Co-creating rehabilitation: Findings from a pilot and implications for wider public service reform

Abstract

As part of a large pan-European project on co-creating public services we supported the design of a programme in England that attempted to operationalise research on desistance, through a model of co-created, strengths-based working. We then evaluated its implementation and impact. The programme was implemented in a Community Rehabilitation Company. It was delivered in the context of rapid organisational change, often in response to rapidly changing external events and a turbulent policy environment. These factors impeded implementation. An impact evaluation did not identify a statistically significant difference in re-offending rates between the intervention group and a comparator group. However, in-depth qualitative evaluation identified positive examples of co-production and co-creation, with individual case managers and service users supportive and noting positive change. Taken as a whole our findings suggest that a co-created, strengths-based model of probation case management is promising but needs to be accompanied by wider systems change if it is to be embedded successfully.

Co-creation in Public Services for Innovation and Social Justice

“…It was therefore not possible to reject the null hypothesis that My Direction had no effect on reoffending outcomes. In other words, impact evaluation did not provide evidence that participation in My Direction reduced the probability of reoffending (Baines et al, 2021). Nevertheless, qualitative evidence from interviews and observation identified some positive examples of personalisation with individual case managers and people on probation that indicate there was positive change.…”

“…For the editors and authors of this collection, co-creation is essentially a moral endeavour that recognises the legitimate knowledge and lived experience of people who typically have services 'done to' them. This line of thinking is grounded in ideas that emanate from advocacy, capability, human rights and social justice, inspired at least in part by struggles of disabled people for control over the support they need to live independently (Fox et al, 2021). Its moral framework recognises the anthropological dimensions of human beings as 'receivers' (in need of support), 'doers' (capable of action) and 'judges', referring to the idea that citizens are able to say what has value in their eyes, and that this should inform policies and programmes that target them (Sen, 1985;Bonvin and Laruffa, 2018).…”

“…Co-creation and the related concept of co-production implies that people who are usually the targets of services (that is, have services done to them) have legitimate knowledge that has value for shaping service innovations and resources or strengths that can contribute to service delivery (Fox et al, 2021). For example, Loeffler andBovaird (2016: 1006) define co-production as 'public services, service users and communities making better use of each other's assets and resources to achieve better outcomes or improved efficiency'.…”

“…Staff explained in interviews that person-centred practice promoted dialogue with people on probation and generated mutual understanding. Some individuals on probation also noted a more flexible and responsive experience of the service (Baines et al, 2021).…”

“…Following this introduction, we position My Direction and its digital aspects within theoretical and policy contexts. Then after indicating the sources of data, we summarise the pilot intervention and results, which have been reported in detail elsewhere (Baines et al, 2021). This chapter goes on to focus in more depth upon two aspects: a promising but ultimately unsuccessful attempt to trial a dedicated software application; and a review of relevant social media.…”