon at that time have burgeoned into much bigger, darker clouds.  However I am very glad to say that through the gathering gloom twinkles the nugget which is Co-production.  Well, enough of the imagery though I do believe that a picture is worth a thousand words, as the saying goes.

We sometimes forget how new the concept of Co-production is and how it needs to be nurtured as a rare and precious thing.  A slightly cynical view might be that co-production has always been there under the different guises of user involvement, engagement, participation and consultation.  So what’s all the fuss?  Well these other concepts do not rock the Power boat – they all stay within the traditional relationship of power-giver and power-receiver.  So much power-sharing and no further.

Service users and carers involved in true co-productive approaches require the Power fault line to be adjusted between professionals and themselves.  We understand this well from our experiences but professionals, particularly those who are working in social care and health organisations new to the concept of user involvement, do struggle.  We understand that professionals have a responsibility and accountability for decision-making in the co-productive relationship but is it as easily understood by professionals that we have rights and that choice and control are important concepts to us?

Co-production could provide the answer to many service issues and I do hope you can get involved in National Co-production Week.

June Sadd: The seeds of empowerment - Independent Mental Health Advocacy

Co-production is about design and delivery

By Sarah Rae, Co-founder of PROMISE Global

I have struggled with severe and enduring mental illness since my late teens. However, it was not until I was admitted to an acute ward at the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust (CPFT) in 2005, that I became interested in the design and delivery of services. This was because during my 6 month stay, I saw so many things that could have been done differently, which spurred me on to train as a Patient Leader. 

When Mind published their report on physical restraint in June 2013, I was curious to find out what CPFT was doing to reduce reliance on force. I approached the Clinical Director of Acute Care the following month to learn more about the Trust’s approach. Our meeting sparked some exciting ideas and together we founded PROMISE (PROactive Management of Integrated Services and Environments) www.promise.global

PROMISE aspires to break new ground in the mental health field. From the outset, the work has centred on supporting staff and service users on a journey towards eliminating reliance force within CPFT. Soon after inception the initiative attracted global attention and it continues to grow apace. There are 5 founder members: Cambridge, Yale, Brisbane, Prague and Cape Town, which has led to the formation of a global knowledge network for proactive care.

I co-lead PROMISE and as a collaborative pair we model good practice. Co-production is very much at the heart of everything we do and it’s one the PROMISE core values. Valuing lived experience is central our ethos and it has been hardwired into the project from the start, which has helped to ensure that the work remains grounded and relevant to the needs of patients. 

Co-production is all about power sharing and giving equal weight to lived experience. However, in my experience, patients are all too often seen as problems rather than problem solvers with untapped skills. With their unique insights they are ideally placed to work collaboratively with clinicians but in practice this rarely happens. In this way, ours is an unusual partnership, as we have an open relationship built on trust and honestly. 

Importantly, there is also room for challenge and when our opinions differ, we agree to disagree. With a project of this size, we’ve found that one of the best ways to ensure that all decisions are taken jointly is by talking daily to decide on a plan of action. This new way of working has been a complete revelation to me and I’m looking forward to the day when it becomes the norm.   

Co-production shouldn’t be on Lonely Street

By Tina Coldham, SCIE trustee and Chair of the SCIE C-Production Network

This blog first appeared on a blog called Reimagining Professionalism in mental health: towards co-production

A few weeks ago, I was at an event looking at employing disabled people in the NHS, or indeed increasing the numbers of disabled people working there.

I joined a workshop which was looking at co-production in the NHS with its services users, and there were two examples from a mental health trust.  They both seemed well meaning and had good user involvement to the point that they were co-producing, which was great to see.

I sat with them over lunch and chatted some more and one of the managers, who was a unit leader and had a certain amount of autonomy in his role, said that he felt “very lonely” at times co-producing.  This stunned me, and I asked him to say more. He confirmed to me that if the prevailing culture of an organisation is not to co-produce, then those that do so are sticking their necks out.  They can become very vulnerable to criticism and lack of support as they are viewed as a dangerous maverick by others within that organisation.

