Using Co-Produced Digital Reviews to Strengthen Person-Centred Planning
Co-produced digital reviews can make person-centred planning more accessible, practical and meaningful for people who do not engage well with paper-based meetings. Within learning disability services practice and knowledge, reviews should help the person recognise their own life, not simply hear professionals talk about support.
Strong providers use person-centred planning in learning disability services to bring together visual evidence, communication records and lived experience. This should connect with learning disability support pathways and service models, so digital reviews improve involvement, outcomes and consistency across support.
Concept explained clearly
A co-produced digital review uses accessible digital material to help the person take part in reviewing their plan. This may include photos of activities, short video clips, easy-read summaries, visual outcome trackers, family messages, staff observations and examples of communication.
The aim is not to make reviews more technical. It is to make them more understandable, recognisable and useful. Strong services demonstrate that digital review evidence helps the person express preference, confirm what matters and shape what happens next.
Why it matters in real services
Traditional reviews can be inaccessible. A person may sit through a meeting where other people discuss support using abstract language, while their own communication is reduced to a few comments or assumptions.
Digital review methods can show real life more clearly. Providers should be able to evidence how the person was prepared, what they responded to, what they chose, what changed in the plan and how review decisions were translated into daily support.
What good looks like
Good digital reviews are planned, consented, accessible and outcome-focused. Staff know which evidence to gather, how to protect privacy, how to involve the person and how to avoid turning the review into a presentation about the person rather than with the person.
Strong services demonstrate this through review records, accessible materials, consent notes, communication evidence, support plan updates, supervision and audit findings. This creates a clear line of sight from digital review evidence to planning action and outcome.
Operational Example 1: Reviewing community inclusion through visual evidence
Context: A person’s review stated that they were accessing the community regularly, but the person rarely spoke during meetings and family were unsure which activities were meaningful.
Support approach: The provider created a digital review board using photographs of recent outings. The person was supported to sort activities into “liked”, “not sure” and “do not want”.
Day-to-day delivery detail:
- Staff gathered photos from community activities with appropriate consent.
- The person reviewed the images with a familiar keyworker before the meeting.
- The review used the person’s sorting choices as the main evidence.
- Staff separated routine errands from meaningful social activities.
- The plan was updated to protect the person’s preferred weekly group.
How effectiveness was evidenced: The person clearly selected two activities they wanted to continue and rejected one routine outing. Records showed that visual review evidence changed the activity plan.
Deepening the approach through continuity
Co-produced digital reviews are especially valuable during change because they help new teams understand the person’s lived experience quickly. They can show what has worked, what matters and what should not be lost during transition.
This links closely with continuity of support during major life changes. Digital review evidence can help protect routines, relationships, communication and outcomes when staff, housing or services change.
Operational Example 2: Using digital review evidence before a housing move
Context: A person was preparing to move into supported living. Professionals focused on tenancy readiness, but the person’s digital review showed that evening routines, sibling contact and garden access were central to wellbeing.
Support approach: The provider used the digital review to shape the transition plan. The person, family, advocate and new support team reviewed visual evidence together.
Day-to-day delivery detail:
- Staff created a short digital summary of current routines and preferred spaces.
- The person selected photos that showed what mattered most.
- The new team used the evidence to plan the first month of support.
- Sibling contact and garden time were built into the weekly rota.
- The post-move review checked whether those outcomes had been maintained.
How effectiveness was evidenced: The person settled more quickly because familiar routines were protected. Records showed that the digital review shaped transition planning, not just review discussion.
Systems, workforce and consistency
Teams apply co-produced digital reviews through clear preparation, consent and follow-through. Staff should know what evidence to capture, how to avoid tokenistic images and how to record the person’s response accurately.
Supervision should check whether digital review evidence is being used to update plans. Handovers should include review actions, preferred evidence formats, new communication observations and any outcomes that need closer monitoring.
Where communication is complex, video communication plans for complex learning disability support can help teams interpret how the person shows interest, refusal, uncertainty or enjoyment during digital reviews.
Operational Example 3: Reviewing health routines through short video clips
Context: A person disliked physiotherapy exercises and often left the room when staff mentioned them. Records showed poor completion, but not why the routine was difficult.
Support approach: The provider used short video clips to review the routine with the person, physiotherapist and staff. The aim was to identify which parts felt uncomfortable, confusing or unmotivating.
Day-to-day delivery detail:
- Staff recorded brief clips of the routine with consent and privacy controls.
- The person watched selected clips with a familiar staff member.
- The person pointed away from one exercise but smiled at another movement.
- The physiotherapist adapted the routine into shorter, preferred movement-based steps.
- Staff recorded participation, mood and physical comfort after the change.
How effectiveness was evidenced: The person completed more of the adapted routine and showed less avoidance. Evidence showed that digital review helped convert a failing health task into a more acceptable support plan.
Governance and evidence
Governance should confirm that digital reviews are secure, consented, accessible and used to improve planning. The audit trail should show what evidence was gathered, how the person was involved, what decisions were made and how the plan changed.
Useful evidence includes digital review summaries, consent records, support plan updates, communication profiles, daily notes, family or advocate feedback, supervision and audit findings. Qualitative evidence may include stronger participation, clearer choice, maintained routines, improved health engagement or better transition outcomes.
Strong services demonstrate that digital reviews are not decorative. Providers should be able to evidence how digital material changed understanding, support and outcomes.
Commissioner and CQC expectations
Commissioners expect providers to evidence meaningful involvement, outcomes and responsive support. Co-produced digital reviews show that providers are using accessible methods to make planning more useful and person-led.
CQC expectations include person-centred care, involvement, dignity, consent, responsiveness and good governance. Providers should be able to evidence that digital review tools are secure, proportionate and used to improve support.
Common pitfalls
- Using digital evidence as a presentation rather than a participation tool.
- Collecting photos or videos without clear consent and purpose.
- Showing activities but not recording the person’s response.
- Failing to update the support plan after the review.
- Using too much digital material and overwhelming the person.
- Allowing digital review records to replace direct communication and observation.
Conclusion
Co-produced digital reviews strengthen person-centred planning by making evidence more visible, accessible and connected to daily life. Strong providers demonstrate that digital material helps people express preferences, shape decisions and protect meaningful outcomes. When used well, digital reviews make planning more inclusive without losing the practical human judgement that good support depends on.