Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study compares the process and outcomes of two approaches to engaging mental health (MH) service users in the quality assurance (QA) process. BACKGROUND: QA plays a significant role in health and care services, including those delivered in the voluntary sector. The importance of actively, rather than passively, involving service users in evaluation and service development has been increasingly recognized during the last decade. DESIGN: This retrospective small-scale study uses document analysis to compare two QA reviews of a MH Day Centre, one that took place in 1998 as a traditional inspection-type event and one that took place in 2000 as a collaborative process with a user-led QA agenda. Setting and participants The project was undertaken with staff, volunteers and service users in a voluntary sector MH Day Centre. Intervention The study compares the management, style, evaluation tools and service user responses for the two reviews; it considers staff perspectives and discusses the implications of a collaborative, user-led QA process for service development. RESULTS: The first traditional top-down inspection-type QA event had less ownership from service users and staff and served the main purpose of demonstrating that services met organizational standards. The second review, undertaken collaboratively with a user-led agenda focused on different priorities, evolving a new approach to seeking users' views and achieving a higher response rate. CONCLUSIONS: Because both users and staff had participated in most aspects of the second review they were more willing to work together and action plan to improve the service. It is suggested that the process contributed to an evolving ethos of more effective quality improvement and user involvement within the organization.