I thought about why it was that I was so shocked by his statement and considered my experience at the Social Care Institute for Excellence – SCIE. SCIE was established in 2001 and produces knowledge resources, bespoke training  and consultancy for the social care world to help drive improvements in users and carers experiences of social care, for them to ultimately have a better life.

From the beginning there was a strong emphasis on involving people who use services and carers and the first Chair of SCIE was disability activist Jane Campbell, now Baroness Campbell of Surbiton.  SCIE established a participation team who were dedicated to making sure users and carers were involved in SCIE and were properly looked after in doing so.

SCIE decided that it would step up to co-produce its work with service users and carers in 2011. It stepped up its ambition for involving users and carers throughout the organisation at a strategic and organisational level, made sure there was resourcing in terms of staff and finances to do this, and began a journey of discovering of what co-production means in practice in an improvement agency trying to help the social care field up its game.

So where are we now?  One of our cores values is to co-produce, specifically to “co-produce our work with people who use services and their carers to identify what works and how that knowledge can be put into practice”. We have a co-production charter to help guide our work. We conducted a board recruitment recently, and out of four new members, three identify as disabled people.

I am a board member too and I also chair the Co-production Networkwhich is there “to support user, carer and equality groups’ involvement in SCIE’s strategic decision making and provide a pool of stakeholders which SCIE can work with to co-produce projects and programmes.”

We have a Co-production team of four within a staff group of less than 70, with a dedicated budget for its work and direct experience of mental health, disability and learning difficulties.  All staff are trained in why co-production is important to their roles, and we are now offering training and consultancy on co-production to the field from the perspective of knowing what we are trying to achieve and hoping to inspire others to work in this way.

From 4 – 8 July we are holding the first National Co-production Week, encouraging everyone to showcase their co-production work. We are also holding a co-production festival on the 7Th of July to celebrate all the good stuff happening, and also starting to draw up a co-production manifesto to get people and organisations to pledge to go the co-pro route like SCIE.

With all this going on, I hope that we can arrive at a point in future where no-one feels very lonely in an organisation when trying to work in a co-productive way.  Indeed, my challenge to you is to answer the question, “Can you give any examples of where co-production or user involvement has had a positive impact on policy or practice?”  We can then carry on the conversation together – and make sure co-production is never a lonely experience.

Co-production: Grotesqueries and Hungarian horror films?

By Penny Pepper, writer poet and performer 

As an avid movie buff, when I think of the word co-production, immediately I see flashing up in the credits - especially a 60s British horror: A Black Snake - A Red Skull – Hungarian Co-production. Yet writing this blog I can see that co production has played a crucial role in my life and my work, alongside collaboration. 

When I moved to London in 1985, a young punk, the idea of Independent Living hinged upon the reverse of co-production. To struggle alone, to surround yourself with gadgets and medical grotesqueries so you could attempt to do everything yourself. For me, this meant failure, unstable health and episodes of ongoing mental distress. Ironically my work, even then, was always approached with a sense of co-production, whether this was as a singer-songwriter, a poet or a writer. Punks were the epitome of that notion: do it yourself, collaborate, co-produce. 

As a user of Personal Budgets (PBs) and its predecessors for 22 years, I’ve always employed my own personal assistants directly. Unsurprisingly the road has been rocky as much as it has been smooth. These days those like me, who are ex ILF users, are in a stasis of anxiety that the stability of our hard-won independence erodes daily via welfare cuts. 

Approaching a care review with the concept of co-production would be welcome, but sadly my own recent experiences were alarming. The Care Act seemed to be interpreted as a means of re-animating that old style of independence, the resurrection of those grotesqueries, of physio and OT assessments. Not to create co-productive relationships as a means to independence, but cutting budgets by pushing those on PBs into ‘rehabilitation’ and the damnable Must Try Harder medical model ethic.

