Tag Archives: Evaluation

Hello from the Value and Impact Task and Finish Group

Value and Impact is one of two task and finish groups operating within the Quality and Impact work stream of the Knowledge for Healthcare programme.  The group has the remit of refreshing the online Impact Toolkit with the aim of broadening its relevance to library services working outside the acute sector, and to increase the range of tools available to enable the assessment of impacts upon areas such as management and commissioning.

The group first met in May 2015 and decided early in its development that an agreed definition of impact would be valuable in establishing a common baseline.  The adopted definition was taken from ISO 16439:2014 Information and documentation — Methods and procedures for assessing the impact of libraries:

Difference or change in an individual or group resulting from the contact with library services

As preparatory work a scoping literature search was undertaken together with an analysis of fully compliant LQAF submissions for Criterion 1.3C.  These were supplied by LKSL Leads with permission of local managers (3 regions returned, 24 fully compliant submissions).

Consultation with the NHS Library workforce was essential before work on refreshing the toolkit could begin.  A committed and enthusiastic reference group assisted with the creation and testing of a SurveyMonkey-based questionnaire looking at how (if at all) library staff made use of the Impact Toolkit, whether they used any alternatives, what they did with the results, and invited suggestions for improvement of the toolkit resource.

The survey was open during August 2015 and received responses from 136 services (63% based on figures reported in Knowledge for Healthcare) with representation from all the LETBs.

An initial analysis of the responses to the survey shows that although over 95% of respondents already collect impact data, reported usage of the toolkit itself is quite low.  Looking at what impact information is used for, the evaluation and modification of services came out top with 89% while publicity and marketing (79%) and justification for business cases/funding bids (60%) were also popular responses.

Over the next few weeks we will be analysing the written responses to the survey and will report on these in the next blog.  We will then move on to work on refreshing the toolkit based on results and suggestions from the survey and other evidence.  The target date for completion of the toolkit refresh is the end of March 2016.

Membership of the Value and Impact Task and Finish Group

  • Jenny Turner – East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust (Chair)
  • Stephen Ayre – George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust
  • Douglas Knock – King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
  • Rebecca Mitchelmore – Isle of Wight NHS Trust
  • Susan Smith – Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Sophie Pattison – University College London
  • Dominic Gilroy – Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust