Evaluating the Efficiency of a Collaborative Learning Network in Supporting Third Sector Organisations in the UK

Abstract

Third-sector organisations are a collective term for voluntary and community services, charities, and social enterprises. Within the UK and internationally, a subset provides a crucial and ever-expanding role in mental health care provision, delivering valuable client and community-led services. However, in the UK these organisations are under increased pressure to demonstrate their value, and many are constrained by scarce resources and lack of expertise. The Service Improvement Learning Collaborative was conceived as an innovative model for shared learning to enhance the value of this sector in mental health care support, generating a valuable resource of practice-based learning and promoting the implementation of effective practices. The initiative combines a collaborative learning model with mentorship support and in-depth, data analytical profiling. This collaborative involved a network of six organisations focused on exploring the maximisation of data quality, the minimisation of client attrition, and the optimisation of clinical outcomes. Evaluating the collated data helped identify the many unique challenges facing the sector and evidenced the model as a pragmatic solution for service quality improvement. This chapter provides an overview of the project's methodology, including its underlying rationale, first year of operation, and value of experiential learning for the field.

Quality improvement in the voluntary sector: knowledge, capacity and education

“…Participants from smaller organisations reported difficulty releasing staff to attend training or delegating time to quality improvement activity. This reinforces a key finding from the review of existing literature: that sufficient time needs to be dedicated to capacity building (Purcell and Hawtin, 2010;Netto et al, 2012;Steen and Mellor-Clark, 2020).…”

“…Quality approaches receive a more positive response when they are seen to be sector-specific Manville and Barnard, 2008). Furthermore, approaches that require a low time and financial investment are valued (Purcell and Hawtin, 2010;Netto et al, 2012;Steen and Mellor-Clark, 2020). Our findings also suggest that accessible language, appreciating the value of qualitative data and creating networking opportunities are key to facilitating the implementation of quality improvement within the voluntary sector.…”

“…We found only five papers on the subject. These consisted of small qualitative studies testing one-off educational programmes and capacity-building interventions; a Collaborative Learning Network for voluntary organisations (Steen and Mellor-Clark, 2020), a project to improve waiting times in a charitable hospice using the Model for Improvement (Sime et al, 2019), a Master's degree course (Netto et al, 2012), a peer-review programme (Purcell and Hawtin, 2010) and an action research case study of organisational capacity building . A summary of the findings of the review and quality ratings are presented in Appendix 2.…”

“…Despite the small pool of literature in this area, there was consistency in the factors reported to aid or hinder capacity-building activities. The analysis suggested two main factors that aided or hindered capacity building: whether sufficient time was dedicated to capacity building and whether there was organisational and management buy-in (Purcell and Hawtin, 2010;Netto et al, 2012;Sime et al, 2019;Steen and Mellor-Clark, 2020). Other factors affecting the success of capacity-building activities included the credibility and appropriateness of what was on offer and the skill of the person delivering the intervention (Purcell and Hawtin, 2010;Netto et al, 2012).…”