If telecare is the answer, what was the question? Storyline, tensions and the unintended consequences of technology-supported care

This document is the Accepted Manuscript version. The final, definitive version of this paper has been published in Critical Social Policy, March 2018, published by SAGE Publishing. Content in the UH Research Archive is made available for personal research, educational, and non-commercial purposes only. Unless otherwise stated, all content is protected by copyright, and in the absence of an open license, permissions for further re-use should be sought from the publisher, the author, or other copyright holder.Telecare—services employing technology to monitor people’s movement, medication and home environment at a distance—has emerged as a key component of global social care and health policies. The relationship between policies about telecare and the experiences and aspirations of service users has been under-interrogated. This paper draws on findings from an organisational case study involving people living with complex conditions using various telecare devices and employs Hajer’s (1995) concept of argumentative discourse analysis to identify two key storylines arguing that telecare improves people’s quality of life and promotes independence. While these storylines point to seemingly logical and incontestable objectives, uncritical policy and practice fails to recognise and prioritise the aspirations of service users, leading to unintended consequences that can deepen people’s isolation and minimise organisational benefits.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

Whose outcomes are they anyway? Report of the pilot evaluation of a joint service\ud

Health and social care partnership working is often predicated on the notion that it improves outcomes for service users. Yet there is a lack of evidence linking partnerships to changes in outcomes. Against this background, the Health Services Management Centre at the University of Birmingham designed the Partnership Outcomes Evaluation Toolkit (POET) specifically to evaluate health and social care partnerships in terms of service user outcomes. This paper reports on the field testing of POET with Sandwell Integrated Support Service. This research provided a number of interesting insights into this service, and indicated some dissonance between staff and service user and carer expectations

A liberated NHS – but will it lead Health and Social Care together or force them apart?

This article is based on a leadership seminar held by the National Skills Academy (Social Care) in July 2010 at which delegates representing local authorities, the independent social care sector, voluntary organisations, central government and academia considered the impact of integrated working on social care leadership. The views expressed in the article are solely those of the authors

Who decides ‘what works’, and how does it get implemented? Insights from the UK’s new centre for implementing evidence in adult social care

The UK’s adult social care system faces severe challenges, including funding shortages, unmet needs and an overburdened workforce. Resultantly, there is a push for high-quality evidence in service enhancement and resource allocation. Using evidence to improve services is essential, but questions arise about best practices for identifying ‘what works’, integrating evidence into everyday practice and addressing resource constraints. Findings from a 2021 UK survey and consultative forums with stakeholders across adult social care underscore concerns about implementing evidence-based practices and highlight the need for increased collaboration to expand the evidence base. These findings shed light on stakeholders’ perspectives regarding factors shaping adult social care practices, opportunities for evidence to play a greater role, definitions of valid evidence and priorities for change. Improved communication and coordination within the sector are crucial to enhance evidence-based decision making, focus limited resources on proven strategies and shape a more effective, evidence-informed adult social care system