Evaluations of the KM team

The KM team has been evaluated three times since September 2013.

The first was an internal evaluation in the summer of 2014 (KM team evaluation (Round 1, 2014) (PDF, 437kB)). It happened nine months after the first Management Fellows were seconded from commissioning organisations into the university. Key messages included:

  1. An established researcher with sufficient time, networks and enthusiasm was needed to ‘broker’ the Management Fellows successfully into academia.
  2. The location of the Management Fellows in the university was a regular reminder to include commissioners and knowledge mobilisation in research projects. 

The second evaluation (Independent evaluation of KM team (July 2015) (PDF, 1,065kB)) was independent and focused on the co-production of service evaluations (July 2015). A key finding was that the team approach of embedding Management Fellows within the university and Researchers in Residence within commissioning agencies helped to make co-produced evaluations happen as:

  1. The Management Fellows had useful knowledge on who to contact and how, as well as the most useful information to produce for commissioners. Because of their academic placements, they also had the time to contribute to data collection and analysis, which their commissioning colleagues often did not.
  2. With their commissioning placements, the Researchers in Residence could pass their research knowledge and skills onto commissioners. Their fellowships allowed them the time to cultivate the necessary relationships and provided space from the constant pressure to produce scientific papers.

The third evaluation was external and explored the impact of the KM team over the 30 months since its beginning (Evaluation of KM team 2016 (PDF, 1,346kB)). A key message was that the KM team was outperforming while being stretched close to its limits. Impacts included:

  1. Commissioning colleagues had better understanding of service evaluations.
  2. Researchers had more influence on decision-making, as some were now members of local health and social care committees.
  3. Commissioners were much more frequently co-applicants on bids.
Edit this page