Evidencing Co-Production in Tenders and Inspections

---

📘 Blog 7 of 7 in our Co-Production & Engagement Series
Evidencing Co-Production in Tenders and Inspections

Links to all 7 blogs in this series are at the bottom of this post.

---

📝 Why Evidence Matters

Commissioners and inspectors hear the word “co-production” frequently, but they only reward it when it is backed up with clear, verifiable evidence. In tenders, evaluators want to see how co-production has shaped service design, delivery, and improvement. In inspections, the CQC looks for consistent examples of people’s voices influencing outcomes under Well-Led and Responsive.

---

🔑 What Commissioners Expect

In tenders, co-production evidence should show:

• Case studies — specific examples of how people shaped service design, training, or policies.
• Quantifiable impact — e.g. “92% of people said they felt more in control of their care after introducing co-produced care plans.”
• Governance links — people involved in steering groups, quality committees, or recruitment panels.
• Ongoing process — not one-off events, but embedded systems for listening and responding.

When framed well, these examples become high-scoring content in method statements and strategies.

---

👁️ What Inspectors Look For

Inspectors don’t just take your word for it — they test co-production in practice. They will look for:

• Consistency — are people’s voices reflected across records, care planning, and governance minutes?
• Staff confidence — can staff explain how they involve people in shaping their care?
• Real changes — examples of “you said, we did” logged, communicated, and reviewed.
• Feedback loops — evidence that outcomes are monitored and fed back to people and families.

Providers who embed co-production in daily practice consistently score higher under Well-Led and Responsive.

---

📊 Practical Evidence Sources

Examples that work well in tenders and inspections include:

• Minutes — from co-production meetings or forums, with tracked actions and outcomes.
• Surveys & focus groups — with clear follow-up actions.
• Peer recruitment panels — showing people shaping the workforce directly.
• Training co-design — lived experience sessions included in induction and CPD.
• Case studies — challenge ➜ action ➜ outcome format for maximum clarity.

---

⚠️ Common Weaknesses

• Generic statements like “we involve people in decisions” with no detail.
• One-off engagement events with no follow-up or impact.
• No written record of how people’s views influenced change.
• Staff unable to describe co-production in practice.

---

🧰 Tender & Inspection Preparation Tips

1. Develop 3–5 strong co-production case studies to include in bids and inspections.
2. Use data to show impact — satisfaction, retention, improved outcomes.
3. Embed examples in bid strategy training so managers can speak confidently during scrutiny.
4. Include co-production in tender reviews to strengthen clarity and evidence.
5. Standardise documentation across services to ensure consistency and traceability.

---

📚 Catch up on the full Co-Production & Engagement Series:

1. 📘 Why Co-Production Matters in Social Care
2. 🧭 Principles of Co-Production: From Tokenism to True Partnership
3. 👥 Involving Families and Carers in Service Design
4. 🏛️ Co-Production in Governance and Quality Assurance
5. 🌍 Building Engagement Pathways for Under-Represented Voices
6. 💡 Case Studies: Co-Production That Changed Services
7. 📄 Evidencing Co-Production in Tenders and Inspections

---