People's Panel for Wellbeing 2022 and Beyond: process and learning evaluation

3. People’s Panel – Summary of approach

This section will provide a descriptive account of how the panel worked, the aims and design, resources, roles and people involved (RA1).

The People’s Panel members were drawn from a pool of those who had responded to an online free text survey about the impact of the pandemic^[2] and those who had taken part in a telephone survey on the impact of COVID-19 on wellbeing^[3] who also agreed to be contacted about future research conducted by the Scottish Government. They were recruited to be a diverse set of participants with a range of experience of, and attitudes to, COVID-19. A selection of equality organisations were also approached in order to recruit panel members who had not completed an online survey^[4]. The initial rationale for the panel was to bring together a group of people, in order to gather and analyse their attitudes, beliefs, and experiences in relation to COVID-19 recovery plans. These in-depth, qualitative insights were not being captured from existing data sources, such as surveys and online polling data. This was described in the initial proposal as an opportunity to:

‘deliver high quality, regular research findings that will add to the depth and breadth of our knowledge […] It will provide a rich and nuanced source of intelligence on lived experience of the pandemic and our response to it’

Further, the approach was framed as part of the Scottish Government commitment to participatory democracy, co-production and deliberative research^[5].

The People’s Panel was led by a social research team within the Central Analysis Division (CAD), within Scottish Government. Note-takers and facilitators were drawn from research teams across the Scottish Government following a request for volunteers. This approach was taken so that there were enough people to support the running of the events but, as stated in the proposal had the ‘added bonus of exposing multiple officials to the research methods to increase capacity in-house’. Prior to each panel event there was a preparation session to run through the practicalities, key themes and research questions to cover in each of the discussion sessions. Following the events there was a debriefing for facilitators and note-takers to discuss any emerging issues and reflect on the processes and outcomes.

The design of each event was led by the research team, with topics guided by the needs of various policy teams. Such needs were gathered via regular requests from the research team that went out via email. Using a standard form, teams were asked about the area of interest they wanted to talk to the People’s Panel about and the strategic links to other parts of the Scottish Government. The form had a section to describe the ‘lived knowledge’ that could be used in the area of work in the short term (in effect in the next 6 weeks) and another section related to longer term needs (in effect over the next year). Responses to the form were followed up by the research team to clarify the requests from policy teams and ensure that the policy team understood the remit of the People’s Panel. This process was described by one of those who delivered information at a People’s Panel event and used the findings from the Panel in their work:

‘I’ve worked with [the research team] quite closely in terms of looking at things we want to know and then how we actually translate that into a social research question, and the difference between being like a focus group to review something versus a group which looks at the experiences and feeling and perceptions and ideas, the kind of differentiation between that. So yeah, I’ve been working with [research team] to develop sessions for the group’ (Policy 5)

The above excerpt highlights the work done by the research team between events and the way that this acted as a form of capacity building for policy teams to understand the way the panels work in more detail and to find the most effective way of working with them.

The events themselves ran for five hours, including breaks, and were held on Fridays. This was agreed with the Panel members who were asked for feedback about the way the events were run following each event (including the length of breaks, and the timing of the events). In total there were six events between June 2022 and March 2023. Each event was a combination of information sessions, led by a member of the relevant policy team, and discussions facilitated in smaller groups. After two events feedback sessions were added for policy teams to inform the People’s Panel about the ways in which their views had been used. At this point there was also a shift in how the events were designed as research questions were made explicit in the planning documents and these were used to design the facilitation guides for the discussion sessions. This is indicative of the fact that the team were reflecting on and learning from the events as the process progressed. The text below summarises the content of each of the events.

Timeline and summary of six People’s Panel events

Event 1: June 10^th 2022

Introduction to the values, principles and ways of working. Discussion sessions to talk about experiences of COVID-19 over the last two years. Information session on the Scottish Government approach to addressing COVID-19 harms. Discussion session about motivations for joining the panel and their views on further topics for discussion at subsequent meetings.

