When Phil Porter and I first suggested the development of a bespoke qualification for adult social care commissioners to the ADASS Workforce network, we weren’t 100% sure what it was that we were getting ourselves into. However, eleven years later and the core rationale behind why we wanted to develop the qualification has become a part of its guiding principles.
From the start we were very clear that the commissioning for well-being qualification should not focus on contracting, finance, and tendering. It’s not that these aren’t important parts of any commissioning process, but for us they aren’t a raison d’etre for why Commissioning is fundamental to making a difference to peoples lives. There are also plenty of other qualifications and training programmes out there that cover finance, contracting and tendering in much more detail than we could fit into the qualification.
The four things that we felt needed to be at the heart of the commissioning for well-being qualification were
*Having a good grounded understanding of the statutory and legal frameworks that support commissioning for well-being.
*Having a focus on coproduction, citizen engagement and working together to make commissioning decisions.
*Knowing how to commission for outcomes not outputs.
And…
*Understanding how the importance of commissioning your workforce supersedes service commissioning every time.
As a friend of mine regularly still tells me, ‘What’s the point of working out what services you want to commission if you haven’t first worked out what workforce you need to commission in order to deliver that service’
Originally there was a lot of scepticism about the vision that Phil and I had, and to be honest this was understandable. There already existed a number of higher education qualifications in commissioning, however we felt that we needed something that worked for commissioners in their workplace. Where they would be able to take their theoretical knowledge from the program, relate it to their practice and demonstrate how it was making a difference to their commissioning decisions.
Before we created the qualification, one of my Skills for Care colleagues conducted an extensive consultation on whether or not such a qualification was needed, what it’s content needed to look like, and at what level that qualification needed to be.
They were amazed by how many people participated in the consultation. It was the biggest and most focused response they had ever had to a consultation about a single qualification.
Over the following six months, in order to develop a curriculum for the qualification we worked with a broad range of people from across groups of people who drew on care and support, people who employed their own PA, people in commissioning roles, people from providers, people from training organisations and people from awarding bodies.
What became clear as we went along was that whilst people didn’t want the qualification to lead to a degree, people did want the qualification to be at degree standard. That’s why the qualification is a level five knowledge based vocational qualification.
Our next stop in making the qualification go live was to find an awarding body that was willing to take it on.
Given that we weren’t talking about big numbers of people, most awarding bodies weren’t interested. However Highfield awarding body were prepared to give it a go. Once they were on board, we set about the task of creating a framework for the qualification and finding training providers who would be willing to deliver it. Two training providers decided to take the risk HASCA and Bespoke Consultancy & Education Ltd.
The final thing that Phil and I had to work out was how on earth we were going to pay for people to do the qualification. working closely with colleagues at Skills for Care we managed to get the qualification on to Skills for Care‘s funding framework. This meant that not only did we have an awarding body and training providers but we had a way of paying for it too.
Around three years after Phil and I had originally pitched the idea to the ADASS workforce network, it was with some trepidation on our part, that the first students started the qualification. We’d hoped that the qualification would make a difference, but how much of a difference it would make was a surprise to all of us.
Early learning showed that one of the most important things that learners got out of the course was a proper understanding of the legislative and statutory framework that surrounded their work. Students reported back saying how this was the first time for many of them, that they had properly studied or understood any of the legislation that surrounds commissioning. Understanding this legal and statutory framework had enabled them to push back against their colleagues in contracting when those colleagues suggested that what they wanted to do wasn’t possible. Also when commissioners wanted to commission in a different way, they were able to demonstrate why they were doing it that way and how the legislation and the statutory framework supported them in doing things differently. My favourite example is of the commissioner who instead of having to give a large contract to one provider, realised that the statutory framework enabled them to split that contract amongst a number of smaller providers. This demonstrated better outcomes.
Being able to show how to commission for outcomes was another area that really made a difference. It surprises me to this day how many learners muddle up the meaning of the words output and outcome. However, by the time they have completed the commissioning for well-being qualification they are very focused on outcomes, outcomes, outcomes. They are also very unfocused on outputs.
Most importantly of all, learners have told us that the qualification has significantly increased their confidence in working with local citizens and coproducing local commissioning. Many of those learners had not had the confidence to coproduce before doing the course.
An accidental consequence of setting up the commissioning for well-being qualification was that before we knew it, commissioners from health, public health and children’s services were signing up for the course. Apart from needing to make sure that the module on the statutory and legal framework covered these commissioners as well, we didn’t have to change anything else.
And the outcome from this wider commissioner engagement is that we can with confidence say that commissioners across the social care and health system are getting a grounded integrated knowledge base, which enables them to move from one part of the system to another and to better understand each other as they develop joint commissioning arrangements.
As for the students themselves, there are now a number of senior commissioners and senior leaders who can honestly say that the commissioning for wellbeing qualification was a launchpad for their careers. They are significant advocates for the programme who make sure that anyone involved in commissioning in their team, is also put forward to do the commissioning for well-being qualification.
What started out as a vague idea between Phil, I and the ADASS workforce network has grown into a qualification that is now directly funded by the Department For Health And Social Care. It was always designed to be flexible and to reflect changes as the years have gone on; remaining practical, knowledge based and committed to commissioning for better outcomes that are co-produced with local people.
After all, isn’t that what commissioning is all about? Making a difference to people’s lives and using the power that comes with being a commissioner wisely.
Jim Thomas
June 2025
Leave a Reply