Honouring the lived experience: Rape and Sexual Assault‎ Victims Taskforce option appraisal report

7. Scoring Process and Methodology

7.1 Scoring the service delivery options

The morning session gave an opportunity for further interrogation of the options as they related to the benefits criterion - quality dimensions as well as the benefits, risks and opportunities for improvement in the speakers' presentations.

Each group were asked to consider the options for change applying the information obtained from the pre briefing pack and also from the presentations to add to their own professional judgement and perspective.

Please Note: As a default the groups were asked to consider the following as a question throughout the process.

• Does the option being considered meet the needs of those with lived experience?
• How will the option meet the needs of children?
• How will the option/model make the best use of skills & expertise available across the agencies across Scotland charged with delivering the future service model?

The facilitators invited the group to:

• Consider the information contained within the pre briefing pack, the presentations by the subject matter experts and proceed to discuss the risks and benefits of the service options for the delivery of services to those who have experienced sexual assault & rape in Scotland.
• Go through the Quality Dimensions (Criteria) to ensure everyone knows how to apply each of the dimensions and definitions as they relate to the service options.
• Ask all group members if they fully understand the process of scoring.
• Ensure sufficient dialogue, questions, explanation are given an airing.
• Ask individuals to score each dimensions on a scale of 0-5 for all options. Each individual to apply a score.
• This process must be repeated for all options and models

All participants completed an individual scoring sheet to represent the value of each of the benefits criterion as it applied to the options. (See Appendix 3)

7.2 Scoring the service configurations

The afternoon session concentrated on assessing the service configuration models using information and materials presented and detailed groupwork discussions. Participants went into previously allocated groups for a facilitated groupwork discussion around all of the service configuration models.

The decision making approach utilised in the afternoon session required the short life working group to suggest some factors they consider to be either 'essential' or 'important' or 'desirable' for the location of the centre/services for people who have experienced sexual assault & rape in Scotland.

For example, an essential factor would likely be 'adequate and fit for purpose accommodation. An important factor might be 'increases the recruitment and retention of staff'. A desirable factor might be opportunities exist for further service development without the need for refer on or hand off to other agencies.

The analysis of the method works as follows:

(Step 1) First consider if a clear preference emerges after consideration of the feedback on essential factors. If yes, then we have a preferred model! If not, move to Step 2.

(Step 2) Consider if a clear preference emerges after consideration of the feedback on important factors. If yes, then we have a preferred model! If not, move to Step 3.

(Step 3) Consider if a clear preference emerges after consideration of the feedback on desirable factors. If yes, then we have a preferred model!

The facilitators took the group through the process to ensure all key questions were answered or explained. Each participant completed individual score sheets across the agreed essential, desirable and important factors for future delivery of the future service location. (See appendix 4)