Co‐Producing the Australian Functional Strengths and Support Needs Framework: Approach, Experience and Outcomes
Emmah Baque, Rachelle Wicks, Zheng Yen Ng, Libby Groves, Bianca Comfort, Amanda Curran, Clare Gibellini, Ailsa Leslie, Erin West, Kiah Evans, David TrembathABSTRACT
Background
Participatory research, including co‐production, is highly valued in health‐ and community‐focused research. Evaluating outcomes of co‐production activities is essential to informing and improving future efforts.
Objective
The study aimed to evaluate the experiences of participants involved in co‐production to develop a National Framework for assessing children's functional strengths and support needs. The National Framework was developed to guide professionals when working with children aged 0–12 years, including children who do and do not have one or more diagnosed condition(s), and their families in Australia and inform good policy across health, education, disability, and community support sectors.
Design
We used a cross‐sectional descriptive survey study design.
Setting and Participants
We invited representatives of 23 community and professional organisations who were involved in co‐production, to complete an online survey. Thirteen individuals accepted the invitation.
Main Variables Studied
Participants provided quantitative and qualitative reflections regarding the extent to which the co‐production process was accessible, inclusive, respectful, participatory, helpful and outcomes focussed .
Main Outcome Measures
Data from the online survey were analysed using descriptive statistics and open‐ended responses used to illustrate the findings.
Results
Participants reported the co‐production process was highly positive, inclusive and respectful. Most reflected positively on their experience (e.g., accessibility, inclusiveness) and outcomes (e.g., open to refining ideas, aims achieved). However, some variability was noted due to the consensus‐seeking approach used which resulted in not all individual contributions being fully reflected in the final product.
Discussion
The findings provide further evidence of the value and importance of co‐production for designing and delivering community‐focused initiatives. Recommendations for further enhancing the approach, experience, and outcomes of co‐production activities for the individuals involved are provided. These include establishing detailed documentation of the co‐production methods used, establishing participants' expectations, and supporting open discussion of what went well/not well in co‐production.
Conclusion
This study shows participant perspectives on the co‐production process and the importance of considering co‐production outputs, experiences, and outcomes to understand such perspectives. Examples of strategies that can support well‐organised, respectful and purposeful engagement are provided.
Patient or Public Contribution
The participants include people with lived experience advocating for individuals and professionals. Three authors report first‐hand lived experience of disability.