Local authorities across England are receiving a government-funded package of adult social care improvement support, and this evaluation will determine whether that package is actually working. The problem is straightforward: the Department of Health and Social Care spends public money on several organisations that help councils improve their adult social care services, but no one has systematically assessed whether this collective effort—called the National Core Improvement offer (NCIO)—delivers real improvements for the people who use care services. The researchers will survey councils, analyse publicly available data, interview delivery staff and senior council leaders, and conduct six in-depth case studies to build a complete picture of what the NCIO does and what difference it makes. If the evaluation succeeds, it will shape future policy decisions about how improvement support is designed and funded. The concrete outcome is better-targeted public spending that actually improves quality of life for people drawing on adult social care—rather than continuing to fund programmes whose effectiveness is unknown. The final recommendations, developed with national stakeholders and Department of Health officials, will directly inform the future shape of the NCIO.
View original technical description
Background Local Authorities (LAs) often strive to improve services or structures but may need support to do this at scale. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) currently funds a number of organisations to deliver adult social care improvement programmes to LAs. The activities are collectively known as the 'National Core Improvement offer' (NCIO). In the context of social care reform it is timely to review whether this still reflects the needs of the sector but given the complex context a development phase took place between March and December 2024 to identify appropriate ways to evaluate this. Aim and objectives The aim of the study is to evaluate the NCIO. The objectives are to: describe how the NCIO is delivered in practice and how LAs participate; describe the organisational context and how LAs use the NCIO to address local needs; explore what contribution the NCIO has made to the outcomes identified through the theories of change (TOCs); and make recommendations to shape the future of the NCIO. Methods A theory-based, mixed methods evaluation will take place based on the TOCs identified in the development phase. Stage one will involve data collection and analysis, both quantitative and qualitative. This will include: a survey of LAs about the activities, outputs and impact of the NCIO; secondary analyses of publicly available LA data to explore impact of the NCIO and variation in outcomes; interviews with delivery partner operational staff to explore in-depth how the support is delivered; interviews with senior LA staff to explore the areas covered by the survey in more depth; and six LA case studies to create a holistic picture of the support provided. The second stage involves synthesis of data sources and an assessment of the contribution the NCIO made to achieving outcomes based on the available evidence (including value for money). Stage three involves two discussion groups, one with national level stakeholders and one with DHSC/PRP representatives to inform future recommendations for the NCIO. Patient Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) At the centre of the study is engagement with stakeholders. We will involve PPIE contributors through a reference group (of eight) and as members of the advisory group throughout the evaluation. Timelines for delivery The overall project timeframe is 18 months. The first stage will take place months 0-12. The second synthesis stage will take place months 12-15 and a final stage to identify recommendations for the future months 15-18. Anticipated impact and dissemination Key outputs will be: a preliminary and final report; briefings; and non-academic outputs. The impact of the evaluation should enable the shaping of policy decisions about improvement support to ensure that it is effective and achieves improved outcomes and quality of life for people drawing on are services.
Plain English summaries and category classifications on this site are generated by AI and may not perfectly reflect the original research.
Is something wrong? Let us know