Slides from the first North East Hampshire and Farnham evaluation symposium on prevention, which took place on the 10 January 2017.

1. Evaluation Symposium
Introduction
Dave Meehan and Philippa Darnton, Wessex AHSN

2. Content
1. Context
2. Why evaluate?
– Supporting local ambition
– Supporting learning and spread
3. Deciding what to evaluate - the evaluation
programme
4. Objectives for today

3. The context
• WAHSN appointed as independent evaluation
partner to Happy, Healthy at Home in 2015 to:
1. Understand if the Vanguard’s New Care Models
are making a difference to patients, staff and the
wider healthcare system
2. Spread our learning about those models that
work (why and how) so that others might benefit

4. Why evaluate?
“The need for robust evaluation of complex care
initiatives is increasingly recognised as an essential
element in managing major organisational and system
changes in healthcare. (Nuffield Trust, 2015)”
“Learning requires a commitment to evaluating what
works during implementation” (Ham et al, 2016)
At the heart of the Vanguard programme

5. Why evaluate?
What has worked/not worked?
Why did it work/not work?
Can others benefit?

6. Deciding what to evaluate
Work from logic models (illustrated by the
programme logic model) – a logic of change
underpinning all NCMs
Develop evaluation questions (and methods) that
measure the expected outcomes and the context
for change

7. Improved personal wellbeing
Increased confidence of people
to take responsibility for their
own health
Improved experience of care
Improved mental and physical
health outcomes
More care delivered at home
or in the community,
rather than in hospital
15-20% fewer emergency admissions
and fewer hospital and care home
bed days per head of population,
compared to counterfactual, with
current model of care
Reduced annual costs per head
of population
Improved staff satisfaction, staff
confidence and staff
recommendation
E
to deliver the following OUTCOMES
How have those
involved been affected
by the changes?
How can the model of
care be improved?
What is the impact on
patient outcomes and
experience?
Which components of the
care model are really
making a difference?
From programme outcomes to evaluation questions

8. Q1
2017-18
Q4
2016-17
Q3
2016-17
Q2
2016-17
Q1
2016-17
Programme overview
Establish steering group
Develop evaluation framework
Refine Evaluation plans with
refresh of Logic models, Activity
outputs, Outcome metrics and
AHSN in depth evaluation.
Ensure data collection in place
for all proposed measures.
Work with CSU to design and
create implementation and
evaluation dashboards
Plan and prepare for first in
depth evaluation of Prevention
workstream.
Undertake detailed evaluation
of Recovery College and Making
Connections projects.
Plan and prepare for in-depth
evaluation of Farnham Locality.
Plan and prepare for in-depth
evaluation of Enhanced
Recovery at Home.(ER@H)
Ongoing - data collection in
workstreams.
Ongoing – regular production of
implementation and evaluation
dashboards.
Produce quarterly progress
report
Report on evaluation of
Recovery College and Making
Connections projects.
Hold first evaluation Symposium
focusing on Prevention
workstreams (Making Connections
& Recovery College).
Undertake detailed evaluation of
Farnham Locality (ICT, Ref.
Man., & prelim. Pre-Diabetes)
Undertake detailed evaluation of
Enhanced Recovery at Home
(ER@H)
Plan and prepare for in-depth
evaluation of Yateley locality
Plan and prepare for in-depth
review of Interoperability
workstream.
Ongoing - data collection in
workstreams.
Ongoing – regular production of
implementation and evaluation
dashboards.
Produce quarterly progress
report.
Detailed evaluation of
outstanding Farnham Locality
(UCC, Pre-Diabetes Education)
Report on evaluation of ER@H.
Hold second evaluation
Symposium Farnham (ICT, RM,
Pre-diabetes)
Undertake & complete detailed
evaluation of Yateley locality
Undertake detailed evaluation of
Interoperability workstream.
Ongoing - data collection in
workstreams.
Ongoing – regular production of
implementation and evaluation
dashboards.
Produce quarterly progress
report and first draft of Final
Report.
Report on evaluation of Yateley
locality.
Report on evaluation of IT
workstream.
Hold third symposium : Final
reflections (Farnham, Yateley,
other workstreams)
Produce final report on
summative evaluation of NEHF
Vanguard programme in 2016-
17.
Undertake evaluation of Safe
Haven Café.
Report on evaluation of Safe
Haven Café.
Plan and Prepare evaluation of
Safe Haven Café.
Plan and prepare evaluation of
Acute workstream, to include
rapid evaluation of NEHF
implementation of MISSION.
Undertake evaluation of
Acute workstream
& report on evaluation of
MISSION.
Report on evaluation of Acute
workstream
Report on evaluation of
Farnham Locality

9. Our approach
Working in
partnership
Combined
methods
Action
learning
Specialist
skills

10. Objectives for today
• Describe some evaluation case studies, focussing on
the prevention workstream
• Explore some of the methods and tools we have
developed
• Feedback some early findings
• Share our learning and start other conversations
about evaluation (reflection cards)