Appendix 2: Evaluation questions
Communication and Engagement with RCS Programme Principles
Do CPPs, schools, parents, children and other stakeholders have a clear and shared understanding of the RCS Programme principles and aims?
If not, what improvements could be made to define/communicate these principles and aims more clearly?
Is the RCS Programme sufficiently clear, detailed enough in its principles, approach, and associated guidance to allow it to be replicated by CPPs if required?
To what extent do CPPs feel engaged with, and motivated by the RCS Programme?
How could engagement with CPPs and schools be improved, if at all?
Data and Evidence
How could the process for implementing the HWB survey and data linkage element of the survey be improved?
To what extent and how has the health and wellbeing survey data, linked to local authority administrative data, 'added value' and improved the JSC process for each CPP, in comparison with their previous use of evidence for JSC?
What impact, if any, has the HWB survey data had on school improvement planning?
To what extent does the 'added value' (if any) of the data and evidence programme outweigh the costs/resource implications of implementing a HWB survey of this nature?
To what extent has the survey raised concerns from parents, schools and what were the nature of these concerns? How could anticipating these and responding to them be improved?
To what extent has the data visualisation tool improved stakeholders understanding of the data and evidence? How has this been used within the JSC process? How could this be improved?
To what extent has, the RCS programme increased the skills and knowledge of CPPs in how to use data for local service planning, evaluation and improvement?
To what extent (and how) has the RCS programme support 'added value' and improved the JSC process for each CPP, in comparison with existing processes? (e.g. greater shared responsibilities and dialogue, increased knowledge and skills, collaboration, multi-agency working)
Does this 'added value' (if any) outweigh the costs/resource implications of providing facilitation and development support for CPPs?
How could this support be improved? Are there any alternative models that should be considered?
Which particular element of the support provided has been considered most useful/effective/critical and why?
Short term outcomes
To what extent, and how, has the overall RCS Programme resulted in improvements to the process and delivery of JSC within CPPs (for example increased collaboration, multi-agency working, improved skills)?
Are these improvements likely to be sustained beyond the RCS Programme support?
Have there been any unintended consequences (positive or negative) for CPPs, schools, parents, children taking part in the RCS Programme? How could these be mitigated for in future?
To what extent was the RCS programme new or a scale-up of existing programmes within each CPP?
To what extent did, the RCS Programme result in a re-focus of services targeted at looked after children, children with Additional Support Needs and children living in poverty.
What are the key elements within each of the five CPPs, which have shown to be most successful in improving JSC (e.g. leadership approach, culture, skills, existing approach to JSC).
How have the different elements of the RCS Programme (linked data, facilitation support, data mapping, etc.) each contributed to improvements in JSC and which elements are considered 'critical' to achieving these outcomes for future support?
To what extent did CPPs consider the support received through the RCS Programme, adequate to meet their goals? Did they supplement this with other sources of funding/support, and why?
What did and did not work well in the national and local governance support as part of the RCS programme?