Evaluation

Contents of this report

2. Feedback - Key Issues

1. Rationale, process and stakeholders

3. Conclusions

Week

Stage

Key Products

&Tasks

(up to) 1

Planning and preparation

Agreed case for

SPOTLIGHT;Team

established;Resources secured;Methods planned;

Stakeholders engaged;

2 - 3

Spotlight on the issue

Analysis of the issue and its

cause and effects on families,

individuals, neighbourhoods

3 - 4

Spotlight on delivery

Analysis of the systems,

structures and incentives in the delivery

chain

5 - 6

Delivery Agreements

Immediate, medium and

long term commitments to

improve delivery – made

to high level panel of LSP

Exec.

Bi Monthly

Stock takes

Regular high tempo checks

on delivery against

commitments

‘Quick wins’ – supporting local ideas

What is Spotlight?

Why are we evaluating Spotlight?

• To consider Spotlight’s value as a change tool

• Identify lessons learned and good practice

• To make refinements to the process

• Highlight role of LSP in the evaluation review i.e. are they approving the process? What are next steps?

How are we evaluating Spotlight?

• Two phases:

Phase 1: Is the Spotlighting process effective?

Phase 2: Does Spotlight deliver?

Phase 1 Methodology

• Listening to people’s experiences – semi structured interviews

• Encouraging people to be reflective

Phase 1 Methodology

Contents of this report

2. Feedback – Key issues

3. Conclusions

1. Rationale, process and stakeholders

Who was interviewed?

• 24 Interviews - some gaps

• 8 partner organisations

Strategic

Spotlight teams

Trios

Week 0 - Selection of Spotlight issue/area

Strengths Lessons learned

• Some interviewees had a very clear idea about why the Spotlight issue and areas were chosen

• Need to be explicit and up front about why a Spotlight has been chosen

Weaknesses Proposed Improvements

• Others less so• Why this area and not the adjacent one?

• Clear message which is articulated from the beginning of the process

Week 1- Preparation and Set up Stage

Strengths Lessons learned

• Framework gave clear brief• Refined with help of core group input and early pilot

• Lead role of neighbourhood management in some Spotlights

Weaknesses Proposed Improvements

• Questions about effectiveness of governance arrangements. • Some key partners aren’t sufficiently engaged

• Longer lead in time for preparation – management of staff – making space, and data requirements• Engaging with neighbourhood management needs to be part of the ‘tick list’

Weeks 2-3 - Understanding the Issue

Strengths Lessons learned

•Wide consultation and creative methodologies used•Use of third sector / community organisations to consult•Use of quantitative and qualitative data•Cause and affect analysis

•New leads given by consultees were useful•Importance of maintaining communication with stakeholders throughout•Stakeholder mapping power/engagement matrix useful

Weaknesses Proposed Improvements

•Limited time to consult•Access to data

•Clear purpose for the session•Cost of consultations – integration of mainstream engagement mechanisms

Weeks 3-4 Understanding Delivery

Strengths Lessons learned

•Commissioning cycle worked well as a functional analysis•Triangle model useful for understanding the task

• Make good use of consultation sessions, maybe using two stage approach – first issue and then service response

Weaknesses Proposed Improvements

• Time – jaded after finding data, need to use those involved in service delivery again

•Use of well prepared case studies to understand service response •Three stage delivery chain analysis – functional perspective, organisational (relationship) perspective, customer journey

Weeks 5-6 - Developing the Delivery Agreements

Strengths Lessons learned

•Commitment of front line staff to change•Acted as catalyst for partnership improvement and change

•Time taken to develop collective agreements•Hard to maintain pace & energy, keep shop open & make changes

Weaknesses Proposed Improvements

•Problem translating analysis, to actions, to strategy to improve overall performance•Level of detail•Over-representation of city council •Buy-in & ownership before end game?•Need to develop structures to ensure local accountability

•Need to be owned by SSP/ thematic partnerships•Using option appraisal – tinkering vs clean sheet and those in between•Need to ensure that there is more clarity over ownership of actions•Use of Peer challenge

End Game/Kick off Presentations

Strengths Lessons learned

• High level buy in / accountability•Level of interest generated

•Small is better

Weaknesses Proposed Improvements

• Challenge overshadowed problem solving•Who needs to be there to make it work?

•Clearer brief for strategic participants•Two stage process

Transition into Delivery

Strengths Lessons learned

• The releasing of resource of SCC’s Transform Trios

•Reluctant partners become even more of a barrier in this stage•Importance of a clear map of change landscape – where do people fit

Weaknesses Proposed Improvements

•Lack of clarity on who is going implement proposed changes•Newness of Spotlight and Trios initiatives•How to maintain pace and urgency?•Delivery agreements needed further work

•Greater emphasis on making what are the expectations of partners organisations• Developing relationships earlier in the process

Contents of this report

2. Feedback – Key Issues

3. Conclusions

1. Rationale, process and stakeholders

Summary of the key strengths

Spotlight Evaluation

Partnership development –

citywide and local

Space for critical/strategic

thinking

Highlighted organisational development

issuesEvidence base for

further work and to support LAA work

Foundations for commissioning

third sector providers

Spotlight tests the quality of partnership working (and an organisation’s pre-disposition to transformational change)

•Testing partnerships in real situations where partnership working is needed

•Galvanises good partnerships/relationships and highlights weaknesses in the initial process and even more so in the delivery plan

Successful partnership working

(Good Relationships, Shared Goals, Trust, Effective Transparent Decisions)

Poor partnership working

Antithesis of above

Par

tner

ship

Un

ive

rsa

l In

dic

ato

r P

aper

Info

rmed

by

the

Pri

nci

ple

s IN

Go

od

Go

vern

ance

Summary of the key development areas

Improving Spotlight

methodology

Expectations, Communication,& Relationships

Purpose of end game

presentation

Resources, planning and timing of the

process

Business case for Spotlight

issue and location

Roles and responsibilities & governanceSkills to support

the process

Move from analysis to actions in

strategic context

Ownership by

SSP / thematic partnerships

Smarter, pacier move into delivery

Early Successes

Influence on LSC tenders

Spotlight Delivery

Centripetal force- focus for work in this

area

Developing & supporting third sector commissioning in East

Salford

Lever to bring in funding - 480k PCDL

(Personal community, development learning)

Rejuvenating Economic Devlopt,

Learning & Skills thematic

partnership

Next Steps/Issues

• Ownership, branding, quality control• Process and reasons to initiate a Spotlight• Toolkit – techniques and guidance

Roles, relationships, resources & building a team

Implementation and innovation• Project management, performance – how do you

monitor creativity and how do you avoid managing out innovation

• Health Spotlights

We mustn’t lose sight

Whenever and wherever societies have flourished and prospered rather than stagnated and decayed, creative and workable cities have been at the core of the phenomenon… Decaying cities, declining economies, and mounting social troubles travel together. The combination is not coincidental.

Jane Jacobs The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961)

Questions and discussion