Agenda item

This report sets out the progress made to date on the Council’s commitment to co-production with residents, particularly Disabled residents. This report also includes an analysis of the four reports submitted to the Policy and Accountability Committees, the learning so far and how co-production can be further embedded and widened to include more residents.

Tara Flood (Head of Co-Production) and Geoff Cowart (Strategic Lead for Communications and Communities) introduced the report which gave an update on Co-Production work that was taking place at LBHF. LBHF’s commitment to working in co-production with residents was driven by the aspiration to create a more inclusive, accessible, and equitable borough for all residents. LBHF was always looking at new ways to work with residents to transform local decision making by co-producing policies and services with the community. The council started to embed its commitment to working in co-production by focusing first on Disabled residents, as the Disabled People's Commission (DPC) found that Disabled people, when considering multiple intersectional barriers, were the furthest away from decision-making. However, the DPC were very clear in their report that whilst the work on co-production should start with Disabled residents, the commitment to ‘doing things with residents not to them’ through co-production should be about all H&F residents.

Councillor Natalia Perez said that it was great to see the wide range of working groups throughout co-production. She noted that the changes being seen were positive and that impact was being made.

Councillor Nicole Trehy stated that engaging 150 residents was a significant achievement, as it was very difficult to talk to residents. She added that residents were hard to engage on good news and asked what learnings had been taken from that and how focus and engagement could be improved. Tara Flood explained that many residents joined groups as an opportunity to tell their story, which marked the start of their co-production journey and led to how their story could shape progress. She noted that the Civic Campus group had been running for seven years, describing it as a great result despite a bumpy journey, and confirmed that conversations were taking place around the next iteration of the group. She added that residents would see the change and how their needs had been reflected.

Councillor Nicole Trehy thanked Tara Flood and commented that she used the work of the co-production team as inspiration when women were not being reflected positively.

Councillor Jacolyn Daly highlighted the difference between co-production and consultation, noting the move from listening to shared power. She asked for an example where residents and officers had disagreed, and residents had prevailed. Tara Flood cited the residents’ panel, which had identified the need for planning applications to be available in different formats. Initially, officers had said this was not possible, but training providers were found who could produce accessible application formats, and training opportunities were shared. Tara Flood offered to share more information on this. Councillor Jacolyn Daly said that examples would be useful to show residents the impact.

Councillor Jacolyn Daly noted that the Digital Accessibility Group had challenged on digital inclusion and slowed processes down to be more reflective. Rana Aria (Co-Production Officer) stated that residents looked forward to co-production meetings as they could see the difference compared to consultation and felt like equal partners. She added that even the most cynical residents attended every meeting because they felt valued and eventually became critical friends.

Councillor Jacolyn Daly asked what the process was to get co-production involved in a project. Tara Flood explained that officers could contact her team directly, or if they heard about a project, they would get in touch and offer support. She said that officers discussed the work and timeframe, and the team helped them understand what was possible with co-production. She noted that on the Cost of Living project, they had been able to start a steering group.

Councillor Jacolyn Daly stated that budget influence had been referred to in the report and asked what residents’ influence on the budget through co-production, looked like. Tara Flood explained that Youth Voices priorities had been included in grant criteria, working with the youth council to incorporate those priorities.

Councillor Jacolyn Daly referred to page 39 and 40 of the agenda, which had a table of indicators for successful co-production, she asked whether these indicators would be used as the criteria for identifying whether co-production can work for specific groups. Tara Flood said that they encouraged officers to look at external pots of money to add resources to departments through including co-production, as they recognised co-production wasn’t free. She added that advice and training were given out free of charge at the moment as they hadn’t worked out how to charge for it at this point. Councillor Rowan Ree stated that services designed around what people wanted were a better use of money than producing services that no one would use.

Councillor Rory Vaughan referred to paragraph 62 and said that there needed to be a pool of residents who were trained and able to get involved in co-production so that officers could draw on them. He also and asked about costs as designing services in this way takes more resource. Tara Flood responded that at some point there could be too many service-focused groups on co-production, making it difficult to manage, and that consideration should be given to moving from multiple service groups to a larger pool of people who could be accessed for specific tasks. Councillor Rory Vaughan asked how the benefits of co-production were evaluated and whether resources were available to produce case studies showing how the model had improved service design and delivery. Tara Flood confirmed that longer versions of case studies were included in the report and that another tool being created was a co-production evaluation tool. Councillor Rory Vaughan noted that benefits were difficult to quantify and suggested bringing them out qualitatively.

Councillor Natalia Perez referred to Health and Adult Social Care Policy and Accountability Committee (HASPAC) and said that an update had been received on Charing Cross Hospital Co-Production, which was great to see.

Councillor Natalia Perez asked about there had previously been mention of a partnership board and whether other residents would be involved. Tara Flood replied that they did not think that route was being pursued now.

Councillor Jacolyn Daly raised challenges around communications for co-production. Geoff Cowart stated that challenges came from officers, as residents liked to have their opinion heard, and officers needed to build co-production into their work streams. The Chair commented that if officers had a project and wanted to co-produce, training was part of the culture change. The Chair noted that reports presented to PACs showed that some departments were much further ahead in culture change.

The Chair cited the Defending Council Homes policy as an example of co-production and noted that many historical policies had also been co-produced.

The Chair highlighted the line between consultation and co-production. Tara Flood stated that leadership was important to drive culture change and that more of a culture shift was needed to make co-production usual business. She said that it was a big task to shift culture and expressed a desire for co-production to be part of the appraisal process to help officers consider co-production at the start of processes. Rana Aria added that initial training had been provided to senior officers and webinars for other officers, noting that culture was easier to change from the top down.

Councillor Jacolyn Daly concluded that co-production should be part of the appraisal process and included in objectives. Tara Flood added that she was happy to work with the People department to look at how this could be implemented.

RESOLVED

1. That the Policy and Oversight Board noted and commented on the report.

2. That the appraisal process change to add a mandatory co-production objective during each appraisal.