A deliberative event is one type of workshop we held. It involves people with different skills and experience talking about an issue or service and giving ideas about what it can look like in the future.
We held a deliberative event for nine healthcare services in April 2024.
We invited representatives from staff, service users, and organisations we work with (stakeholders).
More than 80 people attended to share their skills and experiences.
We discussed nine services in need. These are:
People attending were able to share their thoughts on further matters they felt were important for the services being discussed.
They also shared their views and ideas on how to set the lowest requirements that future options for these services would need to meet (called hurdle criteria).
People in the event also shared early ideas for future options.
There was discussion on the reasons why change is needed at the event.
There was an understanding of challenges in running lots of units delivering the same or similar services.
There was discussion about the need for balancing local services to people, whilst providing high quality services.
There were examples of both benefits and challenges when services are provided from fewer sites in a larger, centralised way.
Challenges in staffing and recruitment was spoken about, as well as the geography across our area.
People agreed the need for investment in the health service, as well as for equipment and developing staff.
High-level ideas were discussed and covered common themes such as:
Ideas were then shaped into a long list of options by a clinical group (the Options Development Group).
They were then shared with the people who attended the first deliberative event to check.
People involved then agreed the best way to consider and score options.
Options development is when a mixed group of people meet to develop draft options for further consideration. Any draft options must meet hurdle criteria, which is the minimum criteria that any draft option should meet. For our Clinical Service Plan, this has meant staff and organisations we work with (including Llais, the independent voice for patients) thinking about how the nine services could be delivered differently in the next two to four years.
This is when a wider group of people, including service user representatives score options against criteria that is important to people. This includes thinking about an option's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.
It is important that all options are thoroughly developed and appraised to meet procedural fairness requirements. The process is important because it helps us make informed, fair and legal decisions and to be open to new ideas. The aim is to ensure that options have been well thought through and that any decision reached is the best possible outcome for people. Early in the process, we think and plan for how we can reduce any negative impacts, especially for people with protected characteristics. This helps us to comply with the Equality Act 2010.
As a Health Board we are committed to working with our people at every stage as we know there is much to learn from different people’s perspectives. Following a thorough process ensures that we have considered as many ideas and options as we can. This helps us to deliver solutions that a fit for purpose for the future.
One of the main risks to engagement and/or consultation on potential changes to services is that the process may be subject to review by the courts (judicial review). There are several previous cases where courts found bodies did not carry out a lawful consultation process. This can mean that change is delayed or cannot happen, can be costly, and can negatively affect public confidence in a public body.
We held the first event (Sprint 1) to create and consider draft options to improve the position of each service in the Clinical Services Plan.
The event was held over two days in April to develop a long-list of draft options. A mix of people attended including clinical, operational, and support staff.
Following this, a virtual ‘Check and Challenge’ event took place in May 2024 to give patient and public representatives, stakeholders, and a wider group of staff, the chance to consider and check draft options from earlier sessions. People were able to discuss the draft options, ask questions and make observations. They were also given a survey to complete where they could share their views and the reason for their opinions.
We held the Second event (Sprint 2) after the check and challenge event. A mix of people attended including clinical, operational, and support staff.
Attendees reviewed the feedback from the Check and Challenge group, and further developed the draft options, before considering the options as a collective group against the hurdle criteria (minimum criteria that must be met) to develop a short list of options.
Sprint 3 was a two-day event held in June with the purpose of considering recommendations related to the shortlist of options. Shortlisting of options was completed on September 5th ahead of options scoring, that took place on September 6 2024. Options scoring took 16 evaluation criteria and weighted them, to be used during the scoring session. Each of the four shortlisted options were then scored based on their strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (a SWOT analysis).
The development work on options so far is contained within Appendix B of the Output Report in the public Health Board papers for the meeting on the 28 November 2024. Click here to view the board papers containing these reports.
You can read an output report from the first session (Sprint 1) in the public Health Board papers for the meeting on 30 May 2024.Click here to view board papers containing the output report (opens in new tab).
You can read the feedback from the check and challenge session and the outputs from the second session (Sprint 2), in an output report within the public Health Board papers for the meeting on 25 July 2024. Click here to view the board papers containing these reports (opens in new tab).