Altogether Better Living Well

Evaluation of

Altogether Better Living Well

Invitation to Tender

Introduction

Sheffield Cubed would like to commission an independent, rigorous external evaluation of the Big Lottery fundedSilver Dreams project ‘Altogether Better Living Well’. We are seeking applications from organisations or consortia who wish to conduct this work. The evaluation will determine the extent to which the project hasmet the Big Lottery Fund programme outcomes laid out for the programme and as set out in this document.

Background

The Silver Dreams Fund was the first of the Big Lottery Fund’s dedicated investments in older people in England, and is run in association with the Daily Mail, with the aim of helping vulnerable older people deal more effectively with life-changing events.

Altogether Better Living Well

Altogether Better Living Well is a Silver Dreams funded project which has built a partnership between older people, Living Well Champions, Altogether Better, Sheffield Cubed, Goodwin Development Trust in Hull, Feel Good Factor in Leeds andpartners from local communities, the NHS, GP’s and Local Authorities.

Altogether Better Living Well was funded to recruit and train older Living Well Champions who use their local knowledge, life experience, skills and understanding to reduce isolation and improve mental health and well-being for older people who are living with life changing events and long term conditions. Living Well Champions offer support, increase social contact and community engagement, create activities with and for older people, build self confidence and increase the voice of older people within health care pathways. Living Well Champions signpost and support older people to access the full range of services, facilities and activities available to help them to live well and better manage their health and well-being. They work alongside GPs, Foundation Trusts, Local Authorities and others to increase the voice of older people, provide insight and improve the range and quality of services.

Altogether Better Living Well was established in January 2013 and funded for one year in the first instance. To date the project has recruited and trained more than 30 older Living Well Champions who have worked with and supported over 200 older beneficiaries.

A unique aspect of this project is that it works across three Local Authority areas - Sheffield, Leeds and Hull.

Aims of the programme evaluation

This evaluation aims to ascertain the extent to which the programme has met both the project outcomes and BIG’s programme outcomes. The evaluation will also need to understand how the three individual projects (Sheffield, Leeds and Hull) have contributed to achieving these objectives.

The evaluation will assess the effectiveness and impacts of the Altogether Better Living Well project. This should include an assessment of both:

Process aspects: related to the delivery and management of Altogether Better Living Well and

Impacts: generated by the activity undertaken.

The process evaluation should examine how Altogether Better Living Well actually works in terms of implementation and delivery and whether it is operating as originally planned.

The impact evaluation should focus on what has been achieved, particularly in terms of exploring the extent to which the project has achieved its intended outcomes:

Outcome 1

Older People will gain training and skills to become "Living Well Champions" and will report increased knowledge, confidence, and ability to manage their own health and well-being and to volunteer with vulnerable older people experiencing life changing events related to long term conditions.

Outcome 2

Living Well Champions will co-design and facilitate activities with and for vulnerable older people affected by long-term conditions to help them to live well, increase social networks and community support to reduce isolation, loneliness and depression.

Outcome 3

Older people involved in the project will be more prepared and able to cope with major life changes relating to long term conditions by being better able to self-manage, more informed to make healthier choices, more supported by their community, and more confident and able to influence decisions about their health and well-being.

The evaluation should also aim to identify good practice from the project.

The successful evaluators will be required to liaise with national programme evaluators Ecorys to ensure a good fit between the various evaluations and supply data accordingly.

Key Questions to be answered

Key questions that the evaluation will need to answer include:

• How effective was Altogether Better Living Well in meeting its aims and objectives?
• What outputs and outcomes have been achieved? How does this compare to targets?
• What outcomes have been reported? Were there any unintended effects?

• To what extent has Altogether Better Living Well led to long-lasting change, which will continue to generate benefits beyond its lifetime?
• To what extent has Altogether Better Living Well resulted in the development of good practice?
• What activities have been undertaken to disseminate and promote take-up of any good practice/innovation?
• How successful has Altogether Better Living Well been in linking up with other interventions/ support in order to maximise synergies?
• What lessons can be learned from Altogether Better Living Well?
• What were the strengths and weaknesses of the approach to engaging with service users and the delivery of services?
• What lessons can be learned from the approach to monitoring and reporting?
• What worked well? What worked less well?
• What is the potential for replication and scalability of Altogether Better Living Well?