Event 2: June 24^th 2022

Information session on current Scottish Government protective behaviour guidelines.

Discussion session about feelings of being safe/unsafe and the behaviour that prompts these feelings. Information session on Scottish Government ventilation plans.

Discussion session on the thoughts and feelings the panel had about the importance of ventilation and the related guidance. Discussion session about the meaning and impact of the Cost of Living Crisis.

Event 3: September 23^rd 2022

Session on impact of findings to date. Three discussion sessions based on the following research questions:

1) what impact is (or will) the cost of living crisis having on member’s behaviour?

2) what impact is (or will) the cost of living crisis having on members health and wellbeing?

3) What are members attitudes towards COVID and protective measures this autumn and winter?

4) What do members think about the new ventilation guidance?

Event 4: November 18^th 2022

Session on impact of findings to date. Information sessions on the use of CO₂ monitors and Resilience.

Three discussion sessions based on the following research questions:

1) To what extent, if at all, could the use of CO₂ monitors in spaces with public access and signage to that effect provide reassurances to panel members and make them feel safe?

2) What do this group understand by the terms communities and resilience?

3) What are this group willing to do ease the pressure on the health service and how do they feel about taking action?

4) To what extent ate this group aware of risks to their health, safety and wellbeing and how does this translate into planning for emergencies?

5) How are this groups of people going about looking for help and support (financially or otherwise) to address difficulties?

Event 5: January 27^th 2023

Information session on coping with emergencies. Two discussion groups based on the following research questions:

1) What aspects of household resilience are practical for this group of people?

2) What do this group believe they can do to help them cope with the impact of an emergency?

3) How can the Scottish Government and partners help households to help themselves cope with emergencies?

4) How do People’s Panel member think it best to communicate and inform community resilience ideas to the public in a helpful way?

Event 6: March 24^th 2023

The final event served in part as a reflection on the People’s Panel process with members discussing the highlights, lowlights, and memorable moments.

In addition, the discussions were organised to address the following research questions:

1) What are the views, opinions, feelings and ideas of the People’s Panel about COVID-19 now?

2) To what extent, if at all, have their feeling changed over the last year?

3) To what extent, if at all, do you expect their feeling to change over the next year?

4) Are we still the broken society riddled with anxieties as found in event 3 in Sept 2022?

5) What did People’s Panel members want to talk about after a year of events, covering COVID 19 recovery, Cost of Living crisis and community resilience?

The research team were responsible for compiling notes from the notetakers and they carried out thematic analysis to identify key themes for reports that were circulated internally, 10 days after each event. The headline findings were shared at the beginning of the subsequent People’s Panel event.

The resources that were requested in the initial proposal for the People’s Panel included £125 per panel member per meeting plus funds to enable participation. For example, IT equipment, software, and caring responsibility payments. Resource was also requested for key members of staff to support the development and running of the panels and volunteers (Scottish Government staff members) were to be used for note taking and facilitating. In reality, the staff time required changed over the course of the process. Initially, there was a significant time commitment which reduced once the team were familiar with the process and the preparation that was required for each event.

Beyond financial resources it is also important to consider the resource of time, energy and emotional impact of this type of work – both for the panel members and those facilitating the events. Over the course of the process additional resource has been required to emotionally support both the panel members and the other members of the research team. From the documentary analysis it is clear that time and thought was given on how best to do this. Facilitator notes have a series of support services identified by the research team for panel members to be signposted to if necessary. The research team also remained available on the online platform for at least 30 minutes after each event to allow panel members to discuss any issues they may want to raise. The facilitator notes also state that the team felt that some of the content shared was difficult to hear and offers debriefing as a team or as an individual. Between events one and two the team sought to identify a mental health first aider within Scottish Government who could observe the meetings and be on call if needed. When this was not possible, one of the research team trained as a mental health first aider to offer that option to panel members.