This site uses cookies to store information on your computer. I'm fine with this Cookie information

SRG 8 - Approach to Wider Public Engagement

The eighth Stakeholder Reference Group (SRG) for the Moving Forward Together (MFT) Programme took place on Wednesday the 28th of March. The Group of 16 patient, service user and carer representatives (details at the end) heard a presentation and engaged in discussion about the intended approach for wider public engagement on the Programme.

Ian Ritchie, Chair of the group welcomed everyone and stated that today was a culmination of the participation and input that members had previously contributed to the Group. He introduced John Barber, Patient Experience and Public Involvement Manger and NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde Engagement Lead for Programme, who’s role up until now was to facilitate these sessions but now had to present how the Group’s feedback had helped shaped the approach to how we inform and engage with the public more widely about the programme.

John started by saying that historically engagement had relied on printed materials like posters and leaflets and use of adverts in local press. However, based on the Group and other’s feedback, there was a decision to take a different approach for the Programme and the intention was to use primarily digital media as this could be shared more easily online and via social media. He explained that one of the main products in development was and animation similar in style to and developed by the same company who produce one for the King’s Fund in England and played this.

He also said that, as highlighted by the Group, it is important to have front-line staff talk about what they thought about the Programme and what change might look like. Again, previous approaches would have seen one or two staff members present to the public, but the scope of the Programme meant that the possibility of organising this across the whole system and across the whole Board area was unrealistic. In addition, feedback from Health and Social Care locality officers mirrored the Group’s in that large public meetings or event often failed to engage with the wider public.

This was why the decision had been made to commission a series of ‘talking head’ videos of staff speaking about the Programme and how services had and will continually need to change to meet demand and through innovation and technology. John explained that these would cover a range of topics, including having the staff who had previously presented to the Group and be short, but informative to allow the public to choose and hear about the areas they were interested in. These and other information materials would be sent out via the Health Board and Health and Social Care Partnerships mailing lists including inequalities groups.

John then explained that often the excellent work and input of stakeholders, like this Group, often went unrecognised, or that the public challenged their credibility to representative of them. For these reason he asked if the members would consider working with him to develop videos and articles that described their involvement and gave them a voice to talk about what they thought about the Programme. He then delivered an early draft presentation that was indented for wider public engagement to community groups that covered the rationale  and early concepts for the Programme and asked members to provide feedback as to how suitable and accessible this was.

Ian Ritchie then facilitated discussion with the Group and asked them for their thoughts about the proposed approach for wider public engagement on the Programme. The Group liked the idea of an animation to explain the Programme, but said it shouldn’t have jargon, acronyms or be too complicated; however Aileen said that it is a complicated picture and the public should be aware of this. There was discussion about how to engage more generally,  Thomas asked about ‘Joe Boggs’ public who might not see things on social media and Betty said that more than a website was needed.

John agreed  with this and stated that a leaflet would be printed and information sessions held in hospitals to engage directly with people, but media like the video can be played on all the screens in hospitals and health centres. In addition the leaflet would detail other ways to find out more information or get in touch including a freephone number. The Group discussed the use of or press or television adverts, but members agreed that for value and to reach more people then social media, email and mailing lists were the best way to engage more widely.

The group made several suggestions to the order and to provide more detail or clarity around some of content of the presentation for community groups. Anne said that it needs to be made clear that the budget for this is the same as services currently have, it’s the same pot of money but it needs to be used better. Several members spoke about the perception of what community care currently is and this being confused with trying to provide more health care services in the community setting. Anne Marie’s said that unpaid carers needs further emphasis, otherwise people might think it was only about paid care.

Overall the presentation was well received and beyond minor changes the Group felt that it was a good high level explanation of the Programme. Gordon said that using examples that they had heard about were a good way to convey the messages such as the community respiratory care model and others as videos. Members agreed that the use of the staff talking head videos would be a good addition to it and for use elsewhere, but again spoke about the need to engage more widely with the public.

Martin provided examples of how unless you have an interest or are a current user of health and care services it can be difficult to engage as people don’t want to think about needing them, but that people need to also take responsibility for their own health . The group felt that as well as using mailing lists and media that working in cooperation with Health and Social Care Partnership Officers was the best was to reach into local communities.  Susan asked who the local officers were and what engagement had been planned and spoke about the relatively short timescale to engage, but the principles were good.

The Group agreed that a range of approaches and materials would be required to engage and that it would take time and acknowledged that this was just the start of the conversation about how health and social care services need to change. Thomas said that there had been 70 years of culture generated around the NHS and changing this would be no mean feat, but Betty said something needs to be done the Group agreed that culture change around the expectations of how where and when people access health and social care services are needed.

Ian thanked the group for their participation and said that the Health Board and Integration Joint Boards had to get key messages across and illustrate the need to change. He said the help of the Group in doing this would be appreciated and asked for volunteers to make themselves known to John to coordinate this.


In Attendance

Ian Ritchie

NHSGGC – Non Executive Director

Antje Hannah

NHSGGC – Admin support

Louise Wheeler

Scottish Health Council



John Barber

NHSGGC - MFT Core Team – Engagement lead


Patient, Service User and Carer Representatives

Aileen Hills


Alison Stewart


Anne Marie Kennedy


Anne MacDougall


Betty Graham


Gordon McInnes


George Brown


Ian Good


Janice Woodburn


Karen Haldane


Margaret Telfer


Martin Brickley


Morag Cullen


Morag McIntosh


Susan McDonald


Thomas Cassidy