There is consolation. From my current PAs to work colleagues, varieties of co-production come into play for me, meaning that however impaired a current assessment procedure declares me to be I can still work as a writer and a speaker, working the well oiled co-production that is my life as a disabled creative. And thankfully – at the moment! – I can go to the toilet when I need to.

Penny’s site

Co-production and leaving care - the road to amazing

By Matt Langsford, Expert Advisor, New Belongings Project. 

Co-production has been a pivotal part of the New Belongings project to improve support for care leavers. It has co-production at the heart of everything it does and without co-production it wouldn't have achieved the amazing things it has achieve.

The guiding principles of co-production - equality, diversity, accessibility and reciprocity - have helped local authorities to make the cultural change to enable the co-production of services being delivered to care leavers.

And the benefits of this way of working couldn't be greater. The local authorities involved are now providing enhanced and more effective services that meet the needs of young people who are leaving care. The local authorities are now benefiting too: while they had to put in funding at the start to make co-production happen, they are now achieving savings and reduced costs as a result of working this way.

As a care leaver myself, I think it is imperative that the co-production of services continues on this trajectory. It's the only way to ensure that young people receive the help and support they need for them to lead successful lives and be active members of society.

I am really excited by SCIE's first ever national Co-production Week and Festival as this gives others the opportunity to learn from actual experiences of working in a co-productive way. And I believe this will inspire others to start on the journey of co- producing services with their service users.

The opportunity to celebrate the successes of co-production will give a boost to its long term success in all health and social care sectors and also to inspire others to start down the road to co-producing services.

Co-production, mental health and film-making

By Sybil Ah-mane, Flexible Films 

I first came across the word co-production about 5 years ago when working on a film with SCIE. Having been part of the mental health service user movement, I was concerned that this was another piece of jargon that wouldn't last. Five years on and I am now convinced that the concept has meaning and has been a driving force for change.

I like the idea that the notion of co-production is fluid and has scope for growth and change - it means that we are still learning and willing to adapt. To me, the main thing is that whenever you are creating something, it should be co-produced by both users and workers of services. The power should be equal which is a hard thing to create so simple things like making sure everyone is involved throughout, communication is accessible, the decision making is thought through is vital. Working in this way requires a change in culture but once systems are put in place and people realise its value, it's a fairly simple process and so much can be gained.

There has been a lot of successes in co-production - from planning architecural spaces to implementing new systems to changes in care plans. Co-production can be used in most circumstances. In fact, we are conscientious in using it in our film-making practice and have found that bringing people on board during the creative process means the films are richer and more meaningful. 

I feel a lot has changed from when I started using services 27 years ago - it's now much more about real input rather than being asked opinions that may or may not be taken up. I'm really glad co-production has helped move things on.

Flexible films 

Modelling co-production

By Patrick Wood, Patrick Wood Training & Consultancy

One of the things I like best about being involved in the SCIE Co-production Network is that SCIE practices what it preaches. There's always a danger that approaches to health and social care that seem innovative and radical at first sight become diluted or recast when powerful people and organisations get hold of them but this isn't the case with SCIE and co-production. 

I first became involved in the network through being part of the group that developed a Co-production Learning Programme for SCIE Staff. This project provides a good example of how the principles of co-production can be put into practice.

The development of the programme involved people with phsyical disabilities, people with learning difficulties, older people, care leavers and people with mental health problems working alongside SCIE staff and associates. The process resulted in a one day training programme that enabled participants to understand the principles and values of co-production and learn how to implement and embed a co-production approach in their work. 

It was a real pleasure to be involved in something that allowed people from a wide variety of different backgrounds to work together with a common aim. To enable this to happen, the project created the conditions necessary to allow for equitable relationships between all participants, which involved paying due consideration to issues like the timing of meetings, prompt payment of fees and expenses, the provision of accessible information, and modelling co-production principles and values in the way in which things were done.

Not only was it rewarding to play a part in a project that modelled co-production in action but it was also pleasing to be involved in something that made excellent use of finite resources to facilitate a productive process with a concrete and valuable end result.

SCIE - Co-production in social care: What it is and how to do it