Methodology

We ask bidders to suggest and justify an appropriate methodology. However we would expect to see consideration given to the following methods:

• Desk based research / literature review
• Quantitative methods, such as the Ecorys surveys and collation of outcome indicator data
• Qualitative methods, such as interviews, focus groups and case studies
• Thematic analysis of beneficiary case studies

We welcome innovative approaches to address the evaluation questions. We would also expect to see plans for effective engagement of stakeholders in the evaluation including projects, stakeholders, professionals, volunteers and beneficiaries.

Other evaluation material available

The appointed contractor will be able to draw upon data collected during the project, including:

• Performance / management data / Key Performance Indicators
• Activity / delivery records / registers
• Financial information
• Staff / volunteer timesheets
• Feedback forms (e.g. collected at events or training sessions).

Dissemination

An important part of the evaluation will be to share learning. We would like bidders to suggest suitable means of doing so. The programme and partners in Sheffield, Leeds and Hull have their own established channels for communication, and outputs could be disseminated through these.

Older people will be key in presenting and disseminating the evidence and evaluation, including attending meetings, events and presentations to share their experience and advise on developments and potential upscale and replication.

Timescale

The evaluation will commence on 11th November 2013 and produce a final report by 28th March 2014.

Team and experience

Please outline your proposed team for the work and your relevant experience.

Outputs and timescale

We require the following outputs:

Draft final report - 7th March 2014

Final report and dissemination – 28th March 2014

The final report should be no longer than 20-30pagesandcontain:

• Executive summary suitable for external audiences
• Introduction and overview of methodology
• Key findings
• Quotes, short case studies and hard data from surveys
• Conclusions and recommendations
• Any lessons learned and good practices identified

Annexes may be provided with more detailed aspects of your method, your sampling, your research tools, and any documents, literature or references used.

Any further outputs should be detailed in the tender response.

Project management and quality assurance arrangements

Please outline your quality assurance mechanisms and the ways in which you will manage the evaluation effectively and manage risks.

The evaluation will be managed at Altogether Better. Please outline the amount of involvement and type of input you will require from our project team, beneficiaries and volunteers.

At this stage we do not anticipate there will be a specific evaluation steering group, however bidders may be required to attend or present findings elsewhere.

We would like bidders to outline the regularity of meetings and format and timing of progress updates that they will provide on the evaluation as it progresses.

Costs

The budget available for the work is a maximum of £10,000 (including VAT and all expenses). Please provide a breakdown of the overall costs, the cost per task, and an illustration of each team member’s inputs and roles.

25% payment will be made up front and the remainder on satisfactory completion and submission.

Innovation and value for money

We are seeking tenders which offer the best value for money for our investment. Bidders should demonstrate how they can offer this within their bid. We are also open to innovative ways of achieving the goals set out in this specification. We reserve the right to reject commercially unviable pricing proposals. We are not committed to selecting the cheapest bid, rather the one which offers best value in terms of the resources committed. We reserve the right to interview the highest scoring tenders, if required.

Scoring criteria

Bids will be scored along the following criteria:

Scoring criteria

Responses

Format for responses: We request that responses are no longer than 20 A4 sides (size 12 font or larger) plus any annexes and should set out as a minimum:

• Relevant experience
• Method statement
• Work programme and timetable
• Outputs and deliverables
• Profiles / CVs of staff who will undertake the evaluation
• Staff day rates, proposed inputs by staff member, by task and total project cost
• Assessment of risks

Deadline and details for responding

Please confirm receipt of this tender documentation.

If you are planning to submit a tender please advise Kate Quail using the contact details below.

Please submit two electronic copies(one in word and one in pdf) by 5 pm on Friday 1st November 2013 via email tobothof the following email addresses:

and

Please also post 3 hard copies of your tender to arrive by 5 pm Monday 4th November. One to the following address:

Kate Quail, 12 Newington Road, Sheffield, S11 8RZ

And two to the following address:

Mandy Forrest, Sheffield Cubed, ZEST Centre, 18 Upperthorpe, Sheffield, S6 3NA

There should be no differences between the electronic and hard copies of your tender.

Questions

Please submit any questions by 5pm on Friday 18th October to:

Responses will be circulated to all bidders.

Interviews

We anticipate conducting interviews (if required) on Wednesday 6th November in Sheffield

Initial Meeting

A kick off meeting will be required on Monday 11th November in Sheffield.

Other details

Please note any contract awarded will be required to sign up to our standard terms and conditions. Ensuring that the data generated and resulting report and material is fully shared with no ownership restrictions (with the exception of acknowledging the source and originator) so that the material can be fully available will be part of the contract.

1